It is frightening to say, but the war in Ukraine has been going on for five years already. The number of missile and drone attacks continues to grow. And according to most analysts, even after the long-awaited peace arrives, we should not expect complete safety — because our aggressive neighbour is not going anywhere.
So isn't it time to return to the issue of shelters in Ukraine and, based on the experience we have gained through sleepless nights without basic comforts, completely rethink them? Given the conditions and prospects we face today, our safe spaces can no longer focus solely on safety. Today, we also need to think about how to make shelters places where people can get proper sleep and recover their strength. After all, it is not enough for us to simply survive a nighttime attack while standing and awake — in the morning we need to get ready for work, take a child to kindergarten or school, and then work effectively for a full day.
Over the years of the full-scale war, Ukraine has significantly expanded its stock of protective structures: at the beginning of 2025, there were more than 62,000 of them, and by the beginning of 2026, the country already had 66,574 civil defence protective structures, compared with around 20,000 before the full-scale invasion. But even with these numbers, the need remains enormous, and access to shelters is still uneven across regions. Kyiv has more than 4,300 civil defence structures, and a shelter map is available for Kyiv residents. This is good, but the mere existence of a map does not mean that every shelter is actually convenient, close to home or suitable for a long stay.
Under the legal definition, the simplest shelter is a basement or cellar, or another underground space where conditions have been created for people to stay for at least 48 hours. A shelter that meets purely safety requirements must have two independent entrances, strong structural covering and a layer of soil above it to disperse the energy of an explosion, ventilation, electricity supply, basic sanitary facilities, reflective navigation signs, fire-fighting equipment and minimum medical equipment (such as first-aid kits). However, such shelters no longer meet our needs: today, people need more than just a safe place for temporary shelter. We need conditions for short rest, nighttime sleep, phone charging, access to water and toilets. We also need a reliable connection and power outlets for charging devices so that we can work or study remotely during daytime air raids. In other words, a shelter should also be convenient.
According to official data, on the nights of June 2 and 15, around 41,000–42,000 people took shelter at Kyiv metro stations during missile attacks, including approximately 3,400 children. And on the night of July 1–2, more than 52,500 Kyiv residents once again found shelter in the metro. This was the highest number in recent years. There are no exact figures for all civil shelters in the city, but we can be sure that tens of thousands of Kyiv residents used them overall. At first glance, this may seem like a large number, but for a city of millions, it represents only a small part of the overall need. A single major attack can send an even larger number of people to shelters at the same time. Therefore, the city needs a much wider network of safe and convenient spaces located close to residential buildings, rather than relying only on the existing metro system and occasional underground car parks in modern residential developments.
Photo: Андрій Ходьков, "Апостроф"
I am convinced that if a person can not only hide during a nighttime attack but also get some rest and recover, they have a much better chance of returning to their normal routine in the morning. They do not start the day exhausted, spend the morning worrying about their children, or drop out of the work process until the evening. For business, this means fewer interruptions, while for the state, it means lower losses caused by people being physically present but unable to work properly after a difficult night. In this sense, shelters become part of civil resilience: they help preserve jobs, support businesses and maintain the pace of everyday life despite the war.
In 2025, the government allocated funds for equipping shelters in schools, while in 2026, it separately provided funding for both schools and kindergartens. However, the mere fact that funding is available does not automatically guarantee a quality result: official audits show that some funds may be used inefficiently, while some projects may be delayed or not brought to the required standard. Therefore, the key question today is not only how much money is allocated, but also whether that money is being transformed into genuinely safe and convenient shelters. I am not calling for investment in new construction from scratch. In real urban environments, spaces located underground or in the basements of existing buildings could serve as shelters: offices, shops, shopping centres, underground car parks, passages and other suitable real estate. The legislation already allows such spaces to be registered as the simplest shelters. Therefore, it is enough to finance their equipment.
Another type of shelter that can currently be seen in cities is mobile shelters, which are particularly important where building a permanent structure quickly is difficult or would take too long. Due to the shortage of full-fledged shelters, the idea of mobile protective structures emerged — for example, concrete pavilions at bus stops or on the premises of large retail chains. They are made of reinforced concrete or steel and may include seating, ventilation, communications and fire-fighting equipment. Such structures provide good protection against debris, but they offer no guarantee in the event of a direct hit by a large missile. According to various estimates, a small mobile shelter complex costs around USD 10,000. This raises a logical question: is it worth investing specifically in such shelters, or would it be better to direct funds towards more reliable solutions designed for longer stays, with sleeping spaces and toilets?
In my opinion, it is already time to view shelters as a basic part of urban infrastructure, just like heating, water or transport. The denser, more accessible and more convenient this network of shelters becomes, the faster people will be able to return to their normal daily routines. I am convinced that, in the fifth year of the war, Ukraine should at least start looking at shelter infrastructure models used in other countries, selecting the best practices, calculating costs and attracting funding to convert existing real estate into convenient — not merely safe — shelters and to build new ones.
Photo: Unterirdisch Überleben
Switzerland — a country that has not been involved in an international war for more than 200 years — has more than 360,000 nuclear shelters capable of protecting the entire population. Today, there is a “shelter place” for every resident. That means more than 9 million places across the country, which even exceeds the needs of the entire population. There, all protective structures are underground concrete spaces that are an integral part of almost every residential building, with armoured doors, filtered ventilation, water supplies, toilets and often even portable sleeping spaces. Every year, these structures undergo inspections to check the functioning of alarm sensors, door sealing and other safety systems. Bunker owners are required to maintain supplies for several days of autonomous operation, including drinking water and medicines, and in some cantons, even long-term food supplies. These supplies are regularly replaced according to their expiry dates. The country has strict requirements: shelters are mandatory in all new buildings, and violations are subject to fines.
Did Switzerland start building shelters for safety only after the beginning of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine? No. Switzerland has been building its extensive network of shelters since the early 1960s. The process began against the backdrop of the Cold War and fears of a nuclear threat, when the country adopted unprecedented laws that eventually guaranteed every citizen a personal place in a bunker.
If we take Israel as an example, the country began creating shelters immediately after gaining independence in 1948 to protect people from the first military conflicts. Following the adoption of the Civil Defence Law in 1951, shared underground bomb shelters became mandatory for every residential building or group of buildings. Then, in 1993, due to the threat of missile and chemical attacks, building regulations were radically changed: new buildings must have “mamads” — individual reinforced rooms made of reinforced concrete directly inside each apartment, with ventilation and sewage systems. Residents generally store food and water supplies themselves. In addition, due to constant shelling, Israel places similar mini-bunkers near bus stops and schools, especially in the south of the country.
If we also look at Sweden, it currently has 64,000–65,000 protective structures capable of accommodating approximately 7 million people, or 70–80% of the population. Swedish shelters have water reservoirs, ventilation, heating and chemical toilets. Construction of the large-scale shelter system began during World War II, with the most active phase taking place in the 1950s and 1960s. The network is impressive because shelters are integrated into residential and industrial buildings, while some have been carved directly into rock. Since 2002, the country had stopped building new bunkers, but after Sweden joined NATO in 2024, amid the broader security situation in Europe, the authorities resumed investment in this area, launching a large-scale programme to modernise existing shelters capable of protecting against radiation, chemical and biological weapons. Most bunkers are currently used as ordinary car parks, storage facilities or gyms when there is no threat, but in an emergency they must be brought to full readiness within 48 hours.
Our country has already come a very long way, from an almost complete lack of protective structures to tens of thousands of facilities across the country. But it is now time to begin the most important stage — transforming shelters from simply existing facilities into genuinely functional ones. This is the new logic of safety: of course, shelters must first and foremost protect lives, but at the same time they should help people recover their strength. So that after a difficult and dangerous night, Ukrainians can return to work, children can study, and entrepreneurs can support the country's economy. And so that people do not lose their sense of a normal daily rhythm in a place where war is trying to destroy it.
Translation into English was created with the help of artificial intelligence.
