In announcing that the U.S. has agreed to a third $1 billion loan guarantee for Ukraine on June 3, Pyatt made this unjustified assessment of President Petro Poroshenko’s progress on rule of law:

“In this regard, Mr. President, I in particular want to signal my appreciation, the United States’ appreciation, of the leadership that you have exercised on the issue of the Prosecutor General’s Office, and to note how satisfied we are with the partnership that we have begun to build with your new Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko. This is critically important both to building the investment climate that will allow for sustainable growth in this country but also to establish a prosecutor’s office that truly enjoys the credibility, the confidence and the support of the Ukrainian people and Ukrainian leadership.”

The announcement and the timing were important. They signaled American support for resumption of the International Monetary Fund’s lending program. A decision is due next month on that issue and, while it’s not clear what the IMF conditions are, the requirements that are known are not particularly onerous. And none of them require an overhaul of the nation’s courts or prosecutor’s office, which the IMF feels is not in its competence.

I disagree with this current wave of Western optimism because I cannot find any factual grounds for Pyatt to make such a statement, nor this one from May 16 at a Kyiv investment conference: “I am feeling more optimistic about Ukraine, about the prospects for Ukrainian reform, than I have felt in about 12 months right now. I think we are in a very hopeful moment.”

He’s not the only one going soft.

U.K. Ambassador to Ukraine Judith Gough tweeted yesterday: “Judiciary reform. Important progress. Effective implementation will be key to regaining public trust.”

Hold on Pyatt and Gough. It’s premature to break out the champagne.

The constitutional changes envisage setting up an independent regulatory body called the Supreme Council of Justice to oversee the court system. The changes also stipulate vetting judges, increasing their wages and banning lifetime appointments. An anti-corruption court will also be created under the amendments, though it is not clear when a special law on the court will be passed. Yegor Sobolev, a lawmaker from the Samopomich Party, says that the authorities lack the political will to set it up. The amendments have been criticized for effectively delaying the implementation of the reform until 2019, failing to renew the court system by starting an open competition for judges’ jobs, and not engaging civil society in the reform.

Don’t take my word for it. Halya Coynash, an astute observer of Ukraine for the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, offers a far more detailed and damning critique that all should read before they rush to praise or criticize.

The prospects for Lutsenko to reform the General Prosecutor’s Office — meaning make less corrupt and more effective — are less clear and, actually, more in dispute.

He’s made some key appointments, or promised to, of people respected in the legal community. He’s also kept people in disrepute, mainly the top deputies of his discredited predecessor, ex-Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, and failed to rehire the credible reformers who Shokin forced out — Davit Sakvarelidze and Vitaly Kasko.

Pyatt, reflecting the country he represents, has taken some very strong and courageous stands during his three-year tenure as American ambassador, particularly in supporting Ukraine’s democratic aspirations, criticizing corruption in Ukraine and, of course, supporting Ukraine against Russia’s war. However, he, like his country, tends to over-personalize issues and also disengage when U.S. priorities shift, as I fear they are from Ukraine today.

Gough’s performance is simply too early to judge. She came in September. But her predecessor, Simon Smith, took a hard stance against Ukraine’s endemic corruption.

In any case, there is nothing to be a cheerleader about in the courts or in the prosecutor’s office today. They have accomplished nothing and not moved a single step in bringing justice that Ukrainians so richly deserve. In fact, it appears that Poroshenko has cleverly set the stage for delaying any overhaul in both institutions as he continues to obstruct justice.

I believe Lutsenko’s track record as interior minister shows he does not have the skills or temperament to succeed in leading the nation’s ineffective and corrupt prosecutors. In the courts, the same corrupt judges are still on the bench, with any meaningful overhaul still several years away, if then. By then, Pyatt and Gough will be long gone.

Praising progress in Ukraine’s corruption fight where there is none makes the West and its representatives look foolish or naive or both. Such unjustified optimism will only disappoint Ukrainians who know better and can see through smokescreens much better than foreigners who are either gullible or who simply just want to end their tenures in Ukraine singing “the sun will come out tomorrow.”

Kyiv Post chief editor Brian Bonner can be reached at [email protected]