Ukraine is in a state of protracted war. We are talking about weapons, economy, mobilization, international support, but there is another resource without which none of these factors work – mental resilience. And if the state does not include it in the national security system, it leaves a critical risk out of control. This is not an emotional topic. This is a question of risk management.
Chronic stress doesn’t look like a crisis. It looks like “wartime normality.”
But at the economic level, it means reduced concentration, a shortened strategic planning horizon, an increase in errors, a decrease in creativity and the ability to innovate. According to international estimates, mental health problems can cost countries up to 4–5% of GDP annually through lost productivity. For a country living in conditions of full-scale war, this figure can be even higher. When a manager, doctor or engineer works in conditions of chronic exhaustion, he continues to perform his functions, but reduces the quality of decisions. And this has a macroeconomic effect.
Professional burnout is not about “fatigue”! It is a systemic emotional exhaustion that leads to reduced efficiency, loss of motivation, increased conflict, and staff turnover. In critical sectors – medicine, defense, public administration, and energy – it is a direct threat to the functioning of the state. Personnel losses due to burnout are often imperceptible. A person formally remains in office, but his or her effectiveness decreases. In the long term, this leads to a decrease in the quality of management, delayed reforms, and erroneous strategic decisions. The question is not whether there is burnout. The question is whether the state is ready to measure it?
Traumatic experiences affect cognitive processes: they reduce tolerance for uncertainty, increase reactivity, reduce the ability to make long-term analyses, and increase impulsive decision-making. This is especially dangerous in wartime.
When strategic decisions are made in conditions of accumulated psychological fatigue, the risk of errors increases. This is not a matter of individual weakness. This is a systemic effect of prolonged stress. And if the state does not take this factor into account, it does not take into account the full picture of risks, including economic ones.
Economic stability depends not only on the budget and credit lines. It depends on trust in institutions, the willingness of businesses to invest, the ability of citizens to plan for the future, and social cohesion. Trust is an economic asset. Chronic anxiety is an economic risk. A country with a high level of psychological exhaustion is less attractive for investment, more vulnerable to social turbulence, and more responsive to information attacks. Mental resilience is a component of economic and national security.
National security is not just about the army and borders. It is the ability of a state to make rational decisions, maintain trust, maintain the effectiveness of institutions, and withstand long-term stress. Mental resilience determines all of these parameters. And if it is not measured, it remains an invisible risk factor.
What, in our opinion, should the state do?
- Incorporate mental resilience into national security strategy.
- Introduce systematic monitoring of stress and burnout levels in critical sectors.
- Integrate mental health indicators into recovery planning.
- Consider trust as a strategic resource.
This is not about humanitarian policy, it is about preserving the functionality of the state!
Ukraine has already proven its military resilience. The next stage is to maintain cognitive and institutional resilience. Because the country can withstand missile strikes, but it will not withstand the systemic depletion of its own human resources. And this is no longer a matter of psychology. This is a matter of state security!