Do not touch the Ministry of Veterans. If you are not ready to keep the war after the front – move away

There are participants in the war. And there are viewers who have convinced themselves that this is also a role. And while the former silently pull out the country, the latter generate “optimization”. This time – Ministry of Veterans.

Again, someone decided that it could be drained into the Ministry of Social. Because many structures because “Optimization of resources” because “similar functions”.

Similar? Sorry, but you do not understand what you are dealing with. This is not a management decision. This is a philosophical mistake. And strategic blindness.

Advertising:

First. Ontological incompatibility. The Ministry of Social is about redistribution.
The Ministry of Justice is about subjectization.
One thing – serves, the other – returns.

The Ministry of Social works in the logic of need. Ministry of Veterans – in the logic of experience. In the Ministry of Social – Help. The Ministry of Veterans is about the truth that you do not wash away – neither from blood, nor from loss, nor from what you take on your shoulders, when you are no longer weapons, and the body is a twin. And not to fit this truth in form # 12345.

These are different languages. Different nature. Different weight.

Second. Veteran is not a beneficiary. Not a customer. Not a category. Not “socialstatus”.
This is a participant. It is a carrier of experience that most of society does not have and will never have.

And that is why veteran policy is not about services. And about the state’s answer to the question: “What do we do with those who held the country when she could fall?”

Third. Minvet is part of the security architecture. Not “allowances”. Not “programs”. And the institutional line of defense after the front.

Accounting. Centers. Veteran’s office. Transition to a cud. Psychological support. Communication with veteran communities. And the return culture.

Destroy the Ministry of Veterans is to cut the channel through which the war returns home not as a injury but as a transformation.

Fourth. You don’t keep the war. You design it. Policy has three supports:

• the structure that holds,
• the tool that works,
• accountability that does not escape.

At the fusion, all this will pour.

The focus disappears. Dissolfs responsibility. And the veteran again hangs between Mow, CNAP and confused regions that do not know where to go.

Because you are trying to create a comfortable reality – where there are “heroes”, “thanks”, “symbols”. But you do not leave space for silence, fatigue, isolation, addictions and post -traumas that do not pass over time.

The real war is not in the pages. She is in the silence of the kitchen where the phone does not match. In the look of a child who has been waiting for a dad or mom for ten years and may not wait.

However, you do that in papers it is a “service”. In fact, the pain, experience and need for a system that does not crumble at the first meeting with reality.

Fifth. Addictions, aggression, loneliness, loss are not “risk factors”. This is part of a person. Veteran experience is another psyche, another nervous system, other responsibility. Otherwise the body. Another reaction. Another weight of silence.

Do you think it is enough to transfer this topic to the social block?
And what do you do with what is not treated with help? With explosion? With addictions? With aggression that does not fit into the depression questionnaire?

War – continues. And you either build a return policy or leave the country alone with the consequences.

And when you ask why “veterans do not trust” why the “explosion again”, why “could not adapt” – remember how they decided that their experience is just another service.

In the meantime – just do not touch.

Because if you did not hold the front – do not break the rear.

Ruslana Velichko

A column is a material that reflects the author’s point of view. The text of the column does not claim the objectivity and comprehensive coverage of the topic that rises in it. The editorial board of “Ukrainian Truth” is not responsible for the accuracy and interpretation of the information provided and plays only the role of the carrier. The point of view of the UP editorial board may not coincide with the point of view of the author of the column.