Denys Bezlyudko's article analyzes the current state of the Ukrainian energy sector and economy against the backdrop of personnel changes at Ukrenergo and ongoing shelling. It discusses how the resignation of the company's chairman, Volodymyr Kudrytsky, and the related judicial investigation may affect the effectiveness of energy management and infrastructure restoration in times of economic turbulence.
A difficult winter. Shelling. Personnel crisis. Where will Ukrenergo get its money?
Ukrainian energy, and with it the entire economy of the country, is plunging into another turbulence on the eve of a difficult heating season. On the one hand, the intensity of enemy shelling is not decreasing, and work to restore the destroyed infrastructure is not slowing down. The prospects for passing the winter are alarming. On the other hand, the personnel decision of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief’s Headquarters to dismiss the head of Ukrenerego not only caused a number of contradictory opinions among both experts and market participants, but also called into question the effectiveness of crisis management not only in a single company, but in the country as a whole.
For at least the last year, numerous media outlets, commentators, law enforcement agencies, officials, and – in a more shadowy format – corrupt officials of all stripes have been fulfilling one destructive political-technological task: all problems that were somehow related to the activities of the state-owned electricity grid operator Ukrenergo were to be transformed in the information space into the personal guilt of the company's former head, Volodymyr Kudrytsky.
There are many reasons for this, the vast majority of “initiated” observers agree on the financial issue. To put it very simply, they say, “Kudrytskyi did not allow money to be stolen and schemes to be implemented.” And supposedly, it was because of this that numerous “illegal apartments”, “audit results”, “abuse of bulletproof vests”, “criminal cases of embezzlement of funds” and “investigations into lifestyle” and other white noise appeared in the infofield. For the uninitiated viewer, the operation lasted the last few weeks, for the more in-depth one – the last few years. And – whoever ordered the resignation – it is now obvious that he won his party.
But here's the problem: the issue of the manageability of the electricity distribution network, the issue of effective protection of energy facilities, attracting financing from external partners and returning problematic debts - the new head of the company will have to deal with all this. It will be especially interesting to observe what will happen with the criminal processes, where the target was Kudrytskyi personally, or the information campaign against him. After all, now that the goal has been achieved, it is simply impractical to waste resources on this.
However, there is one case, the further course of which will be indicative of the real desire of the behind-the-scenes puppeteers to change the situation on the energy market – or simply to get in the way by replacing an effective manager. And this is the case of the embezzlement of UAH 716 million of Ukrenergo funds with the participation of Alliance Bank and Ihor Kolomoisky’s United Energy company.
Let's briefly recall the plot. In the fall of 2021, Alliance Bank issued a guarantee to United Energy so that it could go to Ukrenergo and buy electricity. The company took advantage of the opportunity in March 2022, at the height of the full-scale invasion. However, it did not pay for the goods. And when Ukrenergo turned to the "guarantor" - Alliance Bank - it decided that it would not pay for this document. The result was a criminal case by the NABU for embezzlement of funds plus a commercial process for the return of UAH 1.2 billion (this is the amount of the guarantee with fines and late fees). In March 2024, NABU transferred the case to court, and in the commercial process the story got stuck in legal delays. Some political analyst bloggers whitewash Alliance Bank, while "slandering" Kudrytsky and Ukrenergo, while others, on the contrary, support the point of view that payments should be made under the guarantees. By the way, the Supreme Court is of the same opinion.
And here is the situation: Kudrytsky (“universal evil”) is no longer the head of “Ukrenergo”. What do you think – should the state-owned company continue to demand the return of funds due to it? For an effective manager, the answer is obvious. Especially considering the completely justified and realistic expectations of a “hard winter”, “difficult heating season”, “serious destruction” of the power system, in particular, the part that is under the control of “Ukrenergo”. In conditions of a total shortage of funds, a constant need for repairs – every penny must go to work. And therefore 1.2 billion UAH. from the bank “Alliance” will not be superfluous at all.
Moreover. Let us recall that the public motivation for Kudrytsky’s resignation is the inability to organize effective protection of energy facilities. So the logic of choosing a new leader – as well as his action plan – should proceed from the opposite: he should be able to organize such protection. Including by accumulating funding for it. Will the new head of the company receive “carte blanche”, for example, regarding legal disputes with debtors? Will the judicial machine be ready to make “state” decisions? Or, on the contrary, will the case of “Alliance” debts be written off in a long chest, and will they simply forget about UAH 1.2 billion, which could be used to build more than one shelter or repair more than one substation?
It is also especially interesting what arguments Alliance Bank itself will use in the shadow information struggle now – when the supposedly main “enemy” has been overthrown, but debts still need to be paid.
The further development of the story, which looks like a boring and very narrow-profile corporate conflict, will actually show what the real intentions of the initiators of Kudrytsky’s resignation were and how ready all branches of state power in the country are to defend state interests. In addition, this will also be a signal to state bodies in other sectors, state-owned enterprises and their debtor counterparties – and at the same time to international partners – as to whether the talks about improving the management of internal resources are actually improving, and Ukraine is trying to save every penny of taxpayers (whether their own or Western ones).
Or it will demonstrate that it is still possible to steal shamelessly here, even in the midst of war.
