Yesterday, the Guardian reported the following.
The eventual restoration of Ukraine through a $750bn (£620bn) recovery plan is the common task of the entire democratic world, the Ukrainian president said on Monday at the first detailed event to map out a physical future for the country in the event it survives as a western-facing nation after the Russian invasion.
Denys Shmyhal, the Ukrainian prime minister, said Ukraine’s direct infrastructure losses amounted to more than $100bn, adding more than 1,200 educational institutions, 200 hospitals and thousands of kilometres of gas pipelines, water and electricity networks, roads and railways had been destroyed or damaged.
He claimed there would be three stages of recovery that together might need more than $750bn of investment, of which one third would be from the private sector, and some from Russian reparations and asset freezes.
He said: “The Russian authorities unleashed this bloody war and caused this massive destruction, and should be held accountable for it.”
The first stage would be an immediate implementation plan starting with emergency humanitarian help, such as restoration of water supplies and bridges; a medium-term framework from 2023 to 2025 to bring back life to destroyed communities through reconstruction of schools, hospitals and housing, and finally a long-term modernisation vision from 2026 to 2032 for a Ukrainian green digital economy that finally leaves the Soviet era behind, and prepares the country for eventual EU membership.
Neat. A corrupt country, a faltering economy, and a leadership that refuses to engage in peace talks.
According to Transparency International’s 2021 Corruption Perceptions Index, Ukraine ranked 122nd out of 180 countries, near countries such as Zambia, Gabon and Mexico, while nations like Denmark and Finland ranked first.
That year, Ukraine was the second most corrupt in Europe. Russia was the most corrupt at 136.
But they expect the west to put in the same amount as we passed in the TARP bailout in the wake of the 2008 crash. It’s ludicrous. It’s inflationary. And it should make you ask… why? Why are we perpetuating the war? And what are the economic implications of it. It’s an important question and one we should be asking loudly.
the us govt continues to believe they can just print money without consequences, and few politicians have enough principle to be honest about the situation. money isn't going to make Ukraine as it was whole. That would be a full on war that no one wants.
I have a question. Has the Afghan or the Iraqi government, for example, asked for recovery/reconstruction/modernisation money from the West? Because if they have, I must have missed it. The Ukrainian government, on the other hand, has done nothing but ask for money. And weapons, of course.