An interesting work, although a little bit outdated, this book by Oksana Huss attempts to answer the overarching question of how corruption and anti-corruption policies sustain hybrid political regimes. In order to do so, she presents the main strategies of political domination under Ukraine's three presidents, Leonid Kuchma, Viktor Yushchenko, and Viktor Yanukovych. Accordingly, the timeframe of the study is that from 1994 to 2014, covering two decades of post-communist transformation. No doubt an interesting period in Ukraine's modern history, this timeframe does not capture the rule of Petro Poroshenko and Volodymyr Zelensky, both distinct with tremendous instability and distinct levels of corruption. Huss identifies Ukraine as a hybrid regime based on the theoretical concept of competitive authoritarianism. The author offers a quite substantial theoretical and conceptual framing on corruption prior to proceeding with her empirical and archival study. A focus on understanding corruption overall prior to describing political corruption in Ukraine adds strength to author's arguments. In order to analyze how public framing of political corruption influences state anti-corruption policies, Huss conducts a very extensive textual analysis of the anti-corruption legislation, introduced under each of the presidents.
Some of the statements, made by the author, are arguable. For instance, Huss suggests that: “The issue of corruption became relevant in Ukrainian politics simultaneously with the country's independence. It was conceptualized as a challenge involving organized crime and associated primarily with economic crimes. The term ‘corruption’ was subsequently introduced in a legislative context and the names of agencies primarily responsible for the fight against organized crime” (76). In fact, corruption was very relevant in communist Ukraine as well. More importantly, and paradoxically, Kuchma's regime, under which these concepts were formulated, was utterly corrupt. Yushchenko's era was characterized by a different democratic rhetoric, but equally serious levels of corruption. Yanukovych, with his “family” or corrupt clique, became a quintessence of corruption in a hybrid regime as applied not only to Ukraine, but other similarly kleptocratic regimes around the world.
Huss concludes that, “the persistent cycle of corruption is key to understanding Ukrainian politics it is virtually impossible to enter Ukrainian politics without engaging in corrupt activities because considerable investments are needed to build a political party or to win the elections” (317). Indeed, when it comes to Ukraine's high politics, money matters a lot, if not the most. While Yanukovych managed to build the monopolized system of corruption, his predecessors certainly contributed to the emergence of such a corrupt hybrid political monster.
One of the major conclusions one can arrive at after reading Huss's work is that corruption in Ukraine is here to stay for a long while. Corruption has been changing over the decades of economic and political turmoil and will no doubt continue on its path of transition and adaptation to changing economic and political realities. How Corruption and Anti-Corruption Policies Sustain Hybrid Regimes: Strategies of Political Domination under Ukraine's Presidents in 1994–2014 is not free of minor shortcomings. Nevertheless, this volume by Huss is perhaps among the best books on corruption in a post-communist society written over the last three decades. The strongest feature of the book is its comprehensiveness and political focus, supported by the author's clear longstanding expertise in the country. In addition to researchers, scholars, and graduate students, the book may be highly recommended for those who want to do business with Ukraine or invest in this rapidly changing economy and wish to look beyond mere clichés for understanding the background processes that shape different socio-economic phenomena, including such the long-term phenomenon of corruption.
