In a potential signal of shifting attitudes on how the war in Ukraine is covered in the legacy media, the New York Times is starting to slowly acknowledge the endemic corruption that has been a defining feature of the former Soviet state as officials have admitted that money for military contracts has "vanished".

Following the dismissal of Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov amid a slew of corruption scandals surrounding the war effort against Russia, the New York Times acknowledged that the "enduring challenge of corruption in Ukraine" has "emerged as a rare area of criticism of President Volodymyr Zelensky's leadership."

Although Reznikov has yet to be tied with any of the corruption scandals personally, the Times went on to admit that the resignation has "elevated the issue to the highest level of Ukrainian politics". Unnamed Ukrainian officials even told the paper that some funds intended for military contracts "failed to produce weaponry or ammunition and that some money has vanished," while claiming that the issue was merely confined to the early days of the war.

The neo-liberal outlet has previously been keen to highlight claims from the Biden administration on how the Zelensky government has been "committed to fighting corruption," citing as evidence statements from officials such as veteran Washington insider and Acting Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who played a pivotal role in the Euromaidan revolution in Ukraine that saw the overthrow of democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014.

Despite nine senior government officials being sacked over allegations of corruption, including purchasing military food supplies at vastly inflated prices and taking luxury vacations, the paper went on to write in January that "corruption has otherwise not been a significant factor in the war, despite Russian propaganda claims to the contrary that are aimed at undermining his [Zelensky's] government."