Interethnic conflict - abstract. Interethnic conflicts

Intra-academic competition of student works

"INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: FROM ORIGINS TO MODERN TIME"

specialty "Management"

information resources»

Kozyrenko Natalya Petrovna

Minsk, 2008

ABSTRACT

WORK 36 p., 2 hours, 10 sources

NATION, INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT, NATIONAL MINORITIES, ETHNOCONFLICT, SELF-DETERMINATION.

The object of the study is the study of interethnic conflicts in connection with discrimination and persecution of national minorities in most modern states, as well as the identification of possible practices for resolving these conflicts through political and legislative measures.

The relevance of the work is caused by the increase in interethnic conflicts in the modern world, their continuous development and, as a consequence, the need for a speedy resolution.

In the course of the work, various interethnic conflicts at the turn of the 20th and 21st, the reasons for their occurrence, as well as possible ways to resolve ethnic conflicts in the conditions of a modern state were considered.

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: FROM ORIGINS TO MODERN TIMES

1 Social and psychological interpretation of interethnic conflict

2 Causes, typology and stages of development of ethnic conflicts

Chapter II. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS IN MODERN SOCIETY

1 Interethnic conflicts in society at the turn of the century

2 Experience of a modern state in resolving interethnic conflicts

CONCLUSION

LIST OF SOURCES USED

INTRODUCTION

“All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of this right they freely establish their political status and freely pursue economic, social and cultural development.”

We are all different: some like to read, some like to listen to music, some like to ski. This is what makes our communication interesting, it is this difference that gives us an inexhaustible source of knowledge through the exchange of information. But with all this, we have one more difference: some of us are Belarusian, some are German, some are Turkish. And for some reason, many of us take this difference too seriously, which has manifested itself in such areas as racism and nationalism.

Today there are practically no homogeneous states in the world. Only 12 countries (9% of all countries in the world) can be conditionally classified as such. In 25 states (18.9%), the main ethnic community makes up 90% of the population; in another 25 countries this figure ranges from 75 to 89%. In 31 states (23.5%), the national majority ranges from 50 to 70%, and in 39 countries (29.5%) barely half the population is an ethnically homogeneous group. Thus, people of different nationalities one way or another have to coexist on the same territory, and peaceful life does not always develop.

At the same time, in any dictionary, as a rule, there is no specific definition of the word nation and the signs by which a certain person can be attributed to one or another nation. Sometimes belonging to a nation is judged by appearance, but not all native Belarusians are fair-haired and with blue eyes. It is also not always possible to distinguish a separate nation on a territorial basis, because as mentioned above, today only a few states are considered homogeneous. Today it is customary to divide humanity into nations according to the largest ethnic group living on the territory of the state. So in Belarus these are Belarusians, in France - the French, in Belgium - the Belgians. However, even when using this division, disagreements arise among world scientists about which ethnic group and which nation to classify. And what can we say about people who are quite far from science? About people who do not bother themselves with sophisticated words, and who simply need a specific enemy to give vent to the discontent that has been accumulating for centuries. Politicians catch moments like these, and they skillfully take advantage of them. With this approach, the problem seems to fall outside the sphere of competence of sociology itself; however, it is she who must capture such sentiments among certain groups of the population. The fact that such a function cannot be neglected is clearly shown by the flaring up “hot spots” every now and then. Therefore, for the vast majority of even developed countries, it is vital to probe the soil from time to time in “ national issue» and take appropriate measures. The problem is even more acute in the post-Soviet space, where ethnopolitical conflicts, expressed in large and small wars on ethnic and territorial grounds in Azerbaijan, Armenia, Tajikistan, Moldova, Chechnya, Georgia, North Ossetia, Ingushetia, have led to numerous casualties among the civilian population . And today the events taking place in Russia indicate disintegration and destructive trends that threaten new conflicts.

Therefore, the problems of studying their history, mechanisms for their prevention and settlement are more relevant than ever. Historical studies of ethnonational conflicts in various specific historical and ethnocultural conditions are becoming important in order to identify their causes, consequences, specifics, types, participation of various national and ethnic groups in them, methods of prevention and resolution.

The purpose of this work is to study interethnic conflicts in connection with discrimination and persecution of national minorities in most modern states, as well as to identify possible practices for resolving these conflicts through political and legislative measures.

CHAPTER I. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: FROM ORIGINS TO MODERN TIMES

.1 Socio-psychological interpretation of interethnic conflict

Interethnic conflicts do not arise out of nowhere. As a rule, their appearance requires a certain shift in the usual way of life, destruction of the value system, which is accompanied by feelings of frustration, confusion and discomfort, doom and even loss of the meaning of life. In such cases, the ethnic factor comes to the fore in the regulation of intergroup relations in society, as the more ancient one, which performed the function of group survival.

The action of this socio-psychological mechanism occurs as follows. When a threat appears to the existence of a group as an integral and independent subject of intergroup interaction, at the level of social perception of the situation, social identification occurs on the basis of origin, on the basis of blood; Mechanisms of socio-psychological defense are activated in the form of processes of intra-group cohesion, intra-group favoritism, strengthening of unity and out-group discrimination and isolation from others. These procedures lead to alienation and distortion of images of external groups. This type of relationship historically precedes all other types and is most deeply connected with the prehistory of mankind, with those psychological patterns of the organization of social action that originated in the depths of anthropogenesis. These patterns develop and function through opposition based on belonging to a tribe, to an ethnic group with a tendency to ethnocentrism, underestimation and belittlement of the qualities of “outside” groups and overestimation, exaltation of the characteristics of one’s own group along with the dehumanization of the “outside” group in conditions of conflict.

The unification of a group based on ethnicity occurs on the basis of:
preference of their fellow tribesmen to “strangers”, newcomers, non-indigenous people and strengthening the sense of national solidarity; · protecting the territory of residence and reviving the sense of territoriality for the titular nation, ethnic group;

· demands for income redistribution;

· ignoring the legitimate needs of other population groups in a given territory, recognized as “strangers”.

All these signs have one advantage for group mass action - the visibility and self-evidence of the community (in language, culture, appearance, history, etc.) in comparison with “strangers”. An indicator of the state of interethnic relations and, accordingly, their regulator is an ethnic stereotype as a type of social stereotype. Functioning within a group and being included in the dynamics of intergroup relations, a stereotype performs a regulatory and integration function for subjects of social action in resolving social contradictions. It is these properties of a social stereotype, an ethnic one in particular, that make it an effective regulator of any social relations when these relations, in conditions of aggravated contradictions, are reduced to interethnic ones.

At the same time, the regulation of intergroup relations with the help of an ethnic stereotype acquires a kind of independent existence and psychologically returns social relations to the historical past, when group egoism suppressed the shoots of future universal human dependence in the simplest and most ancient way - by destroying and suppressing otherness in behavior, values, and thoughts. This “return to the past” allows the ethnic stereotype to at the same time perform the function of psychological compensation as a result of dysfunctions of ideological, political, economic and other regulators of integration in intergroup interactions.

When the interests of two groups collide and both groups lay claim to the same benefits and territory (as, for example, the Ingush and North Ossetians), in conditions of social confrontation and devaluation of common goals and values, national-ethnic goals and ideals become the leading socio-psychological regulators of mass social action . Therefore, the process of polarization along ethnic lines inevitably begins to express itself in confrontation, in conflict, which, in turn, blocks the satisfaction of the basic socio-psychological needs of both groups.

At the same time, in the process of conflict escalation, the following socio-psychological patterns objectively and invariably begin to operate:

· a decrease in the volume of communication between the parties, an increase in the volume of disinformation, a tightening of aggressive terminology, an increasing tendency to use the media as a weapon in the escalation of psychosis and confrontation among the broad masses of the population;

· distorted perception of information about each other;

· formation of an attitude of hostility and suspicion, consolidation of the image of the enemy and his dehumanization, i.e. exclusion from the human race, which psychologically justifies any atrocities and cruelties in achieving their goals;

· formation of an orientation toward victory in a conflict by force through the defeat or destruction of the other side.

Thus, the task is, first of all, to catch the moment when a compromise solution to the conflict situation is still possible, and to prevent it from moving into a more acute stage.

1.2 Causes, typology and stages of development of ethnic conflicts

In global conflictology there is no single conceptual approach to the causes of interethnic conflicts. Social and structural changes in contacting ethnic groups, problems of their inequality in status, prestige, and remuneration are analyzed. There are approaches that focus on behavioral mechanisms associated with fears for the fate of the group, not only the loss of cultural identity, but also the use of property, resources and resulting aggression.

Researchers based on collective action focus on the responsibility of elites who fight for power and resources through mobilization around the ideas they put forward. In more modernized societies, intellectuals with professional training became members of the elite; in traditional societies, birth and belonging to the people mattered. Obviously, the elites are primarily responsible for creating the “image of the enemy,” ideas about the compatibility or incompatibility of the values ​​of ethnic groups, the ideology of peace or hostility. In situations of tension, ideas are created about the characteristics of peoples that prevent communication - the “messianicism” of Russians, the “inherited belligerence” of Chechens, as well as the hierarchy of peoples with whom one can or cannot “deal.”

The concept of the “clash of civilizations” by S. Huntington is very influential in the West. She attributes contemporary conflicts, particularly recent acts of international terrorism, to sectarian differences. In Islamic, Confucian, Buddhist and Orthodox cultures, the ideas of Western civilization - liberalism, equality, legality, human rights, market, democracy, separation of church and state - do not seem to resonate.

The theory of the ethnic border, understood as a subjectively perceived and experienced distance in the context of interethnic relations, is also known. (P.P. Kushner, M.M. Bakhtin). The ethnic boundary is determined by markers - cultural characteristics that are of paramount importance for a given ethnic group. Their meaning and set may vary. Ethnosociological studies of the 80s-90s. showed that markers can be not only values ​​formed on a cultural basis, but also political ideas that concentrate ethnic solidarity. Consequently, the ethnocultural delimiter (such as the language of the titular nationality, knowledge or ignorance of which affects the mobility and even career of people) is replaced by access to power. From here the struggle for a majority in representative bodies of power and all the subsequent aggravation of the situation may begin.

Their typology allows us to more accurately and meaningfully comprehend both the features of their course and the specific means and methods of regulating them and resolving ethnic conflicts. It is important to keep in mind that with a significant variety of explanatory models of conflicts, the adequacy of the choice of concept for research depends precisely on the definition of the type of conflict being studied.

It is not possible to classify ethnonational conflicts on one basis due to the complexity of the object of the conflict itself and the reasons leading to an ethnonational clash. The combination of various bases for the typological characterization of this type of conflict is quite reasonable and fruitful, since it allows step by step to unblock and resolve conflict situations.

First of all, many ethnonational conflicts can be called false because of the high component of their emotional nature. Too high a degree of emotional intensity makes it difficult to adequately perceive the situation and the opposite side, giving rise to false images and fears, aggressiveness and dehumanizing the perception of opponents. Many ethnic conflicts can be safely described as substituted conflicts, since often the antagonism of interests is directed at an ethnic group that is not really a party to the conflict, but replaces any other interests and considerations. Yes, often national map played out in an ethnic struggle political elites for the redistribution of the post-imperial heritage.

We can say that interethnic conflicts are most often conflicts of cultures as a result of different understandings, different attitude to the realities of life, their interpretation. When classifying ethnic conflicts, we are dealing with a real conflict of interests - due to unequal access of different ethnic groups to resources, unequal distribution of volumes and powers of power, etc.

Researchers have identified two more principles for typologizing ethnic conflicts: one - according to the nature and mode of action of the conflicting parties and the second - according to the content of the conflicts, the main goals set by the party making the claims.

E.A. Pain and A. A. Popov highlight conflicts of stereotypes, i.e. that stage of the conflict when ethnic groups do not always even clearly understand the reasons for the contradictions, but in relation to the opponent they create a negative image of an unfriendly neighbor, an undesirable group.

Another type of conflict is a conflict of ideas. The characteristic features of such conflicts (or their stages) are the advancement of certain claims. In literature, media mass media justified historical law to statehood, as was the case, for example, in Estonia, Lithuania, Georgia, Tatarstan and other republics of the USSR, and to territory, as was the case in Armenia and Azerbaijan, North Ossetia and Ingushetia.

The third type of conflict is action conflict. These are rallies, demonstrations, pickets, institutional decision-making up to open clashes. It could be argued that such a typologization is a reflection of the stages or forms of conflicts. But that would be inaccurate. In defense of the authors of such typology, we can say that there are conflicts that remain only conflict of ideas . In the early 70s, demonstrations with slogans took place in Chicago, but no action followed.

A different typology - according to the main goals, content of requirements - was proposed in 1992-1993. L. M. Drobizheva. Based on an assessment of the events of the late 80s - early 90s. She identified the following types of ethnic conflicts.

The first type is institutional status conflicts in the union republics, which developed into a struggle for independence. The essence of such conflicts may not be ethnonational, but the ethnic parameter is certainly present in them, and so is mobilization along ethnic lines. Thus, national movements in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova from the very beginning put forward demands for the implementation of ethnonational interests. In the process of development of these movements, the causal basis of conflicts changed and moved from ethnonational to state, but mobilization along ethnic lines remained. The main form of conflicts of this type was institutional. An acute constitutional conflict arose when Estonia, followed by a number of other union republics, adopted amendments to their constitutions, introducing into them the priority right to use resources and the supremacy of the laws of the republic. Status conflicts were also conflicts in union and autonomous republics, autonomous regions for increasing the status of the republic or obtaining it. This is typical for some of the union republics that wanted a confederal level of relations (for example, Kazakhstan), for a number of former autonomies that sought to rise to the level of union republics (for example, Tatarstan).

The second type of conflicts is ethno-territorial. These are usually the most difficult confrontations to resolve. As of 1992, about 200 ethno-territorial disputes were recorded on the territory of the former USSR. According to V.N. Streletsky (Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences), one of the developers of the Data Bank of ethno-territorial claims in the geospace of the former USSR, by 1996, 140 territorial claims remained relevant. Such conflicts include disputes waged on behalf of ethnic communities regarding their rights to live in, own or manage a particular territory. V.N. Streletsky, for example, believes that any claim to territory, if it is denied by the other party to the dispute, is already a conflict. Territorial disputes are often associated with the rehabilitation process for repressed peoples. But still, conflicts associated with repressed peoples are a special type of ethnic confrontation. Only some of these types of conflicts are related to the restoration of territorial autonomy (Volga Germans, Crimean Tatars); for others, there was a question of legal, social, cultural rehabilitation (Greeks, Koreans, etc.). And only in a number of cases are we talking about territorial disputes.

Another type is intergroup (intercommunity) conflicts. Conflicts such as those in Yakutia (1986), Tuva (1990), Russian-Estonian in Estonia and Russian-Latvian in Latvia, Russian-Moldavian in Moldova belong to this type. Massive intergroup violent clashes took place in Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.

Along with the above, typologization based on the content of conflicts and the target aspirations of the parties is becoming increasingly widespread in the literature. Often different goals and contents are combined in one conflict. For example, the Karabakh conflict is a conflict associated with territorial disputes, increasing the status of autonomy, and the struggle for independence. The Ingush-Ossetian conflict is both territorial, and inter-republican, and inter-communal on the territory of North Ossetia.

It is also worth considering the classification of G. Lapidus.

The first type includes conflicts occurring at the interstate level (the conflict between Russia and Ukraine over the issue of Crimea).

Another type is conflicts within the state. These include:

· conflicts involving indigenous minorities;

· conflicts involving communities of newcomers;

· conflicts involving forcibly displaced minorities (Crimean Tatars);

· conflicts arising from attempts to renegotiate relations between former autonomous republics and the governments of successor states (Abkhazia in Georgia, Tatarstan in Russia).

A fairly well-known typology today is the typologization of J. Etinger, which represents the most complete division of interethnic conflicts:

.Territorial conflicts, often closely related to the reunification of ethnic groups that were fragmented in the past. Their source is an internal, political, and often armed clash between the government in power and some national liberation movement or one or another separatist group that enjoys political and military support from a neighboring state. A classic example is the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh and partly in South Ossetia;

Conflicts generated by the desire of an ethnic minority to realize the right to self-determination in the form of creating an independent state entity. This is the situation in Abkhazia, partly in Transnistria;

Conflicts related to the restoration of the territorial rights of deported peoples. The dispute between Ossetians and Ingush over the ownership of the Prigorodny district is clear evidence of this;

Conflicts based on the claims of one state or another to part of the territory of a neighboring state. For example, the desire of Estonia and Latvia to annex a number of regions of the Pskov region, which, as is known, were included in these two states when they declared their independence, and in the 40s passed to the RSFSR;

Conflicts, the sources of which are the consequences of arbitrary territorial changes carried out during the Soviet period. This is primarily the problem of Crimea and, potentially, a territorial settlement in Central Asia;

Conflicts as a consequence of clashes of economic interests, when behind the national contradictions that appear on the surface are actually the interests of the ruling political elites, dissatisfied with their share in the national federal structure. It is these circumstances that determine the relationship between Grozny and Moscow, Kazan and Moscow;

Conflicts based on factors of a historical nature, determined by the traditions of many years of national liberation struggle against the mother country. For example, the confrontation between the Confederation of Peoples of the Caucasus and Russian authorities:

Conflicts generated by the long-term stay of deported peoples in the territories of other republics. These are the problems of the Turks in Uzbekistan, the Chechens in Kazakhstan;

Conflicts in which linguistic disputes often hide deep disagreements between different national communities, as happens, for example, in Moldova and Kazakhstan.

Taking into account the stages of development of ethnic conflicts, as well as the main forces and movements that act on them and determine their course, is also important for understanding the characteristics of specific situations and developing measures to resolve them. It allows us to reveal in more detail the process and mechanisms of their determination, allows us to show that the emergence of national-patriotic and especially national-radical movements moves the interethnic conflict from a potential to an actual stage and marks the beginning of the development of clear and firm claims and positions in it, which are expressed in programmatic documents and declarations of these movements.

As a rule, this stage serves as preparation for the next stage - conflict actions, which become more and more violent as the severity of the conflict increases. As victims and losses accumulate, the conflict at this stage becomes less and less manageable and civilly resolvable. Thus, the development of interethnic confrontation is increasingly bringing the conflict to the point where a national catastrophe may follow, and therefore measures to quickly weaken and pacify it, such as mediation, consultation, negotiation process, etc., aimed at achieving national consensus, or at least compromise.

The effectiveness of their achievement is an indicator of the extent to which the democratic and humanistic methods of settling and resolving interethnic conflicts that have been put into action make it possible to neutralize the nationalist attitudes and aspirations of their participants, to help each of them move from harsh or even violent opposition of national communities and their representatives to effective and coordinated interaction with them for the sake of jointly meeting the fundamental needs and interests of all participants in the interethnic conflict that has arisen. The deployment of this process means the rooting and consolidation of the general democratic principle of the priority and inalienability of the rights and freedoms of each person in the specific sphere of interethnic relations.

The main problem at present is the creation of a special and ramified ethno-conflict examination, the main task of which should be to, on the basis of analysis, monitor the emergence and development of conflict processes and, depending on their nature, put forward informed proposals for their localization, rationalization and resolution through compromise or consensus technologies.

Currently, the greatest organizational difficulties in resolving and preventing ethno-national conflicts and confrontation are associated with the absence in the CIS countries, including the Russian Federation, of an extensive specialized network of organizations for the prevention and resolution of internal conflicts. Most noticeable is the lack of institutions monitoring the development of the ethnopolitical situation in society, early diagnosis and forecasting of conflicts, as well as the lack of conflict management in the form of a service rapid response . The main task of such a service is to protect people, prevent the escalation of conflicts, expand their zones, organize the negotiation process, as well as intensively train people in how to properly respond to a conflict situation and behave in it.

Such an organization would make it possible to carry out practical mediation between the various population groups participating in them, as well as between the administration and the population, and at the same time critically analyze and evaluate the nature and results of various management influences on these situations in order to resolve them. By justifying the need for a fundamental rejection of methods of violence in relations between ethnic groups, which complicate the democratization of society and pull it back, those participating in the mediation of conflict management would have the opportunity to contribute to the restoration of the rights and significance of the values ​​of human existence, strengthening the foundations of the life and activities of society and thereby returning its true meaning , and social conflicts - positive social meaning and function.

An important role in this regard should be played by formalizing the results of conflictological analysis in the form of an appropriate examination of interethnic conflict situations and collisions and transforming it on this basis into a specific technological procedure that allows bringing the results of conflictological analysis to their practical use and use for regulating and resolving real conflict clashes.

The general task of this kind of examination is to promote the establishment of conflictological monitoring and management in interethnic relations as effective tools for monitoring the emergence of conflict situations, identifying their level of tension, dynamics, nature of actions of the conflicting parties, etc., and on this basis developing and implementing measures on preventing and resolving conflicts, stabilizing social relations and promoting reforms.

Many zones of interethnic tension have formed, which under certain conditions threaten to result or have already resulted in open clashes, including those of an armed nature, causing numerous casualties and destruction. Currently, experts count over 200 such zones, the bulk of which are located on the territory of the Russian Federation.

According to the level of tension, they can be divided into three main types:

hot spots where blood has been shed or continues to be shed, armed violence has been used and there are significant losses of human and material resources;

zones where tension is on the verge of possible escalation into open interethnic confrontation or is approaching it;

zones in which interethnic tension has already clearly manifested itself, but is still at a fairly low level.

What all three zones have in common is that interethnic tension everywhere, and even more so conflicts, especially with the use of armed violence, make it difficult to carry out socio-economic and political transformations and hinder the unification of the public around humanistic, democratic ideals. At the same time, it is clear that in each of the zones the methods social control behind the development of interethnic conflicts and measures for their effective resolution and prevention must have significant differences. Interethnic relations become particularly acute in the autonomous republics and other national-territorial entities of the Russian Federation, since it is there that the idea that only strengthening sovereignty can ensure national interests is spreading.

Other social factors also contribute to the exacerbation of interethnic tension. All of them together create a danger of drawing these nation-state actors into large-scale armed violence - inter-ethnic wars, as well as into clashes with the federal authorities. At the same time, states from both near and far abroad may be involved in the confrontation, which aggravates not only domestic but also international tension and increases the risk of an armed conflict turning into a multilateral large-scale and even nuclear conflict, going beyond local regional boundaries and acquiring a global character.

At the same time, the main problem around which should rotate All modern conflictology expertise addresses the problem of ensuring social partnership as the main way to resolve social conflicts in general, ethnopolitical conflicts in particular.

Ethnoconflictological examination and the conflictological monitoring and management that forms its basis are ultimately intended to show that with a correct and principled national policy, the central government can neutralize the playing of the ethnic card by local political leaders and national elites and maintain the necessary stability of the state.

ethnic conflict state Ulster

CHAPTER II. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS IN MODERN SOCIETY

.1 Interethnic conflicts in society at the turn of the century

Interethnic conflicts in the Western world

Ignoring the ethnic factor would be a big mistake even in prosperous countries, even in North America and Western Europe. Thus, as a result of the 1995 referendum among French Canadians, Canada almost split into two states, and therefore into two nations. An example is Great Britain, where the process of institutionalization of the Scottish, Ulster and Welsh autonomies and their transformation into subnations is taking place. In Belgium, there is also the actual emergence of two subnations based on the Walloon and Flemish ethnic groups. Even in prosperous France, everything is not as calm in ethno-national terms as it seems at first glance. It's about not only about the relationship between the French, on the one hand, and the Corsicans, Bretons, Alsatians and Basques, on the other, but also about the not-so-unsuccessful attempts to revive the Provençal language and identity, despite the centuries-old tradition of assimilation of the latter.

And in the United States they record how, literally before our eyes, the once united American nation begins to divide into a number of regional ethnocultural blocs - embryonic ethnic groups. This appears not only in the language, which shows a division into several dialects, but also in the identity that takes on different features among different groups of Americans. Even the rewriting of history is recorded - differently in different regions of the United States, which is an indicator of the process of creating regional national myths. Scientists predict that the United States will eventually face the problem of resolving ethnonational divisions, as happened in Russia.

A peculiar situation is developing in Switzerland, where four ethnic groups coexist on a parity basis: German-Swiss, Italian-Swiss, French-Swiss and Romansh. The last ethnic group, being the weakest, modern conditions lends itself to assimilation by others, and it is difficult to predict what the reaction of its ethnically conscious part, especially the intelligentsia, will be to this.

Ulster conflict

As you know, 6 Irish counties at the beginning of the century after long clashes became part of the United Kingdom, and 26 counties formed Ireland proper. The population of Ulster is clearly divided not only by ethnicity (Irish - English), but also by religion (Catholics - Protestants). To this day, the Ulster question remains open as the Catholic community suffers from the inequalities created by the government. Although the situation in housing, education and other areas has improved over the past 20 years, inequality in the world of work remains. Catholics are more likely to be unemployed than Protestants. Therefore, it was only in 1994 that armed clashes between the Irish Republican Army and paramilitary organizations called the British Army ceased. More than 3,800 people died in the clashes; Given that the population of the island is approximately 5 million people, and Northern Ireland - 1.6 million people, this is a significant figure.

The ferment of minds does not stop today, and another factor is the civilian police, which is still 97% Protestant. An explosion near a military base in 1996 once again increased mistrust and suspicion among members of the two communities. Yes and public opinion I am not yet ready to finally put an end to the image of the enemy. Catholic and Protestant neighborhoods are separated by brick "peace walls." In Catholic neighborhoods, huge paintings can be seen on the walls of houses, testifying to violence by the British.

From Kosovo to Northern Cyprus

Northern Cyprus is an unrecognized international community of a state that has been virtually independent for several decades.

Early March this year In Moscow, a unique in many respects study by political scientist Fuad Hajiyev, “De facto independence. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus". The present study largely breaks the tendency to defend the Greek and Greek-Cypriot point of view on events that has occurred in most studies of the Cyprus problem by Soviet and Russian authors. This trend was a reflection of Soviet and, to a certain extent, Russian policy in the Balkans and Eastern Mediterranean region. This study pays a significant amount of attention to the Turkish and Turkish-Cypriot interpretation of events, which aims to contribute to a better understanding of the position of the TRNC for the optimal implementation of Russian interests in these regions, as well as in the post-Soviet space. This echoes the opinion of a number of leading Russian diplomats and international experts who insist on the need for Russian presence on both sides of the Cyprus conflict.

Obviously, the Cyprus problem arose primarily due to the fact that two peoples live on this island (Greeks and Turks) who have never felt a single civic identity. At the same time, the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, which arose in 1960, was based on bicommunity and granted equal rights to both peoples. However, the Greek majority of the island, constituting 82 percent of the population, did not agree with what it considered unfair, giving the Turkish minority (18 percent of the total population) equal rights with the Greeks. For their part, the Turks did not want to be content with minority status and advocated for the fulfillment of the terms of the Cypriot Constitution.

In 1963, the Greek majority attempted to deprive the Turks of the rights granted to them by the Constitution. The Turks were removed from government structures by force of arms. At the same time, the Turkish minority was expelled from most settlements, deprived of property and driven into small enclaves that occupied 3 percent of the total territory of the island.

In 1974, the “black colonels” who then ruled Greece tried to annex Cyprus. In connection with previously reached agreements prohibiting the unification of the island with any state, Turkey sent its troops to it. As a result, approximately 35 percent of the northern part of the Republic of Cyprus came under the control of the Turkish armed forces. This action by Ankara led to the fall of the military regime in Athens. After which, however, Turkey refused to withdraw its troops from Cyprus, explaining this by the need to protect the rights of the Turkish population. In this regard, most of the Turks moved to the north of the island, and almost all the Greeks moved to the south. This situation continues to this day.

During settlement negotiations that began after 1974, the parties clarified their positions and even reached a compromise on the future structure of a unified Cypriot state. It must be federal, bi-communal and bi-zonal. However, different visions of the Cypriot federation did not allow the parties to reach an agreement. The Greeks see it as a state with a common territory and transparent borders between the two parts, the Turks - as a confederation of two independent states. Conflicts between communities on this issue led to the declaration by the Turkish community of the independent Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) in 1983 - the first in post-war Europe unrecognized state. The formation of the TRNC was negatively perceived by the world community. The UN Security Council adopted resolutions 541 and 550, calling on the world community not to recognize the republic and not to establish any political, economic and cultural contacts with it. At the same time, the TRNC was recognized by Turkey as independent state. It enjoys the full diplomatic, economic and military support of this state. Negotiations to resolve the Cyprus problem are being conducted within the framework of the good offices mission Secretary General The UN, established by UN Security Council Resolution 186. However, there is virtually no progress in the negotiations.

The change in the geopolitical situation as a result of the collapse of the USSR led to greater independence in the international arena of the European Union, which was fully exploited by Greece and the Republic of Cyprus, which joined the EU as a full member. In this regard, it is worth noting the change in the leadership of the TRNC, which was largely facilitated by the USA, Great Britain and Türkiye. The new leadership of the TRNC, which came to power in the wake of the struggle for the unification of the island in accordance with the UN settlement plan (Annan Plan), declared its goal to be the unification of the island, and not its division. The failure of the referendum on the Annan plan in the Greek part of the island and its success in the Turkish part led to a change in the attitude of the world community towards the TRNC and the interception of the initiative by Turkey and the TRNC in the field of international relations. The internationally recognized Republic of Cyprus is currently regarded in the international arena as a force preventing the unification of the island. This and other geopolitical circumstances gave rise to the process of actual recognition of the TRNC by the world community. The USA, Great Britain, France, and some OIC countries began to recognize TRNC passports. These same countries have representative offices in the northern part of the island, partially performing diplomatic functions. There are 22 diplomatic, trade and honorary missions of the TRNC in 17 countries. Bilateral contacts between the TRNC and the EU, Council of Europe, and OIC are expanding; leaders and officials of this unrecognized state are received at high government levels in the USA, Great Britain, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and other countries of the world. This situation was the result not only of the efforts made by the Turkish Cypriot side and its allies to achieve recognition of the TRNC. This is evidence of a serious trend in international relations towards certain forms of recognition of unrecognized state entities.

A natural question arises: if the United States and the main EU countries consider it legitimate to recognize the independence of Kosovo, then why persist in recognizing the TRNC, which has been de facto independent for almost a quarter of a century. The arguments of those who insist on the uniqueness of the “Kosovo precedent” are weak. The main one is that “the Serbs are to blame as a people.” This openly racist and anti-Serbian formula, by the way, was invented and publicly defended by none other than the UN Special Representative for Kosovo, Martti Ahtisaari. But surely there may be some Turkish Cypriot who, knowing about the crimes and atrocities of the Greek Cypriots against his fellow tribesmen from 1963 to 1974, will declare that “the Greeks are guilty as a people.” It is obvious that using this kind of arguments in the 21st century is unacceptable and even shameful for anyone, especially for politicians who have power, authority and corresponding powers. Recognition of an “independent Kosovo” became possible only because the United States, having decided that it had won the Cold War, believed in its own infallibility, believing that only its political system has the right to exist. Therefore, any disagreement with Washington’s position is immediately declared a “violation of freedom and democracy.” In reality, there is neither freedom nor democracy in such behavior. The events around Kosovo became the clearest embodiment of this style of behavior, based on the principle “I do what I want.”

At the same time, the American president, who predetermined back in June 2007 that the independence of Kosovo is inevitable, and all those who supported him, for the sake of elementary objectivity and justice, should recognize the independence of the TRNC.

Conflicts in the Balkans

There are several cultural regions and types of civilization on the Balkan Peninsula. The following are particularly highlighted: Byzantine-Orthodox in the east, Latin-Catholic in the west and Asian-Islamic in the central and southern regions. Interethnic relations here are so complicated that it is difficult to expect a complete settlement of conflicts in the coming decades.

When creating the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which consisted of six republics, the main criterion for their formation was the ethnic composition of the population. This most important factor was subsequently used by the ideologists of national movements and contributed to the collapse of the federation. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, Muslim Bosnians made up 43.7% of the population, Serbs 31.4%, Croats 17.3%. 61.5% of Montenegrins lived in Montenegro, in Croatia 77.9% were Croats, in Serbia 65.8% were Serbs, this includes the autonomous regions: Vojvodina, Kosovo and Metohija. Without them, Serbs in Serbia accounted for 87.3%. In Slovenia, Slovenes are 87.6%. Thus, in each of the republics lived representatives of ethnic groups of other titular nationalities, as well as a significant number of Hungarians, Turks, Italians, Bulgarians, Greeks, Gypsies and Romanians.

Another important factor is confessional, and the religiosity of the population here is determined by ethnic origin. Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians are Orthodox groups. However, there are also Catholics among the Serbs. Croats and Slovenes are Catholics. The religious cross-section in Bosnia and Herzegovina is interesting, where Catholic Croats, Orthodox Serbs and Slavic Muslims live. There are also Protestants - these are national groups of Czechs, Germans, Hungarians, and Slovaks. There are also Jewish communities in the country. A significant number of residents (Albanians, Slavic Muslims) profess Islam.

The linguistic factor also played an important role. About 70% of the population former Yugoslavia spoke Serbo-Croatian or, as they say, Croatian-Serbian. These are primarily Serbs, Croats, Montenegrins, and Muslims. However, it was not a single state language; there was no single state language in the country at all. The exception was the army, where office work was conducted in Serbo-Croatian (based on Latin script), commands were also given in this language. The country's constitution emphasized the equality of languages, and even during elections, ballots were printed in 2-3-4-5 languages. There were Albanian schools, as well as Hungarian, Turkish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Slovak, Czech and even Ukrainian. Books and magazines were published. However, in recent decades the language has become the subject of political speculation.

It is also impossible not to take into account economic factor. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro and the Autonomous Province of Kosovo lagged behind in economic development from Serbia. This led to differences in the income of different national groups and increased contradictions between them. Economic crisis, long-term unemployment, severe inflation, and devaluation of the dinar intensified centrifugal tendencies in the country, especially in the early 80s. Dozens more reasons for the collapse of the Yugoslav state can be named, but one way or another, by the end of 1989, the disintegration of the one-party system occurred, and after parliamentary elections in 1990-1991. Hostilities began in Slovenia and Croatia in June 1991, and in April 1992, civil war broke out in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was accompanied by ethnic cleansing, the creation of concentration camps, and looting. To date, the “peacekeepers” have achieved an end to open fighting, but the situation in the Balkans today still remains complex and explosive.

Another source of tension has arisen in the region of Kosovo and Metohija - on the ancestral Serbian lands, the cradle of Serbian history and culture, in which, due to historical conditions, demographic, migration processes, the dominant population is Albanians (90 - 95%), claiming separation from Serbia and the creation an independent state. The situation for the Serbs is further aggravated by the fact that the region borders Albania and regions of Macedonia populated by Albanians. In the same Macedonia, there is a problem of relations with Greece, which protests against the name of the republic, considering it illegal to assign a name to a state that coincides with the name of one of the regions of Greece. Bulgaria has claims against Macedonia due to the status of the Macedonian language, considering it a dialect of Bulgarian.

Croatian-Serbian relations have become strained. This is due to the situation of the Serbs in Croatia. Serbs forced to remain in Croatia change their nationality, surnames, and convert to Catholicism. Dismissal from jobs based on ethnicity is becoming commonplace, and there is increasing talk of “Great Serbian nationalism” in the Balkans. According to various sources, from 250 to 350 thousand people were forced to leave Kosovo. In 2000 alone, about a thousand people were killed there, hundreds were wounded and missing.

Interethnic conflicts in third world countries. Interethnic conflicts in Africa

Nigeria, with a population of 120 million, is home to more than 200 ethnic groups, each with its own language. The official language in the country remains English. After the civil war of 1967-1970. Ethnic strife remains one of the most dangerous diseases in Nigeria, as well as in all of Africa. It blew up many states of the continent from within. In Nigeria today there are clashes on ethnic grounds between the Yoruba people from the southern part of the country, Christians, Hausas, and Muslims from the north. Considering the economic and political backwardness of the state (the entire history of Nigeria after gaining political independence in I960 has been an alternation of military coups and civilian rule), the consequences of constantly breaking out conflicts can be unpredictable. Thus, in just 3 days (October 15-18, 2000) in the economic capital of Nigeria, Lagos, more than a hundred people died during interethnic clashes. About 20 thousand city residents left their homes in search of shelter.

Unfortunately, racial conflicts between representatives of “white” (Arab) and “black” Africa are also a harsh reality. Also in 2000, a wave of pogroms broke out in Libya, leading to hundreds of casualties. About 15 thousand black Africans left their country, which was quite prosperous by African standards. Another fact is that the initiative of the Cairo government to create a colony of Egyptian peasants in Somalia was met with hostility by the Somalis and was accompanied by anti-Egyptian protests, although such settlements would greatly boost the Somali economy.

Moluccan conflict

In modern Indonesia, more than 350 different ethnic groups live together, the relationships of which have developed over the centuries-old history of this largest archipelago in the world, which represents a certain geographical, cultural and historical community. The economic crisis that erupted in Indonesia in 1997, and the subsequent collapse of the Suharto regime in May 1998, led to a sharp weakening of the central government in this multi-island country, parts of which were traditionally prone to separatist sentiments, and inter-ethnic contradictions smoldered, as a rule, latently, usually expressed openly only in periodic Chinese pogroms. Meanwhile, the democratization of Indonesian society that began in May 1998 led to an increase in freedom of expression for various ethnic groups, which, coupled with the weakening of central government and a sharp decline in the influence of the army and its ability to influence events on the ground, led to an explosion of interethnic contradictions in various parts of Indonesia. The bloodiest conflict in the recent history of interethnic relations in modern Indonesia began in mid-January 1999 - a year ago - in the administrative center of the province of Moluccas (Moluccas Islands), the city of Ambon. Already in the first two months, there were hundreds of dead and wounded in various parts of the province, tens of thousands of refugees and enormous material losses. And all this in a province that was considered almost exemplary in Indonesia in terms of relationships between different groups of the population. Moreover, the specificity of this conflict is that, having begun primarily as an interethnic conflict, aggravated by religious differences, the Ambon conflict gradually turned into an interreligious conflict, between local Muslims and Christians, and threatens to explode the entire system of interfaith relations in Indonesia as a whole. It is in the Moluccas that the number of Christians and Muslims is approximately the same: in the whole province, Muslims are about 50% and about 43% Christians (37% Protestants and 6% Catholics), while in Ambon this ratio is 47% and 43%, respectively, which does not allow either one of the sides quickly take up. Thus, the armed confrontation threatens to drag on.

Conflict in Sri Lanka

Today, the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka covers an area of ​​65.7 thousand square kilometers, has over 20 million people, mainly Sinhalese (74%) and Tamils ​​(18%). Among believers, two thirds are Buddhists, about a third are Hindus, although there are other faiths. Ethnic tensions appeared on the island in the first decades of independence, and they intensified every year. The fact is that the Sinhala people come from Northern India and mainly profess Buddhism; Tamils ​​came from South India, and the religion that prevails among them is Hinduism. There is no information about which ethnic groups first inhabited the island. The 1948 constitution created a parliamentary state. It had a bicameral parliament consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives. According to the constitution, Sinhala was declared the main state language. This sharply strained relations between the Sinhala and Tamil sides, and government policies were by no means conducive to pacifying the Tamils. In the 1977 elections, the Sinhalese won 140 of the 168 seats in parliament, and Tamil became an official language along with English, while Sinhala remained the state language. No other significant concessions were made by the government towards the Tamils. Moreover, the President extended for another 6 years the term of the Parliament, which remained without significant representation of the Tamils ​​in it.

In July 1983, anti-Tamil riots occurred in the capital Colombo and other cities. In response, the Tamils ​​killed 13 Sinhala soldiers. This led to even more violence: 2,000 Tamils ​​were killed and 100,000 were forced from their homes. A full-scale ethnic conflict began, which continues today. Tamils ​​now receive great financial support from compatriots who have emigrated from the country and have the status of political refugees in various countries of the world. Members of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam group are well armed. Their number is from 3 to 5 thousand people. Attempts by the Sri Lankan leadership to destroy the group with fire and sword led nowhere. Clashes still occur from time to time; back in 2000, in just 2 days of fighting for the city of Jaffna, about 50 people died.

2.2 Experience of a modern state in resolving interethnic conflicts

For the normal development of the state, it is necessary not only to identify problems, but also to solve them constructively. Unfortunately, today not a single state can boast of the absolute eradication of interethnic conflicts and clashes on its territory. As practice shows, even with strong government support for national minorities in the country, there are still various groups that share racist and nationalist points of view. But at the same time, we cannot help but talk about positive developments in this direction.

The most important step towards resolving interethnic conflicts is the awareness of the existence of a problem not only by ethnic communities, but also by government bodies, which usually entails a transition from verbal habits to legal, political and financial forms of solving it. All subjects and objects of national conflict must understand that the ethnic factor today has acquired a pronounced political significance. This includes regionalism in national political thinking, the desire to solve the national problems of one’s region in one’s own way within the framework of one federation, and the idea of ​​decentralizing the management of national problems. It is these aspirations that give rise to the desire for autonomous territory and independence.

One of the most important steps towards solving the problem of interethnic relations today is the awareness by the population of states of the negative impact on the development of not only the state as a whole, but also individual economic entities. As a rule, these are economically proactive people who strive to remove national and national-state obstacles to the development of entrepreneurship, business and trade.

In the complex of solving national problems and regulating interethnic relations, both the development of promising concepts for the development of national relations and the role of the ethnic factor in the life of the state, and the development of regional programs for solving national problems (typical for federal states), stabilizing interethnic conflicts and their prevention are of equal importance.

In most cases, for national minorities higher value has national autonomy (an example of this is Kosovo). Many experts believe that in the 21st century it is necessary to resolve the issues of creating new autonomous regions, districts, national districts and national councils wherever possible. In other cases, the form of national-cultural autonomy as a state or mixed public-state governing body can be successfully applied. However, we should not forget that, as a rule, the most pressing issue in the framework of granting autonomy is the issue of changing borders and administrative territories.

Simultaneously with the above, the solution to the problems of national minorities today lies through the wealth of regions, national groups, and the economic well-being of people. Hence the importance of developing the economic initiative (at the level of private or cooperative forms of ownership) of people to create a financial and, in general, economic basis for solving national and cultural problems.

The conditions for the revival and development of national minorities is the use of their original folk systems in the practice of upbringing and education, including systems of teaching folk crafts, crafts, etc. A significant factor is the presence of a national intelligentsia, a professional layer of national culture, providing the level of culture to which it is necessary to raise the level of culture of the entire people or national group, and guaranteeing the disappearance of danger for national culture. Of course, laws and in general have a particularly important role to play. government support policies for the conservation and development of national minorities, their natural and cultural resources. At the same time, one should support the thesis about the need to pursue a multivariate national policy that takes into account the identity and specifics of the economy, culture, way of life, social relations of all peoples and national groups inhabiting a particular republic, autonomy, region or region. The latter is especially important for ending interethnic confrontation and should be the main principle of state national policy.

It should be emphasized that small peoples and national groups, which we also call national minorities, require especially great care from society and the state. And here regional national policy should also play a significant role. But, unfortunately, the lack of political stabilization and the deepening economic, cultural and moral crisis today limit the possibilities of regional national policy and cause a relative reduction in allocations for solving national problems and for culture both from the central authorities and from local administrative authorities. However, national policy needs to be formed at the level of each region, both within individual republican and administrative-territorial entities, and at the interterritorial and even interstate (this is important for border territories) levels.

When forming a regional national policy, the main efforts, as scientists and practitioners believe, need to be focused on creating optimal conditions for the self-development of peoples, national groups and their cultures. For many regions, in the absence of acute interethnic conflicts, socio-cultural issues become the core of programs for solving national problems and preventing interethnic conflicts.

At the same time special attention, according to scientists, require the following main tasks:

· preservation and development of existing cultural potential;

· the formation of a new mechanism of cultural continuity;

· use of the commercial potential of national crops;

· solving problems of teaching national languages;

· development of a comprehensive program for continuous aesthetic education of the younger generation on a traditional national basis;

· creation of state or public-state structures in the form of national-cultural autonomy.

Today it is necessary to develop new ideas and forms of national policy, in particular the development of a mechanism for socio-economic impact on the national environment.

CONCLUSION

Three people were asked: “What is dawn?” One replied: “This is the dividing line between day and night.” The second said: "This is the time between darkness and light." And the third was a poet, and his answer was: “These are two women of different skin colors, but both are truly beautiful.” Sometimes the simple wisdom of a poet is superior to the most complex political theories. N.A.Nazarbayev

In fact, we are all different, but in most cases we all have the same desires: we want to be free, to move freely throughout the territory of our people, to feel our equality in society, regardless of skin color, eye shape or religious views. Today this is almost impossible, despite the fact that most of the world's population desires this with all their hearts.

Undoubtedly, interethnic conflicts are an integral part modern politics, because The problem of ethnic conflicts requires an immediate solution. It is state regulation and state stability in the field of national politics that can give a positive impetus to solving a problem that has existed practically since the emergence of civilizations. Unfortunately, today not a single country can boast of completely eliminating this problem, at least on its own territory.

Every day all over the world, multiple organizations, together with various politicians and government officials, are taking constructive steps towards solving the problem of national minorities, but despite this, humanity is still far from completely eradicating it. Therefore, today, in most cases, national minorities can only hope that one day they will be able to be proud of belonging to their nation in any situation and that one day humanity will understand that a person’s actions do not really depend on how he was born and what gods he worships.

LIST OF SOURCES USED

F. Gadzhiev “De facto independence. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus". Regnum, 2008

www.ru.wikipedia.org

V.V. Amelin “Problems of preventing interethnic conflicts.” akorda.kz

A. Andreev Black Africans are fleeing Libya // Nezavisimaya Gazeta. - 2000. - No. 218 (2280)

Yu.V. Harutyunyan. Y.M. Drobizheva “Ethnosociology: past and new horizons” // Sotsis.- 2000.- No. 4.

I. Ivanov “Kosovo crisis: a year later” // Diplomatic Courier NG. - 2000. - No. 5

Galina Starovoitova, “National self-determination: approaches and case studies”, M., 1999.lawmix.ru

A. Tarasov “The right of nations to self-determination as the most important democratic principle” www.saint-juste.narod.ru

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Almost everything modern states multinational. All capitals of the world, large cities, and even villages are multinational. And that is precisely why, today more than ever, you need to be correct and attentive both in words and in actions. Otherwise, you can find yourself involved in completely unexpected and unreasonable vicissitudes, and sometimes even in a clearly formed interethnic conflict.

Interethnic conflict- this is a complication of relations between nations and peoples up to direct military action. As a rule, interethnic conflicts can occur at two levels of interethnic relations. Thus, one of them is associated with interpersonal and family relations, while the other is implemented through the interaction of federal constitutional and legal bodies and subjects of the Federation, political parties and movements.

CAUSES AND FACTORS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS

Interethnic conflicts as a social phenomenon are a clash of interests of different levels and contents, and are a manifestation of complex deep processes in relations between individual ethnic communities, groups of people, occurring under the influence of many socio-economic, political, historical, psychological, territorial, separatist, linguistic cultural, religious and other factors.

Factors influencing interethnic conflicts:

1. National composition of the conflict region (its likelihood is higher in mixed regions);

2. Type of settlement (the probability is higher in big city);

3. Age (extreme poles: “older-young” give a higher likelihood of conflict);

4. Social status (higher likelihood of conflict in the presence of marginalized people);

5. Level of education (the roots of the conflict are nested in the masses of a low level of education, however, it should be remembered that its ideologists are always individual representatives of the intelligentsia);

6. Political views (conflicts are much higher among radicals).

Whatever the reasons, interethnic conflicts lead to massive violations of laws and citizens' rights.

Objective reasons for the exacerbation of interethnic tension may be:

Firstly, the consequences of serious deformations in national policy, the dissatisfaction that has accumulated over many decades, spilling out under conditions of glasnost and democratization;

Secondly, the result of a serious deterioration in the economic situation in the country, which also gives rise to discontent and hostility among various segments of the population, and these negative sentiments are channeled, first of all, in the sphere of interethnic relations;

Thirdly, a consequence of the ossified structure government system, weakening the foundations on which the free federation of Soviet peoples was created.

Subjective factors are also important.

Interethnic conflicts due to the cause and nature of their origin can be:

Socio-economic (unemployment, delays and non-payment of wages, social benefits, which do not allow the majority of citizens to meet the necessary needs, monopoly of representatives of one of the ethnic groups in any service sector or sector of the national economy, etc.);

Cultural and linguistic (related to the protection, revival and development of the native language, national culture and guaranteed rights of national minorities);

Ethnodemographic (relatively rapid change in the population ratio, i.e. an increase in the proportion of newcomers, a foreign ethnic population due to the migration of internally displaced persons and refugees);

Ethno-territorial-status (non-coincidence of state or administrative borders with the boundaries of settlement of peoples, demands of small nations to expand or acquire a new status);

Historical (relationships in the past - wars, past relations of the “dominance - subordination” policy, deportations and associated negative aspects of historical memory, etc.);

Interreligious and interfaith (including differences in the level of modern religious population);

Separatist (demand to create their own independent statehood or reunification with a neighboring “mother” or related state from a cultural and historical point of view).

Reason Any thoughtless or deliberately provocative statements by politicians, national leaders, representatives of the clergy, the media, domestic incidents, and incidents can also cause interethnic conflicts.

Conflicts over national values ​​and the most important life attitudes in the sphere of interethnic relations are among the most difficult to resolve; it is here that the problem of ensuring and protecting the civil, socio-cultural rights of individuals and representatives of certain ethnic groups may be most acute.

According to A.G. Zdravomyslova, source of conflict is the measure and form of distribution of power and positions available in the hierarchy of power and management structures.

FORMS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS

There are civilized and uncivilized forms of interethnic conflicts:

a) local wars (civil, separatist);

b) mass riots accompanied by violence, gross and numerous violations of individual rights and freedoms;

c) religious fundamentalism.

Depending on the motives (reasons), characteristics of the subjective composition, interethnic conflicts can be presented as follows:

1) national-territorial conflicts. In many cases, these conflicts contain attempts to solve problems of the “historical homeland” (the original territories of residence or the reunification of different ethnic communities);

2) conflicts related to the desire of national minorities to realize the right to self-determination;

3) conflicts, the source of which is the desire of deported peoples to restore their rights;

4) conflicts based on the clash of ruling national elites in the economic and political spheres;

5) conflicts related to discrimination against any nation, ethnic group, violation of its rights or the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of its representatives;

6) conflicts caused by belonging (on a national basis) to different religious communities, movements, i.e. on confessional grounds;

7) conflicts based on divergences and clashes of national values ​​(legal, linguistic, cultural, etc.).

The importance of researching and preventing conflicts on an ethnic and interethnic basis is also evidenced by the following figures: according to some unofficial sources, in the period from 1991 to 1999, the number of deaths in interethnic conflicts in the post-Soviet space amounted to more than one million people.

WAYS TO SOLUTION INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS

Interethnic conflicts are one of those types of conflicts for which it is impossible to find a standard approach or solution, since each of them has its own peculiarity, basis. World experience shows that such situations are best resolved only through peaceful means.

So the most famous of them include:

1. Deconsolidation (separation) of the forces involved in the conflict, which, as a rule, is achieved through a system of measures that make it possible to cut off (for example, by discrediting in the eyes of the public) the most radical elements or groups and support forces prone to compromises and negotiations.

2. Interrupting the conflict is a method that allows you to expand the action of pragmatic approaches to its regulation, and as a result of which the emotional background of the conflict changes and the intensity of passions decreases.

3. The negotiation process is a method for which there are special rules. In order to achieve success in it, pragmatization of negotiations is necessary, which consists of dividing the global goal into a number of sequential tasks. Usually the parties are ready to conclude agreements on vital needs, for which a truce is established: for the burial of the dead, the exchange of prisoners. Then they move on to the most pressing economic and social issues. Political issues, especially those of symbolic significance, are put aside and dealt with last. Negotiations should be conducted in such a way that each side strives to find satisfactory solutions not only for itself, but also for the partner. As conflict experts say, it is necessary to change the “win-lose” model to the “win-win” model. Each step in the negotiation process should be documented.

4. Participation in negotiations by intermediaries or mediators. In particular difficult situations The participation of representatives of international organizations confirms the legality of the agreements.

Conflict resolution- this is always a complex process bordering on art. It is much more important to prevent developments that lead to conflicts. The sum of efforts in this direction is defined as conflict prevention. In the process of their regulation, ethnosociologists and political scientists act as experts to identify and test hypotheses about the causes of the conflict, to assess “ driving forces", the mass participation of groups in one or another scenario, to assess the consequences of decisions made

Federal Agency for Education

State educational institution of higher professional education

State University of Management

Department of State and Municipal Administration

Test

by discipline « Social anthropology »

on the topic: “Interethnic conflicts.”

Completed:

Student of the State Medical University group 3–3

Stenina Maria

Checked:

D.I.N., professor Taisaev K.U.

Moscow 2009

1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………2

2. Causes and factors of interethnic conflicts………………...3

3. Forms of interethnic conflicts…………………………….5

4. Ways to resolve interethnic conflicts……………………….6

5. Conclusion……………………………………………………………...9

6. List of references……………………………………...11

INTRODUCTION

A multinational environment is a typical feature and condition of modern life. Peoples not only coexist, but also actively interact with each other. Almost all modern states are multinational. All capitals of the world, large cities, and even villages are multinational. And that is precisely why, today more than ever, you need to be correct and attentive both in words and in actions. Otherwise, you can find yourself involved in completely unexpected and unreasonable vicissitudes, and sometimes even in a clearly formed interethnic conflict.

Interethnic conflict- this is a complication of relations between nations and peoples up to direct military action. As a rule, interethnic conflicts can occur at two levels of interethnic relations. Thus, one of them is associated with interpersonal and family relations, while the other is implemented through the interaction of federal constitutional and legal bodies and subjects of the Federation, political parties and movements.

REASONS AND FACTORS OF INTERNATIONAL

CONFLICTS

Interethnic conflicts as a social phenomenon is a clash of interests of different levels and content, and is a manifestation of complex deep processes in relations between individual ethnic communities, groups of people, occurring under the influence of many socio-economic, political, historical, psychological, territorial, separatist, linguistic and cultural, religious and other factors.

Factors influencing interethnic conflicts:

1. national composition of the conflict region (its likelihood is higher in mixed regions);

2. type of settlement (the probability is higher in a big city);

3. age (extreme poles: “older-young” give a higher probability of conflict);

4. social status (the likelihood of conflict is higher in the presence of marginalized people);

5. level of education (the roots of the conflict are nested in the masses of a low level of education, however, it should be remembered that its ideologists are always individual representatives of the intelligentsia);

6. political views (conflicts are much higher among radicals).

Whatever the reasons, interethnic conflicts lead to massive violations of laws and citizens' rights. Objective reasons for the exacerbation of interethnic tension may be:

firstly, the consequences of serious deformations in national policy, the dissatisfaction that has accumulated over many decades, spilling out under conditions of glasnost and democratization;

secondly, the result of a serious deterioration in the economic situation in the country, which also gives rise to discontent and hostility among various segments of the population, and these negative sentiments are channeled, first of all, in the sphere of interethnic relations;

thirdly, a consequence of the ossified structure of the state structure, the weakening of the foundations on which the free federation of Soviet peoples was created.

Subjective factors are also important.

Interethnic conflicts due to the cause and nature of their origin can be:

● socio-economic (unemployment, delays and non-payment of wages, social benefits, which do not allow the majority of citizens to meet the necessary needs, monopoly of representatives of one of the ethnic groups in any service sector or sector of the national economy, etc.);

● cultural and linguistic (related to the protection, revival and development of the native language, national culture and guaranteed rights of national minorities);

● ethnodemographic (relatively rapid change in the population ratio, i.e. an increase in the proportion of newcomers, of other ethnicities due to the migration of internally displaced persons and refugees);

●ethno-territorial-status (non-coincidence of state or administrative borders with the boundaries of settlement of peoples, demands of small nations to expand or acquire a new status);

● historical (relationships in the past – wars, past relations of politics "domination – subordination", deportations and associated negative aspects of historical memory, etc.);

● interreligious and interconfessional (including differences in the level of the modern religious population);

● separatist (demand to create their own independent statehood or reunification with a neighboring “mother” or related state from a cultural and historical point of view).

Reason any thoughtless or deliberately provocative statements by politicians, national leaders, representatives of the clergy, the media, domestic incidents, cases of

Conflicts over national values ​​and the most important life attitudes in the sphere of interethnic relations are among the most difficult to resolve; it is here that the problem of ensuring and protecting the civil, socio-cultural rights of individuals and representatives of certain ethnic groups may be most acute.

According to A.G. Zdravomyslova, And source of conflict is the measure and form of distribution of power and positions available in the hierarchy of power and management structures.

FORMS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS

There are civilized and uncivilized forms of interethnic conflicts:

a) local wars (civil, separatist);

b) mass riots accompanied by violence, gross and numerous violations of individual rights and freedoms;

c) religious fundamentalism.

Depending on the motives (reasons), characteristics of the subjective composition, interethnic conflicts can be presented as follows:

1) national-territorial conflicts. In many cases, these conflicts contain attempts to solve problems of the “historical homeland” (the original territories of residence or the reunification of different ethnic communities);

2) conflicts related to the desire of national minorities to realize the right to self-determination;

3) conflicts, the source of which is the desire of deported peoples to restore their rights;

4) conflicts based on the clash of ruling national elites in the economic and political spheres;

5) conflicts related to discrimination against any nation, ethnic group, violation of its rights or the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of its representatives;

6) conflicts caused by belonging (on a national basis) to different religious communities, movements, i.e. on confessional grounds;

7) conflicts based on divergences and clashes of national values ​​(legal, linguistic, cultural, etc.)1.

The importance of researching and preventing conflicts on an ethnic and interethnic basis is also evidenced by the following figures: according to some unofficial sources, in the period from 1991 to 1999, the number of deaths in interethnic conflicts in the post-Soviet space amounted to more than one million people.

WAYS TO SOLUTION INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS

Interethnic conflicts are one of those types of conflicts for which it is impossible to find a standard approach or solution, since each of them has its own peculiarity, basis. World experience shows that such situations are best resolved only through peaceful means. So the most famous of them include:

1. deconsolidation (separation) of the forces involved in the conflict, which, as a rule, is achieved through a system of measures that make it possible to cut off (for example, by discrediting in the eyes of the public) the most radical elements or groups and support forces prone to compromise and negotiations.

2. interruption of the conflict- a method that allows you to expand the effect of pragmatic approaches to its regulation, and as a result of which the emotional background of the conflict changes and the intensity of passions decreases.

3. negotiation process- a method for which there are special rules. In order to achieve success in it, pragmatization of negotiations is necessary, which consists of dividing the global goal into a number of sequential tasks. Usually the parties are ready to conclude agreements on vital needs, for which a truce is established: for the burial of the dead, the exchange of prisoners. Then they move on to the most pressing economic and social issues. Political issues, especially those of symbolic significance, are put aside and dealt with last. Negotiations should be conducted in such a way that each side strives to find satisfactory solutions not only for itself, but also for the partner. As conflict experts say, it is necessary to change the “win-lose” model to the “win-win” model. Each step in the negotiation process should be documented.

4. participation in negotiations of intermediaries or mediators. In particularly difficult situations, the participation of representatives of international organizations confirms the legality of agreements.

Conflict resolution- this is always a complex process bordering on art. It is much more important to prevent developments that lead to conflicts. The sum of efforts in this direction is defined as conflict prevention. In the process of regulating them, ethnosociologists and political scientists act as experts to identify and test hypotheses about the causes of the conflict, to assess the “driving forces”, the mass participation of groups in one or another scenario, to assess the consequences of decisions made

CONCLUSION

A conflict is always a confrontation between two (or more) parties, bringing with it nothing but discomfort. This phenomenon usually does not pass away, but with each subsequent time it becomes widespread. The same principle applies to interethnic conflict. Of all types of conflicts, it is truly one of the largest. Since, as time passes, the number of people taking part in it only increases, discontent increases, and the amount of damage and losses only becomes more impressive.

Having done great job over the abstract, I was once again convinced and came to the conclusion that:

1) interethnic conflict is an undesirable and extremely destructive phenomenon in the life of society, which is a kind of brake in solving problems in the social life of people of different nationalities.

2) The basis of interethnic conflict lies in both objective and subjective contradictions.

3) It is extremely difficult to extinguish a conflict that has broken out; it can last for months or years; fade, then flare up with renewed vigor.

4) The negative consequences of interethnic conflicts are not limited to direct losses. Since mass movements of migrants occur, which significantly changes the quantitative composition of the population.

Also, the consequences of conflicts include unemployment among young people, land shortage, lumpenization (a socially regressive phenomenon characteristic, as a rule, of a catastrophic society and consisting in complete loss people from social life and the simultaneous formation of a vast “social bottom”, consisting of disadvantaged, impoverished sections of the population.) a significant part of the population.

5) It is extremely difficult to avoid interethnic conflict, since within each nation there are always groups interested in establishing their nation and at the same time grossly violating the principles of justice, equality of rights, and sovereignty of others. True, in some countries such groups often determine the main direction of interethnic relations; in others, they always receive a decisive rebuff. Now thinkers and progressive politicians are actively searching for ways out of numerous modern ethnic crises. The leading part of the world community has realized and recognized the value humanistic approach to ethnic problems. Its essence lies in the voluntary search for consent, in the renunciation of national violence in all its types and forms, and secondly, in the consistent development of democracy. Legal principles in the life of society. Ensuring individual rights and freedoms, regardless of nationality, is a condition for the freedom of any people.

LIST OF REFERENCES USED

1. Babakov V.G. Interethnic contradictions and conflicts in Russia" // Socio-political magazine. 1994, No. 8, pp. 16-30

2. Zdravomyslov A.G. Sociology of conflict. M., 1997, pp. 90-92.

3. Tutinas E.V. Individual rights and interethnic conflicts. Monograph. Rostov-on-Don, Regional Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2000, p.20

4. Zdravomyslov A.G. Interethnic conflicts in Russia // Social Sciences and Modernity. 1996, no. 2, pp. 153-164

6. D. ist. D., professor, K.U. Taisaev: course of lectures on social anthropology.

Ethnos is defined as an established community of people united by intra-group norms of behavior, the characteristics of which are fixed by linguistic, psychological, moral, aesthetic and other means of culture.

National-ethnic stereotypes are acquired by a person from childhood and subsequently function mainly on a subconscious level. Therefore, ethnic conflicts are characterized by such features of unconscious behavior as emotionality, illogicality, symbolism and poor justification of the actions taken by rational arguments. Due to these features, the emergence, development and resolution of interethnic conflicts in any sphere of society and at any level has its own specifics.

Interethnic conflicts occur between individual representatives, social groups various ethnic groups . Ethnicity is driven by the need for self-preservation, protection of its values ​​and traditions. The most painful and emotionally intense conflicts that arise as a result infringement of value ethnicity. Value conflicts can take place in any sphere of society. But the specificity of interethnic value conflicts is more clearly manifested in contradictions associated with differences in culture, language, religion and other sociocultural characteristics of ethnic groups.

On household level Ethnic conflicts may arise caused by socio-psychological factors - a general subconscious hostility towards representatives of a certain ethnic group. In the course of a long confrontation, whatever its reasons, such hostility towards each other among the conflicting ethnic groups becomes widespread.

Often conflicts between norms and values and between values differences between different cultures occur at the everyday level, in the course of everyday communication.

The most conflict-prone regions in this regard are regions with high population migration. Migrants, as a rule, do not take into account the sociocultural characteristics of local residents, which causes a negative attitude of the “natives”.

It must be borne in mind that purely interethnic causes of conflicts in real life doesn't actually exist. Ethnic self-identification and solidarity are only a way to protect one’s interests, goals, values, etc.

Interethnic conflict is a very complex and ambiguous phenomenon, which consists of many components, each of which to varying degrees influences the occurrence of a clash between ethnic groups.

If we pay attention to the factors that push contradictions to inflame the conflict, we can identify three main components, such as, firstly, if we talk specifically about interethnic conflicts, then the level of national self-awareness occupies an important place, which can be both adequate and overestimated or underestimated. This factor gives impetus to the outbreak of war between ethnic groups. Secondly, these are unresolved social problems that people encounter every day in everyday life. And, finally, of course, the presence of political forces that will participate in the unfolding of the conflict, thereby realizing their own interests.

Causes of interethnic conflicts

As is known, interethnic conflicts are a clash between ethnic groups that does not arise spontaneously, but “ripes” over time. Like any complex phenomenon, interethnic conflict has its own causes. It cannot be said that all established causes are universal; on the contrary, each conflict has its own nature, especially if it is protracted, but in general, we can identify the most common reasons that give impetus to claims between ethnic groups.

One of the most important reasons is the territorial claims of ethnic groups. They can be caused by various events, such as: arbitrary and uncoordinated changes in borders affecting the interests of ethnic groups, the return of deported people with the desire to appropriate the territory that they inhabited historically, as well as the initial vagueness of borders, which makes it possible to interpret a certain area in the interests of any of the warring parties .

As for the number of political motives for the emergence of political conflicts, it is quite high, and often it is when such clashes “break out” that an interethnic conflict takes the form of an internal armed conflict. The reasons that push the development of such events are usually called: the desire of an ethnic group to separate from the state and gain independence, as well as the seizure of power by one group over another in different levels power, both high and low.

Conflicts caused by contradictions in value components, which include differences in culture, religion and language, were widespread. Religion and moral ideals often became a stumbling block between ethnic groups and were the starting point for inciting war. Infringement of the sociocultural characteristics of ethnic groups could divide the people into opposing sides.

Psychological and social reasons emergence of interethnic conflicts.

As you know, human behavior is determined not only by rational components, but is also characterized by unconscious factors, such as symbolism, illogicality and emotionality. Sometimes, unfortunately, a person is not fully aware of his actions and acts according to his inner impulses and beliefs. In the emergence of interethnic conflicts one can often find precisely psychological reasons that influence the consciousness of individuals, who in turn transmit their “emotional” state to others. It turns out to be a kind of chain reaction.

A significant role in the emergence of inter-ethnic clashes is played by the inflated self-esteem of “our own” and the biased underestimated self-esteem of “outsiders”. Since this type of conflict has a historical background, a person can remember various facts from the past, often precisely those that, in his opinion, infringed on the rights of his ethnic group.

Bibliographic list of used literature:

1. MM. Sharafulin “Interethnic conflicts: causes, typology, solutions // Problems of education, science and culture.” M., 2006.

Speaking about the causes of interethnic conflicts, first of all it should be noted that the most severe consequences are caused by arbitrariness and violence towards any nation, the ban and persecution of religion, culture, language, and traditions. National feelings are very vulnerable, and any kind of arbitrariness towards any nation gives rise to hatred towards those who allowed violence. Bloody events in Azerbaijan, the North Caucasus, Georgia, Moldova, and also in the former Yugoslavia show that interethnic conflicts have turned into interethnic wars. And civil wars that arise on national grounds last a very long time. The war goes on until the last Serb, Croat, Albanian, Chechen, Georgian.

The cause of interethnic conflicts can also be national prejudice towards representatives of a particular nation. According to sociological surveys in Russia, more than 1/3 of respondents said that they dislike representatives of a certain nationality. At the same time, the absolute majority named persons of “Caucasian nationality.” Some political forces and parties deliberately incite national hatred, declaring that Jews, Russians, Armenians, Chechens, etc. are to blame for all the current troubles and problems in our lives. Thus, an “image of the enemy” is formed, the culprit of all troubles. And this is a very dangerous phenomenon, since fertile ground is created for strengthening the ideology of nationalism, chauvinism, and often fascism.

Therefore, the main reason for the exacerbation of interethnic conflicts is associated with the attempts of various political forces to deliberately incite national hatred in order to thereby acquire a certain political capital. By inciting nationalism it is very easy to gain power. But in order to stay in power, such a regime will continue to have to base its policy on inciting national hatred. This is the main reason for the sharp escalation of interethnic conflicts on the territory of the former Soviet Union. According to a sociological survey conducted in the North Caucasus, 2/3 of respondents said that the main cause of interethnic conflicts in the region is the struggle for power. Ordinary people are beginning to understand that politicians, in the struggle for power, are capable of causing conflict among people of different nationalities who have lived peacefully on the same land for centuries.

After the nationalists come to power, as a rule, a regime of ethnocracy is established, when all real power passes into the hands of only one indigenous nationality, the principle applies: one state - one nation. At the same time, methods of ethnic cleansing are actively used. Serbs, Albanians, Chechens, Georgians, Estonians, Latvians are trying to clear their territories of national minorities they do not like. Thus, in Estonia and Latvia, discriminatory measures against representatives of non-indigenous nationality are legislated. They are deprived of voting rights, citizenship, they are not accepted into public service, etc. All these measures are designed to achieve the expulsion of the Russian-speaking population from these states. A similar situation is typical for almost all former Soviet republics. Today all the former Soviet Union is an arena of interethnic conflicts between representatives of indigenous and non-indigenous nationalities. It is no coincidence that the number of refugees in the former Soviet Union has reached tens of millions and is constantly growing.

To prevent interethnic conflicts, the state, not in words, but in deeds, must ensure the equality of all nations. It is necessary to resolutely abandon attempts to create any benefits or advantages for one indigenous nationality, and to take into account the interests of all peoples living in this state. This is the most important principle of preventing interethnic conflicts.