December 3 Cabinet of Ministers passed the decision to rename the Ministry of Reintegration of the Temporarily Occupied Territories into the Ministry of National Unity of Ukraine. The newly created department was headed by Oleksiy Chernyshov, chairman of the board of Naftogaz, who also assumed the position of deputy prime minister. The head of the government, Denys Shmyhal, said that institutional strengthening in the form of this ministry will contribute to a new quality of interaction with the multimillion-strong Ukrainian community, which represents all waves of migration. The key tasks of the reformed ministry were also named: the main one is the development of a strategy that will help return Ukrainians home, providing them with decent conditions for living and working in Ukraine. Strengthening of cultural and economic ties with Ukrainians abroad, popularization of national identity and promotion of diaspora integration into national processes were also included in the Ministry of Unity’s functions. It seems exhaustive, but the focus of the new ministry on the issues of Ukrainians abroad only leaves open a number of other, no less important issues.
The Ministry of Unity should take care of all war victims
Olena Lunyova, Advocacy Director of the ZMINA Center for Human Rights convinced, that national unity should not be reduced only to working with Ukrainians abroad. It should also include those who lost contact with their native country due to the war — residents of temporarily occupied territories, displaced persons and other victims. In a post on Facebook, the human rights activist reminds that back in 2019, during the Unity Forum in Mariupol, the “ZMINA Center for Human Rights” emphasized that the government should have a structure responsible for the protection of all war victims, regardless of where they are – on TOT, in free regions or abroad. Supporting people and restoring ties with citizens should remain a priority of state policy.
Back in September, 64 human rights organizations, including the NGO “Donbas SOS”, the NGO “KRIMSOS”, the Crimean Human Rights Group, the BF “Right to Protection”, addressed President Zelensky public address regarding ensuring the implementation of the powers of the Ministry on Reintegration of the Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine. Even then, the liquidation of the Ministry of Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories announced by the government, which was discussed in the Government, caused serious concern both among civil society and among Ukraine’s international partners. The Ministry of Reintegration played a key role in overcoming the consequences of Russian aggression, dealing with such vital issues as evacuating the population from the frontline areas, supporting the families of political prisoners, and ensuring communication with citizens in the temporarily occupied territories. The Ministry also coordinated the policy of reconstruction of the de-occupied regions, where even a short period of being under occupation left significant destructive consequences.
The liquidation of the Ministry, or rather its renaming with the loss of functions, can be perceived as a signal that Ukraine is reducing attention to the topic of reintegration and protection of victims. This not only undermines confidence within the country, but also creates risks of losing support from international partners.
Experiments on reorganization are not always successful
The idea of merging or reorganizing ministries always has a strategic or political motivation, although in Ukrainian realities it often becomes a source of confusion and controversy. Before we had the Ministry of Unity, there was a complex chain of reforms related to the reorganization of the functions of several ministries. First, there was a merger of the Ministry of Social Policy with the Ministry of Veteran Affairs, which was designed to optimize resources and combine functions related to the support of the most vulnerable categories of citizens — veterans and people in need of social protection. The goal was to create a more holistic support system where veterans’ assistance would be part of the overall social policy. However, this was criticized because veterans required specific support that was difficult to integrate into the wider social system.
The next step is the creation of the Ministry of Reintegration of the Temporarily Occupied Territories, which was a response to new challenges caused by the war and the occupation of part of the territories of Ukraine. The main objective was to ensure the return of control over the occupied territories, support for the people who remained there, as well as assistance to internally displaced persons (IDPs). This ministry took on tasks that other authorities could not effectively carry out, but its operations also faced challenges related to limited resources and cross-functionality with other ministries.
The proposal to transform the Ministry of Reintegration into the Ministry of National Unity envisaged the possibility of finding a new format for dealing with these challenges. It was about expanding the functions of this body to not only focus on the reintegration of territories, but also to build a broad national unity through the support of all victims of war – regardless of their place of residence. Undoubtedly, the functions of the Ministry of Unity should include work with IDPs, liberated territories, Ukrainians abroad, as well as building social cohesion in wartime conditions.
Instead, the reformed Ministry lost a significant part of its functionality and focused only on Ukrainians who ended up abroad because of the war.
A ministry built on misconceptions
“The problem is not in the name or the very fact of the creation of a separate government institution, but in the fact that its functionality is going to be formed on the basis of false foundations”, – such a conclusion reaches Olena Babakova, own correspondent of the “European Truth” publication, working in Warsaw. In her article, it is said that when defining the policy regarding the diaspora, one cannot focus exclusively on strategic steps for re-emigration, because, unfortunately, the majority of Ukrainians will not return. Each year of fighting reduces the number of those who could return, and this percentage decreases by 5-10% annually. That is, if even now there is hope for a return, it is a limited number of people, and not a mass flow.
Moreover, it is necessary to honestly admit another difficult truth: Ukraine should build its policy regarding the diaspora not from the level of trust “zero”, but from the level of trust “minus”. Recent years of war, political instability and social crises have not contributed to the strengthening of ties between the state and its citizens abroad. Many of the Ukrainians who left due to the aggression have lost trust in the authorities, and therefore most of them are not ready to return, without a clear guarantee of stability and security in their homeland.
Therefore, the policy of re-emigration cannot be the basis of relations with the diaspora. Instead, Ukraine needs to develop a more comprehensive approach that takes into account the reality of today — not only the policy of return, but also the policy of support and integration of Ukrainians in host countries, in particular through the provision of legal, cultural and educational opportunities for the diaspora. It is only on such basis that it is possible to restore trust in the state, as well as preserve relations with the Ukrainian community abroad for the long term.
Orwellian newspeak in action?
Journalist Volodymyr Aryev in his comment ironizes on the imperfection and lack of real content in the new initiatives of the government, comparing them with satirical elements from the works of George Orwell. He suggests inventing other “mythical” ministries, such as the Ministry of Truth of Ukraine (Minpru), the Ministry of Justice and Development of Ukraine (Minsru), or the Ministry of Strength and Invincibility of Ukraine (Minpnu), emphasizing the absurdity and propagandistic nature of such institutions. The idea of creating governmental institutions that are more like rhetorical tools to maintain control than real bodies capable of influencing the country, particularly because of policy inconsistency, becomes an important theme of his criticism.
Rostislav Pavlenko, an expert in the field of international relations and security, points out that the authorities are trying to avoid a real solution to the problem of national unity, giving the political forces only the appearance of work. As a result, instead of a real Ministry of National Unity, we get the appointment of a person with corporate experience to a leadership position that has no relation to these complex political processes. According to Pavlenka, the appointment of the head of Naftogaz as the minister of national unity is a direct evidence of how superficial decisions are made at the government level without real changes or deep political will to ensure true national unity.
The idea of creating a Ministry of National Unity in Ukraine raises many questions. This is an initiative that may seem important at first glance, but in reality it looks like another attempt to create the illusion of change. This opinion is supported even by critics who draw attention to the absurdity of the concept itself.
As notes well-known blogger and publicist Volodymyr Vetka, such an initiative may eventually lead to the creation of new government structures that will not have real content, but will rather resemble “simulacra”. Vetka quips: “Ministry of Coolness”, “Ministry of Loneliness”, “Ministry of Yoga” and “Ministry of Happiness” – these, in his opinion, could become the next ministries if the authorities continue to try to fake real changes instead of solving the deep problems of the country.
