Ukraine will combine its military procurement bodies into a single agency in 2026, reversing NATO guidance from last year and renewing concerns among anti-corruption groups.
Defense Minister Denys Shmyhal announced the plan, saying the new “Unified Acquisition Agency” will centralize contracts for weapons, ammunition, clothing, and food under the national defense department and operate with a fresh supervisory board.
The merger joins the Defence Procurement Agency and the State Logistics Operator, which previously handled lethal and nonlethal acquisitions separately.
Shmyhal noted that the change is part of broader reforms after major corruption investigations shook the Ukrainian energy and defense sectors this year.
“We continue to move towards increasing the transparency and efficiency of defense enterprises,” Shmyhal said, adding that Kyiv is expanding cooperation with private manufacturers to support the armed forces.
Posing ‘Huge Risk’
Transparency advocates warned that the reorganization concentrates enormous spending authority.
Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the non-government organization Anti-Corruption Action Center in Kyiv, told Ukrainian media the Unified Acquisition Agency could manage about 1 trillion hryvnias ($23.7 billion) annually, calling that scale a heightened risk.
She cited that former Defense Minister Rustem Umerov promoted the merger in 2024 but halted it after NATO urged Ukraine to keep the agencies separate.
Ukrainian officials now say NATO has no objection. The defense department also pledged to renew associated structures and continue corporatization, with Shmyhal noting that 14 of 90 ministry-owned companies have shifted to the State Property Fund, which circulates and allocates government assets across industry bodies, and more are in process.
Meanwhile, the supervisory board and leadership of the merged agency remain unclear.
Integrity watchdogs also questioned whether Arsen Zhumadilov, who has led both military procurement offices at different points, will head the new entity.
Kaleniuk argued that consolidating control under figures tied to ongoing investigations creates “a huge risk.”
