The Perils of Peronism

Recently, a figurehead of the Argentine political scene, Vice President and former President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, was sentenced to six years in prison on corruption charges. She and her late husband Nestor, who served as President from 2003 to 2007, are prominent in the Kirchnerism political movement, which is an offshoot of Peronism. Kirchnerism opposes international free trade agreements and other neoliberal ideals. According to the New York Times, Kirchner is divisive within Argentina; to her supporters, she is regarded as someone who has lifted many out of poverty. However, according to her detractors, her policies have triggered massive inflation and high poverty rates. As an example of her divisiveness, an attempt was made on her life in September.

According to Reuters, Kirchner was involved in a scheme to award public works contracts to businessman and close political ally Lazaro Baez. After the contracts were awarded, money was funneled back to the Kirchners. These public works contracts were based in the province of Santa Cruz, which is the Kirchners’ political stronghold. Kirchner will likely appeal her conviction in hopes of avoiding prison. Nonetheless, it appears that her days in the political spotlight may be coming to an end.

Going Bust: The Troubles of Michelle Mone

Recently, Baroness Michelle Mone, a member of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom, has been facing allegations that she and her family have unethically profited from government contracts awarded at the beginning of the pandemic. Mone is well known in the UK for founding Ultimo, a designer lingerie brand, leading to the nickname in some quarters of the UK media as “Baroness Bra.” On November 23 of last year, The Guardian published an exclusive saying that Mone and her children received £29 million ($36 million) from the profits of a company called Medpro PPE. Medpro was given a £200 million contract to provide Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) through the so-called “VIP lane,” where the government appeared to hand out contracts to companies with close links to people in government. Some of the PPE Medpro provided to the government proved defective and is currently sitting in warehouses.

In the case of Mone specifically, according to a follow-up article in The Guardian, it is clear that the Baroness had a much less stressful pandemic than most people. She and her then fiancé, a businessman named Douglas Barrowman, bought a luxury yacht called the Lady M. It is alleged that Barrowman received 65 million pounds in profits through the same scheme and then passed 29 million pounds of that on to an offshore trust that Mone and her children control. recently, The Guardian published an article saying Mone is taking a leave of absence from the House of Lords to try and clear her name. It is unclear what will happen next, but it appears that Baroness Mone has some explaining to do about how she may have profited off the misery of millions.

The History of Transparency International

Transparency International was formed in 1993. Before then, corruption was not studied in depth by international organizations. Corruption and bribery in the developing world were often a necessary part of doing business. However, by 1995, TI established its head office in Berlin, Germany, and subsequently opened 26 chapters worldwide. They started the first global Corruption Perceptions Index, which ranked countries on the level of corruption domestically. In the first decade of the 2000s, TI had advocated for international organizations to create their own anti-corruption bodies. An example of this was the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, which required UN members to enforce anti-corruption laws and encourage global cooperation on corruption.

In the 2010s, Transparency International started to expand its focus. For example, they began to focus on the connection between corruption and climate change and how funds intended to reverse the effects of climate change could be mismanaged. As the 2010s progressed, TI became more focused on combating the use of shell companies and increasingly elaborate methods that heads of state and business people employ to hide away ill-gotten gains. In 2019 Transparency started to focus on the link between corruption and democracy. In particular, they have looked at the connection between democracy in a given country and the level of corruption.

A follow-up on Brazil

Recently Lula da Silva won the run-off to decide the winner of the Brazilian election. While this comes as a great relief to left-wing political movements in Brazil and around the world, Brazil still faces questions about corruption. In a statement released by Transparency International, it is alleged that despite the harsh anti-corruption rhetoric put out by the previous government, Bolsonaro and his administration engaged in corrupt practices. It is alleged that money was funneled to allies of Bolsonaro without government oversight which was spent on multiple pet projects. The Bolsonaro administration has also gutted previous anti-corruption legislation to cover their crimes. One of the goals of the new government will hopefully be to reinstate and build on anti-corruption legislation, although given Lula’s previous history of alleged corruption, this remains to be seen.

The Potential Ramifications of FATF Sidelining Russia.

In recent weeks there have been reports that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is discussing the possibility of excluding Russia from the anti-money laundering group due to the ongoing war in Ukraine. According to the International Working Group on Russian sanctions (a collection of independent experts in international relations based at Stanford University), the ramifications of FATF blocking Russia would be considerable. Firstly, it wouldn’t allow Russia to influence the creation of new International anti-money laundering laws, which Russia may try and water down with its influence. Secondly, it would force western banks to institute further checks on any capital flows in or out of Russia. Finally, complete sanctions would most likely stop the current practice of Russian companies being able to conduct financial dealings through one of the few banks in Russia that have not yet been banned.

Given the current circumstances, Ukrainian financial institutions are leading the drive to get Russia sanctioned by FATF. On October 14th, the National Bank of Ukraine released a statement pushing FATF to exclude Russia from future FATF conferences and legislation. The Ukrainian World Congress, a non-profit organization advocating for the rights of Ukrainians worldwide, has added its voice to calls for Russia to be sidelined. While the West should welcome such a move, it is now unclear if and when it will happen.

Sergei Surovikin: Is he Corrupt or Not?

Recently, President Vladimir Putin named Sergei Surovikin as the commander of Russian forces in Ukraine. In many articles announcing his appointment, military sources (mainly the Ministry of Defense (MOD) in the United Kingdom) state that he is corrupt, brutal, and ruthless on the battlefield. According to the New York Times, he served in Chechnya in the early 2000s and commanded Russian forces in Syria, where numerous human rights violations occurred. Also, according to a report in The Guardian, Surovikin led a rifle division that broke barriers set up by pro-democracy protesters during the 1991 attempted coup by Soviet hardliners and killed three people.

It is much harder to pin him down on any concrete allegations of corruption other than the possibility of weapons dealing. Brokering arms is undoubtedly an unsavory business, but without in-depth evidence, it seems a stretch to label Surovikin as corrupt. This raises the issue of media outlets and other organizations stating that a person may be involved in corruption, but fail to back up such allegations with credible evidence. It seems clear that Surovikin is likely a war criminal, but is he corrupt? It is much more difficult to tell without hard facts.

Lula Da Silva: A Corrupt Politician or Hero to Brazil’s Working Class?

Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, better known as Lula, has been a prominent figure in Brazilian politics and on the international stage. Silva was the head of the metalworkers union in Sao Paulo state and, in the mid-1980s, founded the Partido Dos Trabalhadores (PT), known in English as the workers’ party. After many failed attempts, he was elected as president of Brazil in 2003 and served until 2010. In 2014 four years after he left office, a massive corruption scandal involving the state oil firm Petrobras.

According to BBC, In July 2017, Lula was found guilty of receiving a beachfront house as a bribe from a construction firm called OAS in return for his aid in winning lucrative government contracts. After spending four years in prison, his convictions were annulled because the alleged crimes took place in Brasilia when Lula was president and not in Curitiba in the state of Parana. This freed up the possibility for him to run again for president after three years of populist rule under Jair Bolsonaro. The first round of the election was held recently, and while Lula got 48% of the vote, he needed 50% to win outright. (Bolsonaro received 42%) A runoff will be held at the end of the month to determine the winner. It is difficult to know what the truth is here: Is Lula a hero to Brazil’s working class, or is he like so many other politicians who are corrupted by power?

The Capture of “Fat Leonard.”

Recently, Venezuelan police captured Leonard Glenn Francis, better known as “Fat Leonard,” after he fled from his San Diego home while under house arrest. Francis, a Malaysian defense contractor was involved in a massive 35-million-dollar bribery and fraud scandal. Earlier this month, according to The Guardian’s Edward Helmore, Francis, who is due to be sentenced for his part in the scandal, cut off his ankle bracelet and left the U.S with the possible intention of going to Asia or Russia. Fat Leonard was brazen in his methods for winning lucrative U.S Navy contracts. He would host lavish parties for members of the U.S. navy in Asian ports, wining and dining the right people to gain preferential treatment in the bidding for resupplying contracts.

On the 27th of September of last year, Aljazeera reported that Fat Leonard has kidney cancer and was attempting to apply for political asylum in Venezuela. According to the report, it has been suggested by the State Department that the socialist government in Venezuela, led by Nicolas Maduro could use him as a bargaining chip to reduce U.S. sanctions. According to PBS, the sanctions toward Venezuela prevent U.S banks from dealing with the Venezuelan government or the state oil firm PDVSA. While the U.S does have an extradition treaty with Venezuela, it does not have an embassy in Caracas, which could make any deal more complicated.

EU Gravy Train to be Halted in Budapest.

Recently, the European Union has threatened to cut off funds from its state budget to Hungary. Reportedly, the EU could withhold up to 7.5 billion Euros from the Hungarian government. If the EU does indeed take action, this could deliver a severe blow to an already struggling economy. According to the EU, this is being considered because the Hungarian government led by Viktor Orban has diverted EU funds to friendly oligarchs. Hungary is also accused of having inadequate anti-corruption laws. In response to this, the Hungarian government has stated that it will enact new anti-corruption legislation shortly.

It is widely acknowledged that Orban and his cronies engage in corrupt practices. Orban, like many other populist leaders, uses sport as a tool to shape their political vision, mainly to increase his domestic popularity and a way to boost his ego. This has involved the use of government money to support football clubs. For example, according to an article by Tomasz Mortimer in The Guardian, the Orban government spent around 2 billion Euros on stadium construction and youth academies’ development. Orban has also authorized 100 million Euros to Puskas Akademia FC in his hometown of Felcsut. Orban has subsidized clubs owned by his oligarch friends, which has raised concerns about how the government is spending money. Using government funds to construct football stadiums instead of investing money into healthcare or education is misguided.

Viktor Gusan: the Corrupt Sheriff of Transnistria.

Recently, in a Europa League match, Manchester United, one of the most recognizable names in world football (soccer), played a team from Moldova called FC Sheriff. The background of FC Sheriff is fascinating and mysterious. The club are based in Transnistria, a breakaway self-governing republic of Moldova that has close geopolitical ties to Russia. A company, also called Sheriff, owns the football club and additionally has its hands in many other businesses, including gas stations, supermarkets, and the local mobile phone network. Viktor Gusan, the owner of Sheriff—both the club and the company–is also allegedly involved in the illegal smuggling of many goods, including weapons. Gusan called his company Sheriff due to a love of old western movies. According to Foreign Policy magazine’s Robert O’Connor, the Sheriff company increased its bottom line through smuggling. Most of these goods make their way towards Odesa, Ukraine, a haven for illicit activities before the recent conflict with Russia.

With his accumulated wealth, Gusan built a $200 million stadium and spent lavishly on new players from foreign countries to help drive FC Sheriff to the top of the Moldavan League standings. Gusan is also heavily involved in local politics, and, according to Radio Free Europe’s Timothy Wesolowsky, he has close ties with almost every politician in the Transnistrian parliament. It is probably safe to say that not much happens in Transnistria without his approval.