FACT CHECK: US National Security Advisor Waltz Pushes Alternate Facts on Ukraine

US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz in an interview published by Fox News misled millions of viewers and subscribers about US support to Ukraine in the past and a minerals development deal expected to be signed by Kyiv in the near future.

The former US special forces operator and Congressman made the inaccurate and misleading comments about Ukraine during an interview with Fox’s Brian Kilmeade.

Corruption in Ukraine

Waltz’s remarks to Kilmeade begin here:

• Waltz said Ukraine is a disastrously corrupt country and the oversight of US resources given to Ukraine is poorly tracked.
• Waltz said: “I will say Ukraine was one of, and is one of, the most corrupt countries in the world. We always have to protect the taxpayers’ dollars. And there have been billions going in. And I don’t think, remember, I don’t think the previous administration had all of the appropriate oversight going in. So we have to keep a hard eye on that.”

The part about Ukraine being one of the world’s most corrupt countries is false.

The part about the US not having sufficient oversight over resources sent to Ukraine is true, but highly misleading.

According to Transparency International’s 2024 Corruptions Perceptions Index, corruption in Ukraine is mid-range on a worldwide standard, at 105th place among 180 countries, along with Serbia, sandwiched between Dominican Republic and Algeria.

In Europe Ukraine was rated less corrupt than Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina and NATO member state Turkey, but more corrupt than Hungary and Bulgaria.

For reference, according to Transparency International, Waltz’s own country, the United States, was rated 28th place in 2024, worse by four spots compared to 24th place in 2023.

An October 2024 US Defense Department Inspector General review of assistance to Ukraine found that about half of recent American support was not always documented to Department of Defense accounting standards. The insufficient record-keeping was not, the review said, necessarily proof of improper use of US resources.

Other Topics of Interest

Lina Kostenko – Ukraine’s Poetic Sphinx, Turns 96

For many years she has shunned the media and made few public appearances. This chosen role as a recluse has only added to the enigma and reverence surrounding this brilliant and defiant Ukrainian.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and other Kyiv officials have repeatedly stated that US weaponry is critical to national survival and that misdirection of US arms for corrupt purposes would be absurd and impossible because the entire nation is at war.

Further, Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have said, US inspectors are welcome to audit any US resources sent to Ukraine, including visiting the fighting front to see weapons in action against the Russian army, should the American inspectors wish. Zelensky’s most recent declaration that Ukraine’s books are open to US auditors was on Friday, April 25, during an interview with Daily Wire reporter Ben Shapiro.

US protection for minerals agreement

Waltz said that Zelensky and Ukraine had missed a “huge opportunity” to receive US support and protection by failing to sign a rare earths exploitation agreement with the Trump administration.

Opening up Ukraine’s resources to US development would give Ukraine reliable security, Waltz argued.

He said: “Rather than trying to correct the president of the United States, and the vice president, in the Oval Office, when he [Zelensky] was invited there for the first meeting, and could have sat side-by-side with the president, signing a minerals deal that bound our economies together for the foreseeable future. You want to talk about a security guarantee? That would have been phenomenal. I think that was a historic and missed opportunity.”

This is false.

First, Trump administration officials led by Walz have repeatedly stated that the US would not give Ukraine hard security guarantees protecting Ukraine against Russia, similar to NATO Article 5, under any circumstances.

Second, the Trump administration signed a minerals agreement with a democratic government in Afghanistan, claimed that it would solidify US support to Afghanistan, and then signed a deal with the Taliban committing the US to remove all forces from Afghanistan. The Trump administration excluded Afghanistan’s government from participation in its talks with the Taliban.

Background: In 2017, the White House, led by US President Donald J. Trump, signed a minerals development agreement with the then-in-power Afghan government led by Ashraf Ghani.

The September 2017 agreement gave US big business near-monopoly access to development of an estimated $1 trillion mineral reserves in Afghanistan. Both sides called the agreement a critical underpinning for long-term US commitment to Afghanistan.

In 2020, the Trump White House negotiated a withdrawal agreement with the Taliban – at the time a terrorist organization the US was at war with – committing America to withdraw all US forces from Afghan on a hard deadline. The Trump administration cut the deal over the strident objections of the democratically elected Afghan government led by Ghani, whose representatives were excluded from the White House-Taliban negotiations.

In 2021, as the last US troops left Afghanistan as per the terms of the 2020 withdrawal agreement, the Taliban moved to the offensive and overthrew the Ghani-led government, replacing it with an autocratic-theocratic regime.

The 2017 minerals exploitation agreement notwithstanding, US forces in and outside Afghanistan did not substantially contribute to resistance to the Taliban offensive, which ended the democratic government in Afghanistan.