There will be no demobilization. As in Ukraine a caste was formed that will never go to war

The army is behind the brackets of the social equation - the burden of wartime is disproportionately distributed between the rear and the pixel, says the writer and serviceman Pavel Kazarin. The rear was fenced off from front -line problems and learned to guarantee a peaceful life. At the last press conference, no one asked about the life and demobilization. And the thing is not intent or conspiracy.

Just this topic has become unpopular for politicians, a niche for journalists and an undesirable one for most of their audience. The service life is concerned except the military and their families themselves. In the most general terms, there are four million people, 10-15% of the country's population. For all others, this topic is undesirable because demobilization of some will mean the oncoming mobilization of others.

It is difficult to suspect hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens in a willingness to change their established life, and therefore this topic is transformed into clearly unpopular for politicians. Every time we say that our war is "full -scale", "domestic" and "folk". But in reality, everything came down to the fact that the protection of the country is a matter of hands only military who were bred in a special caste: there is a nipple between them and the rest of the country.

The form can be worn and impossible to remove. And all domestic lawmaking has been working on those who have not worn it. The army was behind the brackets of the public equation. The burden of wartime is disproportionately distributed between the rear and the pixel. Over the past two and a half years, the military has increased responsibility for violation of orders. They removed a "default" extra charge of 30 thousand hryvnias.

The mobilization law was approved for a long time, senseless and liability. The theme of demobilization ceased to be heard in the speeches of politicians half a year ago. Instead, the whole discussion is now reduced to the right to prescribe economic booking rules for civilian rules. In this case, the rules of life in the rear are little different from the pre -war. Industrial mobilization was not introduced. The system of compulsory military training for civilians is also.

We have no import restrictions. Consumption limits. Additional taxes for war. Thanks to Western partners, Ukraine can afford to keep the economy afloat, avoiding those scenarios that usually accompany wars of such a scale. And it is not that the quality of life in the rear is disproportionate to the conditions of the front. It is just right and natural. It is said that in the conditions of general threat, the distribution of risks was uneven.

In the conditions of a full -scale war, the country's protection should be a common cause. But it creates the feeling that it has been left behind by the military alone, who now monitor how the authorities prepare a system of economic reservation. And if you think that in the military environment all this is perceived as legalization of redemption, then you are not mistaken. You can understand a business that wants to save skilled employees.

You can understand the power that you need to build budget revenues with expenditures. Even the logic of those who do not want to serve and is ready to pay for it not to the military but in the budget. But the question remains: how is it planned to take into account the interests of those who fight? The war for independence risks turning into the war of the poor, which the rich decided not to come.

Mobilization will now be determined by a blind case and not the need for the army in specific skills. Economic reservation is introduced for the civilian list for the right not to wear pixel. At the same time, no one, of course, is about to introduce rates for the military for the right to remove it. It can be said that the "redemption price" has acted before - and this is true.

But the introduction of it into the legislation will mean that the state at the level of the rules of the game enshrines for the military role of "disadvantaged". Those who are poor serve and serve indefinitely. War as such is a test for a nation for solidarity. The war checks whether society feels the level of intra -group unity, for which people are ready to risks. It determines whether citizens are ready to invest their lives, health and resources in a common task.

Therefore, victory in the war is often transformed for a nation into a main holiday and serves as proof of the subjectivity of the people. But in order for the war to be perceived as "general" and "people's", the same criteria should be approached by the official rules by which the country lives during the war. If the violation of the rules becomes not a "deviation on the ground" but a new norm, then the war ceases to be a common cause. Instead, something devoted to the outsource.

"We paid for the right not to notice your war. " The war needs solidarity. Solidarity is born of a sense of justice. Justice is formulated by the establishment of rules. The rules require public proceedings. But so far, the authorities prefer to formulate the rules for the rear only. Refusing to be what the future will be for those who already wear pixel. Preferred to avoid issues of service and demobilization. But if there is no comfortable answer to a topic, it does not mean that there is no honest.

If the forecast is unpleasant, it should still be voiced. If you have nothing to promise us, except for your blood, sweat and tears - have the courage to say it. It is possible that the full -scale war does not really leave room for demobilization. In my mouth, about 70% serve in the spring of 2022, and if they go, the mouth will stop fighting. It can be assumed that history does not know examples of the introduction of the service life in wars of such intensity.

But all these arguments today are heard in military disputes with the military. Those who have to place dots above and prefer to give up an unpopular topic. And those who have to ask the politicians of the first echelon of the question about it, forget to ask about it. If we want the army to feel loneliness, then this scheme does not need to change anything. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.