Since the start of the war in 2022, Ukraine has paid out approximately $770 million in advance to foreign arms dealers for weapons and ammunition that were never delivered, arrived incomplete, or turned out to be unusable, according to internal government documents and interviews cited by the Financial Times. The FT’s findings, based on leaked state files, court documents, and interviews with officials and intermediaries, shine a light on the murky and high-risk world of wartime arms procurement.
In one striking case, a small ammunition shop in Tucson, Arizona—OTL Imports—secured a €49 million contract with Ukraine in 2022 to deliver artillery shells. Founded by 28-year-old Tanner Cook, the company had no prior experience on such a scale. Despite receiving a €17.1 million advance, the promised munitions never arrived. Ukraine has since won an arbitration ruling against OTL but has yet to recover the money.
Ukraine’s former defense minister Oleksiy Reznikov, who oversaw the early war-time procurement, defended the use of foreign intermediaries as a wartime necessity. “You have guys on the front line dying without shells,” he told the FT. “You have to put a shell in their hands every day and every night.”
But the price of speed and desperation has been high. From inflated prices driven by global shortages to broken contracts and possible fraud, Ukraine’s urgent procurement efforts created opportunities for unscrupulous actors to exploit the chaos. In some instances, deals were struck with companies linked to Russian interests or lacking proper licenses, according to the FT’s report.
The Arizona OTL case is just one of more than 30 similar deals. Another involved Regulus Global, a Virginia-based company that received over $160 million in advance payments from Ukraine for NATO-standard 155mm artillery shells. Spetstechnoexport, Ukraine’s state arms broker, now claims Regulus breached the contract and failed to deliver. Regulus denies wrongdoing and insists it continued deliveries despite financial strain, asserting that it is, in fact, owed $350 million by the Ukrainian side.
As these cases wind through slow arbitration courts in London, Vienna, and Geneva, Ukraine’s anti-corruption authorities have opened multiple investigations. Several procurement officials have been dismissed or indicted.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, responding to public outcry and international concern—particularly from NATO partners—has moved to reform the country’s arms procurement processes. In January 2024, he appointed Maryna Bezrukova, a seasoned supply chain expert, to lead the Defense Procurement Agency with a mandate to overhaul the system.
Despite the financial and reputational damage, Reznikov stressed that the flawed deals represent only a fraction of the massive wartime effort to supply Ukraine’s front lines. “How many contracts were signed,” he asked rhetorically, “and how many are in the courts?”
The Financial Times investigation offers a rare and detailed view into how, in the fog of war, even well-intentioned governments can fall prey to profiteers—particularly when fighting for survival on a battlefield shaped by both bullets and business deals.
