Russia Military Corruption
One of the reasons for the military failures and heavy losses of the Russian army in the special military operation in Ukraine in 2022 was the high level of corruption. Combat training was more and more carried out on paper, and new weapons looked modern only at exhibitions. The armed forces of the Russian Federation in fact turned out to be an army from the last century.
Corruption (from lat. corrumpere “to corrupt”, lat. corruptio “bribery, venality; damage, distortion, decomposition; corruption”) is a term that usually denotes the use by an official of his powers and the rights entrusted to him , as well as the official status associated with this authority, opportunities, connections for personal gain, contrary to law and moral principles. Corruption is also called bribery of officials, their corruption, corruption, which is typical for mafia states
In early 1999, Yu. Ya. Chaika , Deputy Prosecutor General of Russia , declared that Russia was one of the ten most corrupt countries in the world and that corruption was one of the most destructive forces in the Russian state. In 1999, Academician D.S. Lvov and Doctor of Economics Yu.V. Ovsienko assessed corruption in Russia as “total”. In 2006, First Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Alexander Buksman stated that , according to some expert estimates , the volume of the corruption market in Russia is estimated at more than 240 billion US dollars. Corruption corrupts the army, has a destabilizing and destructive effect on it, like on any other social or state institution. However, in relation to the army, such a negative impact can have the most catastrophic consequences, primarily for national security. Corruption increases geopolitical threats and risks for the state as a whole. As a result of manifestations of corruption, the world status and competitiveness of Russia are declining. Society is gradually putting up with the phenomena of corruption and corrupt relations, which are gradually becoming the norm of public life. The main result of all these actions is the poor-quality provision of services, overhaul and construction, the supply of products, goods, services, and most importantly weapons and military equipment, which ultimately affects the general state of military security and the defense capability of our state.
Corruption in any sector can be detrimental, but corruption within the defense and security forces, which are tasked with protecting the population and responding to insecurity, is especially damaging. Sometimes the effects of corruption are immediately noticeable: self-serving security forces take advantage of the population they were created to protect. In other cases, the impact of corruption can be obscured by the veil of secrecy and confidentiality often inherent in this sector until a crisis and major failure occurs.
The Russian military survey shows that 20% of the Russian defense budget has flowed into the hands of corrupt people. In 2012, according to Russian media reports, a defense service company affiliated to the Ministry of Defense sold some buildings and plots owned by the Ministry at prices below market prices. For example, some plots were constructed with funds from the Ministry of Defense's state budget before the sale. The high-end villa area was sold, but it was still sold at the price of vacant land. In addition to the defense service company, another logistics support company affiliated to the military is also suspected of extracting funds from the state budget. According to the investigation, the two cases caused losses to the country of more than 6.7 billion rubles, and then Defense Minister Serdyukov also lost his post due to the case. The Russian army, which was considered the second strongest in the world, suddenly got bogged down in operations on the territory of Ukraine in 2022, where it emerged as the second strongest in Ukraine. Corruption undermines supply lines, supplies of fuel and ammunition no worse than enemy mines. Low morale and hazing do not help in the war. One way or another, experts and military officials agreed on one thing: this chaotic and failed campaign began largely because of corruption Arrests have been reported in the media related to the disruption of supplies and import substitution in the defense industry. “This, of course, is only the tip of the iceberg, someone somewhere has become impudent, someone somewhere has crossed the road to someone higher. We do not see all the volumes of theft, even in these cases, ”says a specialist from one of the research centers in the field of the military-industrial complex. According to him, it comes to the ridiculous: “They steal everywhere, over there, more than a year ago, even on inflatable mock-up tanks, they tried to steal some millions.” In Ukraine, units had problems with warm clothes, fuel and spare parts for military equipment, mainly trucks. The problems with clothing and fuel are also confirmed by the intercepted conversations of the Russian military, as well as Western intelligence data. The leak of this information became possible due to another miscalculation - instead of secure communication channels, the Russian military used ordinary phones and Chinese household radios. The army is one of the most closed state institutions. On the one hand, this is quite justified, given the tasks facing the military organization, on the other hand, it creates favorable conditions for arbitrariness and corruption. Today, corruption is one of the most pressing problems for Russia's state military organization. Information about manifestations of corruption in the military service sphere is contained both in the periodical press, scientific and journalistic literature, and in the statistics of military justice bodies and data from sociological surveys.
Corruption is a complex social phenomenon that has various forms of manifestation that are not always obvious. It would be wrong to understand corruption only as the commission of corruption-related crimes. Experts quite rightly point out that corruption manifests itself in a whole range of offenses. These are crimes of a corruption orientation, and administrative offenses, and disciplinary offenses, and civil dereliction.
Typical manifestations of corruption that take place in the army include bribery, theft of property (fraud, misappropriation and embezzlement), abuse of official authority, patronage in obtaining a position or transfer to a desired duty station, etc.
In January 2011, in an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda , Chief Military Prosecutor Sergei Fridinsky, answering a question about corruption in the army, admitted that its scale was "sometimes amazing." “Sometimes it seems that people have simply lost their sense of proportion and conscience. The amount of embezzlement is often shocking,” Fridinsky said. He called the criminal case against a group of officials of the Main Military Medical Directorate and the State Order Directorate of the Russian Ministry of Defense an example of this kind. Representatives of these structural divisions of the military department signed a state contract with a commercial firm for the supply of medical equipment in the amount of more than 26 million rubles. “As we found out, the cost of the equipment purchased from merchants was overstated by more than three times, and the state suffered damage by more than 17 million rubles."" Most banks working with the money of the Ministry of Defense are involved in shadow operations for cashing out and withdrawing capital. In fact, no one needs real financial control and the fight against corruption, since this contradicts the ideology and interests of the “offshore kleptocratic aristocracy” ruling in Russia, whose activities are primarily aimed at personal enrichment and ultimately undermine the foundations of state and national security.
According to the military personnel themselves, the most common forms of corruption in military service today are: the provision of reciprocal services and patronage in the promotion of friends, relatives, etc. (38% of respondents); receiving and giving bribes, gifts (36.4%); committing theft using their powers (26.6%); use of official position and powers to obtain housing, awards, vouchers, other benefits and privileges (23.8%); "kickbacks" when concluding government contracts (13.3%). According to other data, military personnel indicate that they receive remuneration from individuals and legal entities in connection with the performance of official duties (70.1% of respondents); use for purposes not related to the performance of official duties, means of material and technical and other support, other state property, as well as their transfer to other persons (58%); engaging in other paid activities, with the exception of scientific, pedagogical and other creative activities (49.4%); entrepreneurial activities, participation in the management of commercial organizations (43.1%).
Thus, not all manifestations of corruption that are widespread today in the field of military service are criminally punishable, many of them relate to other offenses, and some generally lie in the field of ethics, but in any case, as experts rightly point out, all these manifestations testify to the presence in the legal consciousness of employees of ideas, views, feelings and beliefs that allow corrupt behavior in military service and in connection with military service.
In addition to corruption manifestations of an economic nature, the sphere of military service is also characterized by such corruption manifestations as protectionism, favoritism and nepotism. Accordingly, vacant positions in the military service are quite often assigned to "their own people" (protégés), who have certain preferences (advantages) associated with the patronage of high-ranking commanders. In turn, promotion to high military positions with low professional and moral qualities of the subject of such a career causes a chain reaction of the spread of non-professionals among the staff. Candidates for promotion are selected not on the basis of professional criteria, but on the basis of personal devotion to leadership and psychological fit.
V.M. Koryakin defines the concept of corrupt protectionism and its varieties as applied to the military environment in the following way. Corrupt protectionism is the selection of military personnel for military positions not on the basis of business and professional qualities, but on the basis of acquaintance, blasphemy, patronage, for illegal remuneration. Corrupt favoritism is a situation in which military personnel policy is determined by the influence of favorites, favorites. Corrupt nepotism - official patronage of relatives and their people, the so-called "nepotism".
The consequence of such a personnel policy is the recruitment of non-professionals, random people, focused on obtaining from such activities, first of all, any benefits and advantages, and this, in turn, further provokes crime and corruption. in military service. In this regard, situations very often arise when, after the appointment of a person to a military position, it turns out that this person, in terms of his professional qualities and level of training, does not meet the qualification requirements provided for this position, or, in terms of his moral and business qualities, is not able to effectively perform official duties. duties, or commits offenses incompatible with being in this position.
In this regard, as some experts note, when analyzing the causes and conditions that contribute to the preservation of a high level of corruption crimes in the military organization of the state, it is necessary to pay attention to such a reason for this phenomenon as omissions and costs in the activities of personnel authorities in the selection and appointment of military personnel for military positions with high corruption risks, i.e. the likelihood of a military official committing corruption offenses related to his official position.
The legislation of the Russian Federation provides for a number of measures aimed at curbing the possibility of corruption. Thus, Article 12 of the Federal Law “On Combating Corruption” assigns an obligation to an employer when hiring a citizen (employment or civil law contract) who filled the positions of state or municipal service provided for by the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, within two years after his dismissal from the state or the municipal service to report within ten days on the conclusion of such an agreement to the employer of the state or municipal employee at his last place of service.
Prevention of corruption offenses in military and labor collectives, as well as the identification and elimination of the causes and conditions that contributed to their commission, remains a priority area of activity for officials of the Russian Ministry of Defense.
Main tasks for 2021-2024:
- increasing the efficiency of work on identifying possible corruption risks in the activities of military command and control bodies, in the implementation of the functions assigned to them, systematizing such risks and developing measures aimed at eliminating the causes and conditions for their occurrence;
- increasing the efficiency of control, supervision and verification activities of the department in the field of prevention of corruption offenses;
- improvement of work on consideration in the bodies of military administration of citizens' appeals about the facts of possible corruption offenses, as well as forms and methods of anti-corruption information work. Prevention of repeated appeals of citizens;
- building up the structure of units (introduction of separate positions) for the prevention of corruption and other offenses, including in the troops (forces), military educational institutions, military medical institutions of the department;
- carrying out by units for the prevention of corruption and other offenses of activities aimed at identifying cases of non-compliance by civil servants with the requirements of the legislation on the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest, as well as bringing the perpetrators to legal liability;
- taking measures to improve the efficiency of implementing the requirements of the legislation on the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest in military command and control bodies, military units, institutions and organizations created to fulfill the tasks assigned to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation;
- providing training on additional professional programs in the field of combating corruption for civil servants whose job responsibilities include combating corruption, participation in the procurement of goods, works, services, as well as persons who have entered the public service (work) for the first time.
The systemic complexity of overcoming corruption in the Russian Federation is due to the low level of the moral and ethical state of society and the state. The difficulty in the fight against corruption in the field of state security is actually determined by the fact that Russia is a state with an information closed system and is simply a "hotbed" of corruption, bribery and embezzlement of budget funds. Therefore, in today's environment, the current state of state mechanisms is key in creating and shaping the principles and culture of combating corruption.
Corruption increases the level of instability and the risk of conflict by undermining the legitimacy and credibility of state institutions as well as of peacekeeping and state-building interventions. Post-conflict states, or states emerging from conflict, are particularly vulnerable to corruption, due to the lack of good governance infrastructures, which makes it difficult to detect, disrupt, or bring about successful prosecutions against those who are involved in activities such as bribery, extortion, false accounting, and embezzlement. Where corruption is rife, it is widely acknowledged that funds intended for country stabilization projects often do not reach their intended recipients. This, in part, is the reason that tackling corruption has become a high priority in some post-conflict transitions. In addition, anti-corruption efforts, whether direct or indirect, are seen as having a potentially legitimizing and stabilizing effect. However, such measures can only be successful if implemented with strong, high-level leadership, as corruption has the potential to contribute to legitimacy as well as to erode it. Lack of legitimacy is a common feature of fragile states, which have failed to establish good governance. Poor governance, in turn, results in an environment where corruption and criminality can flourish. Corrupt individuals holding senior public roles of influence are able to abuse their positions to further their own personal goals and accumulate personal wealth, to the detriment of the people who they are intended to serve. This results in instability through the inevitable sense of injustice and desperation that develops amongst the citizens of that regime, which can drive populations to civil war and leaves citizens susceptible to crime and radicalization, both as perpetrators and as victims.
Corruption - Military
https://realtribune.ru/vysokij-uroven-korrupcii-v-rukovodstve-ukrainy-niveliruet-voennuju-pomoshh-ssha
Ukraine Military Corruption
In peacetime, corruption harms people indirectly, but in wartime it can be deadly, like a bullet. The events in Ukraine clearly show how corruption affects national security, sovereignty and independence. In 2009, former US Vice President Joe Biden stated: “Over the past ten years, Russia has been using another foreign policy weapon. It uses corruption as a tool to force Ukraine to remain vulnerable and dependent. Continue reforms to eradicate corruption. It is not only about good governance, but also about self-preservation. It's about the security of your country ."
Corruption is often compared to cancer, a malignant but amorphous force that undermines development and security. However, such an interpretation overlooks the fact that corruption can be used intentionally, knowingly by one state to undermine the choice and freedom of action of another state. Exposure to corruption, especially in the critical sectors of defense and energy, must be seen as a contributing factor to unconventional struggles that pose a threat to NATO and partner countries.
Chinese military expert Song Zhongping believes that corruption in the Ukrainian government and armed forces is very serious, so financial and material support will not change the situation in the conflict zone. “No one can buy a modernized army with money. Russia is aware that the United States will only supply weapons or train the military outside of Ukraine, but will not directly intervene in the situation ... This is an armed conflict in which Russia cannot lose. Therefore, Moscow will do everything possible to set an achievable goal and fulfill the mission,” Sun explained. He believes that the Kremlin does not need to set a deadline to achieve the goals of its special operation in Ukraine.
Wang Yiwei , director of the Institute of International Relations at Renmin University of China, expects that “port cities in the south, including Odessa and Kherson, could become targets for Russia. If the Kremlin can take control of these cities, it will turn Ukraine into a landlocked country.”
Cui Heng , an expert at the Center for Russian Studies at East China Normal University, believes that increased military funding and US sales of ammunition to Ukraine lead to a prolongation of the conflict, and not to a turning point or an early end to the conflict. This policy of Washington does not have a constructive effect on the development of the situation.
The purchases of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine have usually been classified. This means that the government can purchase low-quality equipment with impunity. Which is what it usually does. In 2013, the Ministry of Defense reported that the Department of Internal Audit and Financial Control was launching a special investigation on behalf of the military department and its then head, Pavel Lebedev. Prior to this, it was relatively easy for bureaucrats in the ministry to make an investigation fall apart. But in June 2013, representatives of the internal audit department were removed from the procurement commissions and revoked their authority to review contracts for the army. Military leaders explained this by the fact that in wartime, the army leadership needs authority and flexibility in its purchases in order to supply troops as quickly as possible.
In 2014, the Prosecutor General's Office announced charges against several former Defense Ministry officials who purchased substandard body armor for the army. They are accused of spending $5.6 million to buy 17,080 pieces of low-quality body armor, resulting in dozens of casualties. The armor, apparently, was not able to withstand a direct blow from a bullet.
Currently the Ukrainian government does not pay to equip its own soldiers. AOrdinary people in Ukraine want to help their soldiers. One organization collected donations from the people to buy military equipment for the troops, and then tried to sell it to the soldiers. Corruption scandals happen in many countries. But in Ukraine, the system itself is corrupt. This greases the wheels between all institutions, both public and private, volunteer movements and even NGOs. Without this lubrication, nothing moves.
In Ukraine, the average salary is about $260 a month, which means that the average family is unable to equip their sons and brothers for war. Salary of a military conscript - from 185 to 417 dollars, depending on the rank and specialty. Many families are forced to buy with their own money what he needed: we found a used NATO uniform, body armor, a helmet, a scope for his machine gun, as well as knee pads and boots. All this, including winter uniforms, cost about $ 2,400.
In 2013, the Ministry of Defense reported that the Department of Internal Audit and Financial Control was launching a special investigation on behalf of the military department and its then head, Pavel Lebedev. Prior to this, it was relatively easy for bureaucrats in the ministry to make an investigation fall apart. But last June, representatives of the internal audit department were removed from the procurement commissions and revoked their authority to review contracts for the army. Military leaders explained this by the fact that in wartime, the army leadership needs authority and flexibility in its purchases in order to supply troops as quickly as possible. In 2016, Congress began requiring a certification for a portion of the funds from the congressionally-created Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. [P.L. 114-328, FY2017 NDAA]. To spend more than half of the authorized funds, DOD, in coordination with the State Department, must certify that certain anti-corruption reforms have taken place. The eligible amount has varied based on authorizations, but, for FY2019, $125 million was subject to certification. Long before President Trump ordered a halt to security assistance, the Secretary of Defense—in coordination with Secretary Pompeo—twice certified that Ukraine had made sufficient reforms to decrease corruption and increase accountability, and that the country could ensure accountability for U.S. provided military equipment. On July 13, 2018, DOD certified that Ukraine had taken actions sufficient to release security assistance funds. DOD cited passage of a national security law that supported reforms for civilian control of the military, parliamentary oversight of the defense sector, and transparency in defense budgets. Notably, the assessment stated that Ukraine had improved its ability to ensure accountability for U.S. provided equipment. On May 23, 2019, DOD again certified that Ukraine had taken substantial actions to decrease corruption, increase accountability, and sustained improved combat capability enabled by U.S. assistance. DOD recommended providing $125 million in military assistance, including for counter-artillery radars and defensive weapons. According to DOD, the U.S. had helped Ukraine advance reforms, including adopting legislation to reform defense procurement, and strengthened civilian control of the military reform. The certification further noted that Ukraine had improved its ability to ensure accountability for U.S. provided equipment. Further, after OMB held the assistance to Ukraine in July 2019, the Department of Defense (DOD) conducted an additional analysis and concluded that the assistance was effective and should be resumed. [Amb. Taylor testimony, 10/22/19]. Finally, before the July 2019 hold, the Trump administration had approved sending foreign assistance to Ukraine nearly 50 separate times without ever holding it because of concerns that it would be diverted due to corruption. Laura K. Cooper spoke virtually 07 June 2021 at the Democracy in Action: Zero Corruption Conference. Regarding defense industry, the United States urges Ukraine to adopt a strategy to better support the needs of the Ukrainian armed forces and Ukraine economic objectives, while implementing effective corporate governance and supervisory board principles that are in line with global best practices. Effective defense industry processes and institutions will lead to sustained improvement in combat capability, reduce corruption and open the door to increased Western investments. The Defense Department strongly encourages Ukraine to continue to implement its law on defense procurement to create a globally competitive process, increase efficiency and enhance transparency in the defense procurement cycle. "I categorically do not accept corruption and will not tolerate any of its manifestations in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, - the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine", Lieutenant General Valery Zaluzhnyi, said on his Facebook page. "I consider it necessary to voice my position publicly so that the public and the entire personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, without exception, know about it. Zero tolerance for corruption is a prerequisite for appointing a person to a position. I will be especially careful with the leadership of the logistics forces, higher military educational institutions, territorial centers of recruitment and social support, responsible for assigning servicemen to positions in peacekeeping contingents."
The effect of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" in the part obligating to submit a declaration every year. Simply put, if an employee has subordinates or deals with financial matters, he must submit a declaration. From January 1 to April 1, the subjects of the declaration must fill in the declaration for the previous year. All officers with the rank of major and above must submit a declaration. However, this rule does not apply to military personnel who served in military commissariats (now these are territorial recruitment and social support centers). Despite the name change, these units are the legal successors of the Military Committees, performing mainly the same functions and tasks. All military personnel (except conscripts) serving there must submit a declaration.
The Anti-Corruption Strategy was passed the Committee of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on Anti-Corruption Policy in late 2020. (Draft of the Law "On the Basics of the State Anti-Corruption Policy for 2020-2024"). The Anti-corruption Strategy was developed by the Center for Political and Legal Reforms, and NAKO joined this work. In the defense sector, the Anti-corruption Strategy defines four priority areas of work:
- raising the efficiency of the use and management of defense lands, "defense" real estate objects and military property;
- establishment of strict control over the use of fuel;
- removal of excessive secrecy and non-competitiveness in defense procurement.
- normalization of the system of providing servicemen with housing in order to eradicate abuses in this area.
The work on the Law "On Defense Procurement" was accompanied by considerable criticism in the mass media. The adoption of this law is an important step in reforming defense procurement, bringing it closer to NATO and EU standards. Procedures should become more competitive, transparent, and the use of budget funds more efficient. The development of the law took place openly, with the involvement of the public and the expert environment. NAKO acted as the coordinator of the process. Of course, the topic of defense procurement is not easy for the general public, in particular, from time to time some journalists told us that it is difficult for them to understand the problems in this area. It is likely that it was difficult for some deputies, at least at the beginning of work on the law.
In December 2019, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine started working with the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA), making its first trial purchase. Ukraine joined it in 2016 but made no progress in implementing it. By 2020 Ukraine was dismantling the obsolete, Soviet system of State Defense Acquisition in favor of unified defense acquisition plans. The law “On Defense Procurement” was approved in July 2020, declassifying a significant part of the state defense order, creating a competitive and transparent environment in the arms and military hardware market. “Declassifying a significant part of the state defense order, creating a competitive and transparent environment in the arms and military hardware market is critical to improving our country’s defense capability at a time when it needs security and a buildup of military strength. That is why this law is particularly important,” Oleksandr Zavitnevych, Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security, Defense, and Intelligence, said. The law aims to fundamentally change the mechanism of pricing, change the system of product quality control, and create conditions for efficient coordination between producers and customers. The new defense procurement policy is supposed to minimize corruption risks, raising the level of transparency, and increase fair competition in this sector. The new approach to defense procurement is meant to bring balance and strategy-based priorities. The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine will set up an independent task force to inspect and approve all acquisitions.
China - Military Corruption
The corruption of the CCP military ranks first in the world. The Chinese military has indeed become corrupted to the point of worrying about whether the PLA is ready to fight. The facts of corruption at the top of the Chinese military and the group corruption of hundreds of generals are even more horrifying. In January 2013, Transparency International, an international anti-corruption organization, listed the Chinese People's Liberation Army as a "high risk level" of corruption. The corruption of the Chinese military ranks as the highest of any military in the world. In 2012, Liu Mingfu, a former professor at China's National Defense University, warned in a book titled "Why the PLA Can Win" that corruption and corruption in the Chinese military were posing a greater threat to China. "As an army that hasn't fought for 30 years, the People's Liberation Army has developed to a stage where the biggest danger and number one enemy is corruption." In an interview in 2012, Liu Mingfu expressed his concern that the army's anti-corruption campaign would be unfavorable, " The power of anti-corruption is not as great as that of corruption, the energy of those who engage in corruption is greater than that of anti-corruption, and those who are good at corruption will do better.” According to reports, the Chinese military was so corrupt under Jiang Zemin that senior Chinese military officials even dispatched warships overseas to smuggle home appliances and cars. Jiang Zemin, who is also the chairman of the Military Commission, once ordered the military to stop doing business, but was resisted by the military, or changed its name and continued to do business in disguise. In September 1998, then Premier Zhu Rongji revealed at the China Anti-Smuggling Work Conference that in those years, 800 billion yuan was smuggled every year, and the military accounted for at least 500 billion yuan. A pro-Beijing Duowei quoted and analyzed that the Chinese military has too many relationships with interest groups in doing business, and it is difficult to check the "underlying countermeasures" in the actual investigation and punishment. It remains to be seen whether the Chinese military can completely ban business in half a year. Corruption can be seen everywhere in the Chinese army, from being a soldier, to being promoted to another job, to changing jobs, to border guards smuggling arms, smuggling products, and guarding mines. Xu Caihou and Guo Boxiong have been in charge of the army for nearly 20 years. Corruption is rampant throughout the army, and the army is almost rotten. Since Xi Jinping took office, he has repeatedly warned about the dangers of Communist Party corruption. In many public and private speeches, Xi Jinping emphasized that if the corruption problem is not addressed, the party and the country will be destroyed. In a talk he gave after taking office in late 2012, he reminded Communist Party cadres with the adage that “things must rot first, and then insects grow.” Can Xi Jinping complete the military reform as he wishes and turn the PLA into the war-fighting army he hopes? Very doubtful, why? Because the Chinese army is hard to return, the World Daily editorial believes that its corruption and stubborn disease, it is not easy to completely eradicate it under Xi Jinping's strong anti-corruption. The CCP is dominated by a single party and lacks an effective political system for supervision. It is difficult to completely eradicate military corruption. In early April 2017, the 55-episode Beijing anti-corruption TV series "In the Name of the People" premiered on Hunan Satellite TV. Zhou Meisen, the screenwriter of this TV series, wrote the script at the request of the Film and Television Center of the Supreme Procuratorate. When the TV started airing, Zhou Meisen said in an interview with mainland media: "Look at how serious the corruption is now . It's so serious that you can't even talk about it. They say that it's too dark, and the military chief can sell the car as soon as he exercises. It was sold out (scrapped), gasoline was sold, 10 rounds of artillery shells were fired, and 100 rounds of shells were fired in the report, embezzling military funds. Political commissars and other cadres sold officials, starting from the squad leader and selling them all the way to the general. I didn’t believe it at the time. Now, believe it! More than 140 generals." He also said that since the CCP launched the Nanchang riot on August 1, 1927, “all the wars added together, few generals were wiped out by the enemy. The army was wiped out. How terrible? Do you think they can last for a long time? Can they play for a long time? The party and the country will inevitably be destroyed. How can they not be destroyed? There is no war. Why should the official here work for you? It's terrible." Since Xi Jinping launched an anti-corruption campaign in 2013, more than 160 generals have been investigated. This number exceeds the sum of the generals who fell in the CCP's "civil war, foreign war, and Cultural Revolution" in a century. Seven generals had been sacked. They are: Xu Caihou, former member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China and vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, Guo Boxiong, former member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China and vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, and former director of the Political Work Department of the Central Military Commission Zhang Yang, Fang Fenghui, former chief of staff of the Joint Staff Department of the Central Military Commission, Wang Jianping, former deputy chief of staff of the Joint Staff Department of the Central Military Commission and former commander of the Armed Police Force, Tian Xiusi, former political commissar of the Air Force, and Wang Xibin, former president of the National Defense University. Guo Boxiong became the vice chairman of the Central Military Commission at the First Plenary Session of the 16th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2002, Xu Caihou became the vice chairman of the Central Military Commission at the Fourth Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee in 2004, and Guo was elected two years earlier than Xu. In this way, in the position of vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, Guo has more chances to sell official ranks and positions than Xu for two years. From 2013 to 2017, Xi Jinping relied on the then member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China and secretary of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection to fight corruption. Many high-ranking CCP officials who are greedy for money and lecherous are very afraid, and some of the sinners prefer to commit suicide. General Liu Yazhou said that he asked people to count, from 2015 to July 6, 2016, "more than 30 people have committed suicide in the army". If the previous and subsequent ones are added, there may be more officers who committed suicide. The corruption problems of Guo and Xu are enough to shock the whole of China and the whole world. However, they are not yet the most corrupt in the military. On August 18, 2018, Liu Yuan, the son of former Chinese President Liu Shaoqi, said in an interview with a reporter from the Beijing News that "Zhang Yang's problem is more serious than Guo Boxiong and Xu Caihou." So, is Zhang Yang the "most" corrupt person in the CCP military? In fact, it's not that much. He is only the director of the General Political Department of the Central Military Commission, the director of the Political Work Department of the Central Military Commission after the military reform. The general background of these seven generals is Jiang Zemin , the former chairman of the Central Military Commission . It was Jiang Shengba who reused Xu Caihou and Guo Boxiong, and indulged Xu and Guo to engage in corruption, which caused the entire army to become a "hypermarket" for buying and selling official ranks and positions. On January 9, 2015, a person who signed the "informed cadre of the general government" broke the news overseas that when Xu Caihou and Guo Boxiong served as vice-chairmen of the Military Commission, "the whole army ran up and down to buy officials, and thousands of troops (referring to military cadres) had become a common practice. The price of 10 million yuan) and one million heroic divisions (referring to the price of 1 million yuan for teachers and cadres) have become well-known unspoken rules, my mind is all devoted to entertaining guests and gifts, engaging in relationships and gaining votes." On July 6, 2016, Liu Yazhou, the then political commissar of the National Defense University, said at a meeting: "In the past ten years (that is, the ten years in which Guo Boxiong and Xu Caihou dominated the Central Military Commission), we are all in the army. What has the army become? We are not facing the battlefield, we are facing the market, not even the market, we are facing a supermarket, everything has a price, and everything can be priced. Under their control, the army has become a There is a pool of mud, and this mud is not because the enemy is stuck in and can’t pull it out, but we ourselves are stuck in and can’t pull out.” On 15 August 2015, the article "The Sigh of a "Red Second Generation" was published online in mainland China, which attracted widespread attention. The author is said to be Deng Luyan, the eldest son of Deng Keming, the former deputy commander of the Fuzhou Military Region and the eldest son of Deng Keming, a major general when the CCP was founded. At the beginning of the article, it wrote: "Corruption in the military is very serious. In terms of making money, it will only be darker, more violent, and more rampant than the corrupt officials of the local government." The General Office of the CPC Central Committee, the State Council, and the Central Military Commission jointly issued the "Guiding Opinions on Promoting the Comprehensive Cessation of Paid Services in the Army" on 11 June 2018, requiring a complete cessation of all paid services in the military by the end of 2018. The official Xinhua News Agency reported on May 31 last year that the cessation of military business should be completed by June 2018, a rare extension that shows that the CCP’s order to stop military business has encountered significant resistance. The so-called paid service of the military originated in 1985 after the reform and opening up. Many troops rented their street-facing houses to local governments. There are more than ten major industries involved. The most typical ones are the hospitals of the military and the armed police (90% of which are for local personnel to see a doctor). ), as well as military and armed police academies, scientific research institutions, warehouses, docks, and literary and artistic products. But then these paid services gradually became a hotbed of corruption in the military. The "Guiding Opinions on Further Promoting the Comprehensive Cessation of Paid Services in the Military" jointly issued by the General Office of the CPC Central Committee, the General Office of the State Council, and the General Office of the Central Military Commission pointed out that at present, the military's comprehensive cessation of paid services is at a critical period of decisive victory. Party committees and governments at all levels of the military and local governments must strengthen their confidence and determination, strengthen work coordination, and intensify military-civilian cooperation to ensure that the military completes the full suspension of paid services as scheduled. The "Opinions" emphasize that it is necessary to accurately grasp the major strategic decision-making intention of the military to completely stop paid services, and in accordance with the standards of no military operation, no loss of assets, strict integration, and two lines of revenue and expenditure, "by the end of 2018, all paid services in the military should be completely stopped. service activities". The "Opinions" also require that, for projects with paid services, if the contract agreement has expired, it should be terminated without renewal, and all military assets should be recovered; if the contract agreement has not expired, projects that can be terminated through negotiation or judicial procedures should be terminated in advance. Termination of the contract; if compensation is really needed, economic compensation shall be given in accordance with national laws. Entrusted management can be implemented for projects that have been integrated into the resident urban development plan, directly affect social and economic development and people's livelihood stability, have a long contractual agreement period, have large tenant investment, have potential military use value, and are indeed difficult to shut down and recover. Projects that are relatively independent from the camps and have low military use value but have been transferred can be dealt with by means of replacement after being approved by the Central Military Commission. For real estate leasing projects that introduce local services in the camp, the access conditions, operation methods, preferential measures, and fund management will be standardized. The "Opinions" emphasize that, after the army has completely stopped paid services, tasks assigned by the state that the army is capable of accomplishing, those that are unique to the army or have obvious advantages, and that are really needed for national construction, as well as projects that the army introduces social forces to serve officers and soldiers, shall be handled by the relevant military and local governments. The department studies and proposes relevant conditions, procedures, approval rights, management and other policies, and implements standardized management. Spare real estate, agricultural and sideline production land, and large-scale hospitality assets are all centrally managed and regulated by the Central Military Commission. Judging from the information that has been disclosed, the corruption of the CCP's military ranks first in the world. How did this situation come about? There are three main reasons. First Xi Jinping "caught the thief but not the king". So far, he has not arrested Jiang Zemin , the head of the CCP's highest-level and most serious corrupt elements . The second Xi Jinping investigated and punished only a very small number of "unfortunate eggs" who were not investigated and many more. For example, Major General Zhang Jinchang of the Communist Party of China published an article in "Yanhuang Chunqiu", revealing that Wang Shouye, the former deputy commander of the navy, explained more than 40 people who had the same case with him, but none of those people were held accountable, instead they were promoted and reused. Third, the root of the CCP's military corruption is "the Party's absolute leadership over the military". Absolute power inevitably leads to absolute corruption.Military Corruption
The US Defense Department seeks to guard against waste, fraud, and abuse. Misuse of taxpayer funds undermines confidence in government programs, hurts legitimate beneficiaries, and squanders scarce resources. Given the size of the Federal Government, given any project that is at the level of activity, for anyone who says that there is no waste or fraud or abuse simply doesn't realize that a little bit of an examination will sometimes turn up some interesting behavior. People who may be well-intentioned, but are involved in waste, fraud and abuse aren't always involved in criminal activity. The US Defense Department is the largest, the most complex, the most diverse, and arguably the most important entity on the face of the Earth, bar none. With an entity like that, waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement will never be zero, but managers have zero tolerance for it, and try to do everything that we can to minimize fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. The full extent of fraud associated with Pentagon contracting cannot be fully determined at this time, due to faulty and incomplete reporting and implementation. In 2018, DOD reported to Congress that from fiscal years 2013 to 2017, over $6.6 billion had been recovered from defense contracting fraud cases. Over the past two decades, virtually every major defense contractor in the U.S. has paid billions of dollars in fines and settlements for misconduct and fraud – all while making significant profits on government contracts. About half of the Pentagon’s budget goes directly into the hands of private contractors. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report 20 September 2021 requested by House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) that found the Department of Defense has not finalized and implemented a comprehensive approach to combat department-wide fraud. Despite the Pentagon regularly signing contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars, the Department’s ability to conduct fraud risk assessments and report procurement fraud risk remain incomplete and inadequate. “The Pentagon doesn’t seem to want to get serious about combatting the fraud, waste, and financial mismanagement that has been its legacy for decades,” said Sen. Sanders. “They don’t seem to want to get serious about spending taxpayer dollars wisely and effectively. Well, I think we can all agree, that is absolutely unacceptable. Currently, the U.S. spends more on our nation’s military than the next thirteen countries combined. Meanwhile, half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck, just under 40 million Americans are living in poverty, and over 600,000 Americans are homeless including roughly 40,000 veterans. The time is long overdue for the Defense Department to be held to the same level of accountability as the rest of the government.” “This independent report shows that the Trump Administration utterly failed to address the Pentagon’s longstanding problems with financial management, including procurement fraud,” said Chairwoman Maloney. “This failure to safeguard taxpayer dollars is completely unacceptable, and I urge the Biden Administration to quickly and fully implement GAO’s recommendations and put the Defense Department on a path to operate more efficiently and effectively, with the confidence that it is not spending money on fraudulent contracts.” The Pentagon is the largest contracting agency in the federal government and generally accounts for about two-thirds of all federal contracting activity, obligating more than all civilian federal agencies combined. GAO’s review examined Department of Defense fraud risk management activities for the period of October 2019 through September 2020. “Fraud poses a significant risk to program integrity and erodes public trust in the government,” according to GAO’s report. “In fiscal year 2020, DOD obligated approximately $422 billion on contracts. The scope and scale of this activity makes DOD procurement inherently susceptible to fraud.” GAO also reported that, “given the billions of dollars DOD spends annually on procurement, failing to manage and mitigate fraud effectively may ultimately adversely affect DOD’s ability to support the warfighter.” There is a continuing threat to Government operations from individuals intentionally using the Government's acquisition system to line their own pockets at taxpayer expense, thereby risking the health and welfare of the members of the Armed Services. Procurement fraud squanders limited funds, threatens safety, cheats American taxpayers, and harms DOD efforts to obtain needed goods and services for troops. Presidential Executive Order 12731 requires all federal employees to disclose suspected waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities. Within DCMA, the Contract Integrity Center is the required and appropriate authority for referral of contractor fraud matters. In addition, staff can report other instances of internal DCMA waste, fraud, and abuse to the DCMA Hotline, DCMA Ombuds or the Office of General Counsel. Outside of DCMA, personel may make such reports to a variety of authorities, including the Office of Special Counsel and the DODIG. Established in 1982, the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General [DoD OIG] is an independent office within the DoD that conducts oversight of DoD programs and operations. The DoD OIG is authorized “to have timely access to all records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other material available to [any DoD Component] which relate to programs and operations” of the DoD, as stated in section 6(a)(1) of the IG Act. The DoD OIG’s mission is to detect and deter fraud, waste, and abuse in DoD programs and operations; promote the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of the DoD; and help ensure ethical conduct throughout the DoD. The DoD OIG carries out its mission with a workforce of approximately 1,800 auditors, evaluators, criminal and administrative investigators, attorneys, support staff, and contractors. For the reporting period of April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021, the DoD OIG completed multiple criminal investigations, some conducted jointly with other law enforcement organizations, resulting in 154 arrests, 139 criminal charges, 124 criminal convictions, $360.8 million in civil judgments and settlements, and $456.3 million in criminal fines, penalties, and restitution ordered. In addition, the DoD OIG completed 15 senior official, reprisal, and restriction investigations, and oversaw 152 senior official, reprisal, and restriction investigations completed by the Military Service and Defense Agency OIGs. In the six month period from 01 October 2021 through 31 March 2022, the DoD OIG completed 301 criminal investigations, some conducted jointly with other law enforcement organizations, resulting in 125 arrests, 131 criminal charges, 159 criminal convictions, $740.5 million in civil judgments and settlements, and $189.2 million in criminal fines, penalties, and restitution. In addition, the DoD OIG completed 8 senior official, whistleblower reprisal, and Service member restriction investigations, and oversaw 155 senior official, whistleblower reprisal, and Service member restriction investigations completed by the Military Service and Defense agency OIGs. The DoD OIG’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) investigates criminal matters related to DoD programs and operations. Procurement fraud investigations are a major portion of DCIS cases. Procurement fraud includes cost and labor mischarging, defective pricing, price fixing, bid rigging, and defective and counterfeit parts. The potential damage from procurement fraud extends well beyond financial losses. This crime poses a serious threat to the DoD’s ability to achieve its objectives and can undermine the safety and operational readiness of Service members. DCIS investigates criminal and civil cases involving counterfeit, defective, substandard, or substituted products introduced into the DoD supply chain that do not conform with contract requirements. Nonconforming products can threaten the safety of military and Government personnel and other end users, compromise readiness, and waste economic resources. In addition, when substituted products are provided to the DoD, mission-critical processes and capabilities can be compromised until the substituted products are removed from the supply chain. DCIS works with Federal law enforcement partners, supply centers, and the defense industrial base, in working groups and task forces, to investigate allegations that DoD contractors are not providing the correct parts and components to meet contract requirements. Financial crimes range from theft to fraud involving the unlawful conversion of the ownership of money or property for personal use and benefit. Financial crimes include money laundering, forgery, and counterfeiting.A Few Examples
From June 1996 through June 2001, Robert Neal served as the Director of the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (SADBU) within the Office of Secretary of Defense. From this position, Neal directed policy and allocated multimillion dollar resources for DOD’s acquisition preference programs for small and disadvantaged businesses. Francis Jones served as Neal’s special assistant from May 1999 until January 19, 2001. Neal and Jones conspired to extort and to accept bribes and gratuities from companies and individuals doing business with the SADBU office. Among the items of value accepted by Neal and Jones were at least $70,000 in cash, Rolex watches, paid sexual favors from prostitutes, expenses for travel to Las Vegas and elsewhere, hotel rooms and at least $200,000 in payments to third parties intended for the benefit of Neal and Jones. They also conspired to embezzle funds which belonged to the United States government. Neal and Jones used a complex maze of companies, bank accounts and financial transactions to accomplish the objectives of the money laundering conspiracy. On 14 March 2017 Retired U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Bruce Loveless and David Newland, chief of staff to the Commander of the Navy’s Seventh Fleet, along with seven other high-ranking Navy officers are charged in a federal grand jury indictment with acting as a team of moles for a foreign defense contractor, trading military secrets and substantial influence for sex parties with prostitutes, extravagant dinners and luxury travel. According to a federal grand jury indictment, the Navy officers worked together to help Singapore-based defense contractor “Fat Leonard” Glenn Francis and his company, Glenn Defense Marine Asia, pull off a colossal fraud that ultimately cost the Navy – and U.S. taxpayers – tens of millions of dollars. According to the indictment, the group of officers referred to themselves using various terms, such as “the Cool Kids,” “the Band of Brothers,” “the Brotherhood,” “the Wolfpack,” “the familia,” and “the Lion King’s Harem.” The officers tried to conceal their corrupt relationships by using fictitious names to create email addresses using foreign-based email services. The defendants allegedly worked in concert to help Francis and GDMA win and keep defense contracts to provide port services to U.S. Navy ships; to redirect ships to ports controlled by Francis in Southeast Asia so he could overbill the Navy for supplies and services such as food, water, fuel, tugboats, and sewage removal; to sabotage competing defense contractors; to recruit new members for the conspiracy by spreading the “Glenn Gospel” to incoming Seventh Fleet leaders; and to keep the conspiracy secret by using fake names and foreign email service providers. On December 22, 2021, Balfour Beatty Communities LLC (BBC) pleaded guilty and agreed to pay over $65 million in fines and restitution for defrauding the Air Force, Army, and Navy. BBC, one of the largest providers of privatized military housing, pleaded guilty to one count of major fraud, and agreed to pay over $33.6 million in criminal fines and over $31.8 in restitution to the military, serve 3 years of probation, and engage an independent compliance monitor for 3 years. Separately, BBC also entered into a False Claims Act settlement to resolve its civil liability for $35.2 million. From around 2013 to around 2019, BBC employees altered or manipulated data in property management software, and destroyed and falsified resident comment cards to falsely inflate their metrics and fraudulently induce the Services to pay performance incentive fees that BBC had not earned. As a result, Service members and their families experienced lengthy and unnecessary delays in the resolution of maintenance issues. On February 23, 2022, food service equipment contractor TriMark USA agreed to pay $48.5 million to resolve allegations that its subsidiaries, TriMark Gill Marketing and Gill Group, Inc., improperly manipulated Federal small business set-aside contracts intended for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. This settlement constitutes the largest-ever False Claims Act recovery based on allegations of small business contracting fraud. Former TriMark executive Kimberley Rimsza also agreed to pay an additional $100,000 as an individual civil penalty for her conduct in connection with the scheme, which resulted in Federal agencies improperly awarding Government set-aside contracts.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
