International conflicts. The problem and danger of interethnic conflicts

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

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

Therefore, the main reason for the aggravation of interethnic conflicts is associated with the attempts of various political forces to deliberately incite national enmity in order to acquire a certain political capital in this way. Thanks to the incitement of nationalism, it is very easy to gain power. But in order to stay in power, such a regime will continue to have to build its policy on inciting national hatred. This is where the main reason for the sharp aggravation of interethnic conflicts on the territory of the former Soviet Union lies. According to a sociological survey conducted in the North Caucasus, 2/3 of respondents said that the main reason for 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 quarreling people of different nationalities who have lived peacefully on the same land for centuries.

After the nationalists come to power, as a rule, an ethnocracy regime 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 unwanted national minorities. Thus, in Estonia and Latvia, discriminatory measures against representatives of non-indigenous nationality are legislatively fixed. 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. This situation is typical for almost all former Soviet republics. Today, the entire former Soviet Union is an arena of inter-ethnic 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 renounce attempts to create any benefits, advantages for one indigenous nationality, to take into account the interests of all peoples living in this state. This is the most important principle of preventing interethnic conflicts.

Ethnos is defined as an established community of people united by intra-group norms of behavior, the features 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 at a subconscious level. Therefore, ethnic conflicts are characterized by such features of unconscious behavior as emotionality, illogicality, symbolism, and weak 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 of various ethnic groups . The ethnic group is driven by the need for self-preservation, protection of their values ​​and traditions. The most painful and emotionally intense conflicts that arise as a result of infringement of value ethnos. Value conflicts can take place in any sphere of society. But more clearly the specificity of value-based interethnic conflicts is manifested in contradictions associated with differences in culture, language, religion and other socio-cultural characteristics of ethnic groups.

On the 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 causes, such hostility towards each other becomes widespread among the conflicting ethnic groups.

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

The most conflictogenic in this regard are regions with high population migration. Settlers, as a rule, do not take into account the socio-cultural characteristics of the local residents, which causes the negative attitude of the "natives" towards them.

It must be borne in mind that purely inter-ethnic causes of conflicts in real life do not actually exist. Ethnic self-identification and solidarity are just 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, affects the occurrence of a clash between ethnic groups.

If we pay attention to the factors that push contradictions to incite conflict, then we can distinguish three main components, such as, firstly, if we talk specifically about interethnic conflicts, then an important place is occupied by the level of national self-consciousness, which can be both adequate and overstated or understated. This factor gives impetus to kindling war between ethnic groups. Secondly, these are unresolved social problems that peoples face every day in everyday life. And, finally, of course, the presence of political forces that will participate in the development of the conflict, thereby realizing their own interests.

Causes of interethnic conflicts

As you know, interethnic conflicts are a clash between ethnic groups that does not arise spontaneously, but “ripens” over time. Like any complex 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, it is possible to single out the most common causes 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: an arbitrary and inconsistent change of borders that affects the interests of ethnic groups, the return of deported people with a desire to appropriate the territory that they historically inhabited, as well as the initial vagueness of the 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 it is often when such clashes “flare up” 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 secede from the state and gain independence, as well as the seizure of power by one group over another at different levels of power, both at higher and lower levels.

Conflicts caused by contradictions in value components, which include differences in culture, religion and language, had a significant distribution. Religion and moral ideals often became a stumbling block between ethnic groups and were the starting point for inciting war. The infringement of the socio-cultural characteristics of ethnic groups could divide the people into opposing sides.

Psychological and social causes 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 origin of interethnic conflicts, one can often find precisely psychological causes that affect the consciousness of individuals, who in turn transmit their “emotional” state to others. It's kind of a chain reaction.

A significant role in the emergence of interethnic clashes is played by the overestimated self-esteem of “ours” and the biasedly low self-esteem of “strangers”. Since this type of conflict has a historical background, a person can remember various facts from the past, often 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.

Examples of such events were given to many nations at a very significant cost. The bloody world wars of the twentieth century will long be remembered in every corner of the globe. Modern society, it would seem, opposes any military actions and conflicts; its development is based on liberal ideas, healthy competition and world globalization. However, in reality, things are somewhat different. The number of conflicts on national and religious grounds is only increasing every year, and an increasing number of participants are involved in the cycle of such battles, which leads to a gradual expansion of the problem.

Mismatch of national interests, territorial claims, negative perception of each other by the parties - all this forms interethnic conflicts.

Examples of such situations are covered in the political news with enviable consistency.

It is a kind of social conflict, which is based on many factors and contradictions, as a rule, ethno-social, political, national and state.

The causes of national conflicts, if we analyze them in more detail, are very similar in many ways:

• Fight for resources. The depletion and uneven distribution of natural resources that provide the most often leads to inciting disputes and strife.
• Population growth in conditions of closed territory, uneven level of quality of life, massive forced
• Terrorism as a phenomenon requiring tough measures and, as a result, aggravation

Religious differences

The interethnic ones which will be given below relate primarily to the largest power of the twentieth century - the Soviet Union. Many contradictions arose between the union republics, especially in the Caucasus region. A similar situation persists even after the former constituent parts of the country of the Soviets obtained sovereign status. Since the collapse of the USSR, more than one hundred and fifty different conflicts have been registered in Chechnya, Abkhazia, Transnistria.

The presence of the disadvantaged within the framework of a sovereign country directly forms the basis of the concept of "interethnic conflicts", examples of which are becoming more and more frequent. This is the Gagauz conflict in Moldova, the Abkhazian and Ossetian conflicts in Georgia. Usually, with such contradictions, the population inside the country is divided into indigenous and non-indigenous, which leads to an even sharper aggravation of the situation.

Examples of religious conflicts are no less common. The most striking of them is the fight against infidels in numerous Islamic countries and regions (Afghanistan, Chechnya, etc.). Similar conflicts are also characteristic of the African continent, the fierce struggle of the Muslim authorities and representatives of other faiths claimed more than two million lives, and wars in the holy land between Muslims and Jews have been going on for decades.

The same sad list includes conflicts in Kosovo between Serbs and Albanians, the struggle for the independence of Tibet.

Almost all modern states are multinational. All capitals of the world, large cities, and even villages are multinational. And that's precisely why, today more than ever, you need to be correct and attentive both in words and in actions. Otherwise, you can be involved in completely unexpected and unreasonable ups and downs, and sometimes even in a clearly formed ethnic conflict.

Interethnic conflict- this is a complication of relations between nations and peoples up to direct hostilities. As a rule, interethnic conflicts can occur at two levels of interethnic relations. So one of them is connected with interpersonal and family relations, while the other is realized 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 is a clash of interests of different levels and content, and is a manifestation of complex deep-seated processes in relations between individual ethnic communities, groups of people, occurring under the influence of a variety of socio-economic, political, historical, psychological, territorial, separatist, linguistic and cultural, religious and other factors.

Factors influencing interethnic conflicts:

1. The ethnic composition of the conflict region (higher its probability in mixed regions);

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

3. Age (extreme poles: "older-younger" give a higher probability of conflict);

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

5. Level of education (the roots of the conflict nestle in the mass 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 the radicals).

Whatever the reasons may be caused by interethnic conflicts, they lead to a massive violation of laws and the rights of citizens.

The objective reasons for the aggravation of interethnic tensions can be:

Firstly, the consequences of serious deformations of the national policy, the dissatisfaction accumulated over many decades, which spilled out in the conditions of openness 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, primarily in the sphere of interethnic relations;

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

Subjective factors are also important.

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

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

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

Ethno-demographic (relatively rapid change in the ratio of the population, i.e. an increase in the share of the alien, other ethnic population in connection with the migration of forced migrants, refugees);

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

Historical (relationships in the past - wars, former relations of the "domination - submission" policy, deportations and the negative aspects of historical memory associated with them, etc.);

Inter-religious and inter-confessional (including differences in the level of the modern religious population);

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

Cause any rash or knowingly provocative statements by politicians, national leaders, representatives of the clergy, the media, domestic incidents, cases can also become inter-ethnic conflicts.

Conflicts over national values, the most important 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, representatives of certain ethnic groups can 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) riots accompanied by violence, gross and numerous violations of the rights and freedoms of the individual;

c) religious fundamentalism.

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

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

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

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

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

5) conflicts related to discrimination of any nation, ethnic group, violation of its rights or 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 differences and clashes of national values ​​(legal, linguistic, cultural, etc.).

The following figures also testify to the importance of research and prevention of conflicts on an ethnic, interethnic basis: according to some unofficial sources, in the period from 1991 to 1999, the death toll 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 by peaceful means.

So the most famous of them are:

1. Deconsolidation (separation) of the forces involved in the conflict, which, as a rule, is achieved with the help of a system of measures that allow cutting off (for example, by discrediting in the eyes of the public) the most radical elements or groups and supporting forces prone to compromise, negotiations.

2. Interruption of the conflict - a way 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, the intensity of passions decreases.

3. The negotiation process is a method for which there are special rules. In order to succeed in it, the pragmatization of negotiations is necessary, which consists in dividing the global goal into a number of successive tasks. Usually, the parties are ready to conclude agreements on vital needs, about 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 decided last. Negotiations should be conducted in such a way that each side seeks to find satisfactory moves not only for itself, but also for the partner. As conflictologists 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 legitimacy of agreements is confirmed by the participation of representatives of international organizations.

Conflict resolution is always a complex process bordering on art. It is much more important to prevent the development of events leading 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 the "driving forces", the mass participation of groups in one or another scenario, to assess the consequences of decisions made.

Intra-academic competition of student works

"INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: FROM THE ORIGINS TO THE PRESENT"

specialty "Management

information resources"

Kozyrenko Natalya Petrovna

Minsk, 2008

ESSAY

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 growth of interethnic conflicts in the modern world, their continuous development and, as a result, the need for an early resolution.

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

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: FROM THE ORIGINS TO MODERN TIMES

1 Socio-psychological interpretation of interethnic conflict

2 Causes, typology and stages of the development of ethnic conflicts

Chapter II. INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS IN MODERN SOCIETY

1 Interethnic conflicts in society at the turn of the century

2 The experience of the modern state in resolving interethnic conflicts

CONCLUSION

LIST OF USED SOURCES

INTRODUCTION

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

We are all different, someone likes to read, someone likes to listen to music, someone likes 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 Turks. And for some reason, many of us take this difference too seriously, which has come to light in such directions as racism, nationalism.

There are practically no homogeneous states in the world today. Only 12 countries (9% of all states of 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 is between 50 and 70%, and in 39 countries (29.5%) hardly half of the population is ethnically homogeneous. 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, as a rule, none of the dictionaries has a specific definition of the word nation and 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 primordial Belarusians are fair-haired and have blue eyes. On a territorial basis, it is also not always possible to distinguish between a separate nation, because. as mentioned above, today only single states are considered homogeneous. Today it is customary to divide humanity into nations according to the most numerous ethnic group living on the territory of the state. So in Belarus they are Belarusians, in France - the French, in Belgium - the Belgians. However, even when this division is used, disagreements arise among world scientists about which ethnic group to which nation to attribute. And what can we say about people who are rather far from science? About people who do not fill their heads with tricky words, and who simply need a specific enemy to give vent to the discontent that has been accumulating for centuries. Such moments are captured by politicians, and they skillfully use this. With this approach, the problem seems to go beyond the sphere of competence of sociology proper; however, it is she who should be engaged in capturing such sentiments among certain groups of the population. The fact that such a function of it cannot be neglected is quite clearly shown by the flashing “hot spots” every now and then. Therefore, for the vast majority of even developed countries, it is vital from time to time to probe the soil in the "national question" and take appropriate measures. The problem is even more aggravated in the post-Soviet space, where ethno-political conflicts, which have found their expression 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 testify to disintegration destructive tendencies 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 ethno-national conflicts in various concrete historical, ethno-cultural conditions are of great importance in order to identify their causes, consequences, specifics, types, participation of various national, ethnic groups in them, methods of prevention and settlement.

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 THE ORIGINS TO MODERN TIMES

.1 Socio-psychological interpretation of interethnic conflict

Interethnic conflicts do not arise from scratch. As a rule, their appearance requires a certain shift in the habitual way of life, the 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 an older one that performed the function of group survival.

The action of this socio-psychological mechanism occurs as follows. When there is a threat 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; the mechanisms of socio-psychological protection are included in the form of processes of intra-group cohesion, intra-group favoritism, strengthening unity and out-group discrimination and isolation from strangers. These procedures lead to the distance and distortion of the images of outgroups. This type of relationship historically precedes all other types and is most deeply connected with the prehistory of mankind, with those psychological laws of the organization of social action that originated in the depths of anthropogenesis. These patterns develop and function through opposition on the basis of belonging to a tribe, to an ethnic group with a tendency to ethnocentrism, underestimation and belittling of the qualities of "foreign" groups and overestimation, elevation of the characteristics of one's own group along with dehumanization of the "foreign" group in a conflict.

The unification of a group on an ethnic basis occurs on the basis of:
preferences of their fellow tribesmen to "alien", newcomers, non-indigenous and strengthening the feeling of national solidarity; · protection of the territory of residence and the revival of a sense of territoriality for the titular nation, ethnic group;

· claims for redistribution of income;

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

All these signs have one advantage for group mass action - the visibility and self-evidence of 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 kind of social stereotype. Functioning within the group and being included in the dynamics of intergroup relations, the stereotype performs a regulatory and integrative function for the subjects of social action in resolving social contradictions. It is these properties of a social stereotype, ethnic in particular, that make it an effective regulator of any social relations, when these relations are reduced to interethnic ones in the conditions of exacerbation of contradictions.

At the same time, the regulation of intergroup relations with the help of an ethnic stereotype acquires, as it were, an independent existence and psychologically returns social relations to the historical past, when group egoism suppressed the sprouts of future universal human dependence in the simplest and most ancient way - by destroying, suppressing heterogeneity in behavior, values, thoughts. This "return to the past" allows the ethnic stereotype at the same time to 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 claim the same benefits and territory (as, for example, the Ingush and the North Ossetians), in the context 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 be expressed 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 increase in the tendency to use the media as a weapon in the escalation of psychosis and confrontation among the general population;

· distorted perception of information about each other;

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

· the formation of an orientation towards victory in the conflict by forceful methods due to 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 its transition to a more acute stage.

1.2 Causes, typology and stages of development of ethnic conflicts

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

Researchers based on collective action focus on the responsibility of elites fighting with the help of mobilization around the ideas put forward by them for power and resources. In more modernized societies, intellectuals with professional training became members of the elite, in traditional societies, nobleness, 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 enmity. In situations of tension, ideas are created about the features of peoples that impede communication - the “messianicity” of Russians, the “inherited militancy” of Chechens, as well as the hierarchy of peoples with whom one can or cannot “deal with”.

The concept of "clash of civilizations" by S. Huntington enjoys great influence in the West. It explains modern conflicts, in particular recent acts of international terrorism, by confessional differences. In Islamic, Confucian, Buddhist and Orthodox cultures, the ideas of Western civilization - liberalism, equality, legality, human rights, the market, democracy, the separation of church and state - do not seem to find a response.

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

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

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

First of all, many ethno-national conflicts can be called false because of the high component of an emotional nature. Too high a degree of emotional saturation 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 displaced conflicts, since often the antagonism of interests is directed at an ethnic group that is not really a participant in the conflict, but replaces any other interests and considerations. So often national map is played out in the struggle of ethnopolitical 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 understanding, different attitudes to life realities, 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 distinguish two more principles of typology of ethnic conflicts: one - according to the nature and mode of action of the conflicting parties, and the second - according to the content of conflicts, the main goals set by the party making claims.

E.A. Pain and A. A. Popov highlight the 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 the conflict of ideas. The characteristic features of such conflicts (or their stages) is the advancement of certain claims. In the literature, the media substantiates historical law on statehood, as was the case, for example, in Estonia, Lithuania, Georgia, Tatarstan and other republics of the USSR, and on 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, the adoption of institutional decisions up to open clashes. It could be objected that such a typology is a reflection of the stages or forms of conflicts. But that would be inaccurate. In defense of the authors of such a typology, we can say that there are conflicts that remain only conflict of ideas . In the early 1970s there were demonstrations with slogans in Chicago, but no action followed.

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

The first type is institutional status conflicts in the union republics that have developed into a struggle for independence. The essence of such conflicts may not be ethno-national, but the ethnic parameter is certainly present in them, and mobilization along the ethnic principle is also present. Thus, the national movements in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova from the very beginning put forward demands for the realization of ethno-national interests. In the process of development of these movements, the casual basis of conflicts changed and moved from ethno-national to state ones, but mobilization along the ethnic principle remained. The main form of this type of conflict was institutional. A sharp 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 the resources and the supremacy of the laws of the republic. Status conflicts were also conflicts in the union and autonomous republics, autonomous regions for raising the status of the republic or obtaining it. This is typical for a part 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 conflict is ethnoterritorial. These tend to be the most difficult confrontations to resolve. About 200 ethno-territorial disputes were recorded on the territory of the former USSR for the period of 1992. According to V.N. Streletsky (Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences), one of the developers of the Data Bank of Ethnoterritorial Claims in the Geospace of the Former USSR, by 1996, 140 territorial claims remained relevant. Such conflicts include disputes that are ongoing on behalf of ethnic communities regarding their rights to reside in a particular territory, to own or manage it. VN 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 in relation to the repressed peoples. Nevertheless, conflicts connected with repressed peoples are a special type of ethnic confrontation. Only a part of such conflicts is connected with the restoration of territorial autonomy (Volga Germans, Crimean Tatars), in relation to others there was a question of legal, social, cultural rehabilitation (Greeks, Koreans, etc.). And only in a number of cases we are talking about territorial disputes.

Another type is intergroup (intercommunal) conflicts. It is this type of conflicts that are similar to those in Yakutia (1986), in Tuva (1990), Russian-Estonian in Estonia and Russian-Latvian in Latvia, Russian-Moldovan in Moldova. Mass inter-group violent clashes took place in Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.

Along with the above, typology based on the content of conflicts and the target aspirations of the parties is becoming more widespread in the literature. Often different goals and content are combined in one conflict. For example, the Karabakh conflict is a conflict associated with territorial disputes, and with an increase in the status of autonomy, and with 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 are conflicts within the state. These include:

· conflicts involving Aboriginal minorities;

· conflicts involving alien communities;

· conflicts involving forcibly displaced minorities (Crimean Tatars);

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

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

.Territorial conflicts, often closely related to the reunification of ethnic groups 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 the political and military support of 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. Such is the situation in Abkhazia, partly in Transnistria;

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

Conflicts based on the claims of a state 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 you know, were included in these two states when they declared their independence, and in the 40s passed to the RSFSR;

Conflicts arising from the consequences of arbitrary territorial changes carried out during the Soviet period. First of all, this is the problem of the Crimea and, potentially, a territorial settlement in Central Asia;

Conflicts as a result of clashes of economic interests, when the national contradictions that come to the surface are in fact the interests of the ruling political elites, dissatisfied with their share in the nationwide 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, due to the traditions of many years of national liberation struggle against the mother country. For example, the confrontation between the Confederation of the Peoples of the Caucasus and the Russian authorities:

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

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

It is also important to take into account the stages of the development of ethnic conflicts, as well as those main forces and movements that act on them and determine their course, for understanding the characteristics of specific situations and developing measures to resolve them. It allows you to reveal in more detail the process and mechanisms of their determination, allows you to show that the emergence of national-patriotic and especially national-radical movements transfers an 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 a preparation for the next stage - conflict actions, which become more and more violent as the conflict becomes more acute. With the accumulation of victims and losses, the conflict at this stage becomes less and less manageable and civilized solvable. Thus, the development of interethnic confrontation is increasingly bringing the conflict to the point where a national catastrophe may follow, and therefore measures to weaken and pacify it as soon as possible, 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 put into action make it possible to neutralize the nationalist attitudes and aspirations of their participants, to help each of them move from tough or even violent opposition of national communities and their representatives to effective and coordinated interaction with them for the sake of joint satisfaction of 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 a specific area of ​​interethnic relations.

The main problem at present is the creation of a special and branched ethno-conflictological expertise, the main task of which should be to track the origin and development of conflict processes based on analysis and, depending on their nature, put forward reasonable proposals for their localization, rationalization and settlement through compromise or consensus technologies.

At present, the greatest organizational difficulties in the settlement and prevention of ethno-national conflicts and confrontations are associated with the absence in the CIS states, including the Russian Federation, of an extensive specialized network of organizations for the prevention and settlement of internal conflicts. Most of all, there is a lack of institutions that monitor the development of the ethno-political situation in society, early diagnosis and forecasting of conflicts, as well as the absence 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 zone, organize the negotiation process, as well as intensively teach people 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 groups of the population 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 managerial influences on these situations in order to resolve them. Justifying the need for a fundamental rejection of methods of violence in relations between ethnic groups that impede the democratization of society and pull it back, those participating in the mediation of conflictology would have the opportunity to help restore the rights and significance of the values ​​of human existence, strengthen the foundations of life and activity of society, and thereby return its true meaning , and social conflicts - positive social significance and function.

An important role in this regard should be played by the formalization of the results of conflict analysis in the form of an appropriate examination of interethnic conflict situations and collisions and its transformation on this basis into a specific technological procedure that makes it possible to bring the results of conflict analysis to their practical demand and use to regulate and resolve real conflict clashes.

The general task of this kind of expertise is to promote the establishment of conflict monitoring and management in interethnic relations as effective tools that allow you to track the emergence of conflict situations, identify their level of tension, dynamics, the nature of the actions of the conflicting parties, etc., and on this basis to develop and implement measures to prevent and resolve conflicts, stabilize social relations and promote reforms.

Many zones of interethnic tension have formed, which, under certain conditions, threaten to escalate or have already escalated into open clashes, including those of an armed nature, causing numerous casualties and destruction. Currently, experts have over 200 such zones, most of which fall 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 the tension is on the verge of possible escalation into open inter-ethnic confrontations or is approaching it;

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

Common to all three zones is that everywhere interethnic tension, and even more so conflicts, especially with the use of armed violence, make it difficult to carry out socio-economic and political transformations, 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 of social control over the development of interethnic conflicts and the measures for their effective settlement and prevention should have significant differences. Interethnic relations are especially acute in the autonomous republics and other national-territorial subjects of the Russian Federation, since it is there that the idea is growing that only the strengthening of sovereignty can ensure national interests.

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

At the same time, the main problem around which should rotate all modern conflictological expertise, the problem of ensuring social partnership as the main way to resolve social conflicts in general, ethno-political conflicts in particular, is advocated.

Ethno-conflictological expertise and the conflictological monitoring and management that forms its basis are ultimately designed 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 of 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 in prosperous states, 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 consequently, into two nations. Great Britain can serve as an example, where the process of institutionalization of the Scottish, Ulster and Welsh autonomies and their transformation into subnations is taking place. In Belgium, the actual emergence of two sub-nations based on the Walloon and Flemish ethnic groups is also observed. Even in prosperous France, everything is not as calm in ethno-national terms as it seems at first glance. It is 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 not so unsuccessful attempts to revive the Provencal language and identity, despite the centuries-old tradition of assimilation of the latter.

And in the United States, they record how, literally before our very eyes, the once united American nation begins to divide into a number of regional ethno-cultural blocks - embryonic ethnic groups. This appears not only in the language, which shows a division into several dialects, but also in the self-consciousness, which acquires different features in different groups of Americans. Even the rewriting of history is recorded - in different ways 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 ethno-national division, as happened in Russia.

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

Ulster conflict

As you know, at the beginning of the century, 6 Irish counties, after lengthy clashes, became part of the United Kingdom, and 26 counties formed Ireland proper. The population of Ulster is clearly divided not only along ethnic lines (Irish - British), but also along religious lines (Catholics - Protestants). To this day, the Ulster issue remains open as the Catholic community suffers from government-created inequalities. Although housing, education, and other areas have improved in the last 20 years, inequalities in work remain. Catholics are more likely to be unemployed than Protestants. Therefore, only in 1994 did the armed clashes between the Irish Republican Army and paramilitary organizations called the "British Army" stop. More than 3,800 people became victims of the clashes; given that the population of the island is approximately 5 million and that of Northern Ireland is 1.6 million, this is a significant figure.

The fermentation of minds does not stop even today, and another factor is the civilian police, which still consists of 97% Protestants. An explosion that took place in 1996 near one of the military bases again increased distrust and suspicion among members of the two communities. And public opinion is not yet completely ready to put an end to the image of the enemy. Catholic and Protestant neighborhoods are separated by brick "peace walls". In the Catholic quarters, on the walls of the houses you can see huge paintings that testify to violence by the British.

From Kosovo to Northern Cyprus

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

At the beginning of March of this year, a unique in many respects study by political scientist Fuad Gadzhiev “Independence de facto. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. This study largely breaks the trend towards the defense of the Greek and Greek Cypriot point of view on events that took place 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 the Eastern Mediterranean. 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 Russia's presence on both sides of the Cyprus conflict.

It is obvious that 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 civil identity. At the same time, the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, which arose in 1960, was based on a bicommunity and provided equal rights to both peoples. However, the Greek majority of the island, which accounted for 82 percent of the population, did not agree with the unfair, in his opinion, 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 the status of a minority and stood up for the fulfillment of the terms of the Cypriot Constitution.

In 1963, the Greek majority made an attempt to deprive the Turks of the rights granted to them by the Constitution. The Turks were removed from the 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 to themselves. In connection with the agreements reached earlier, which prohibited 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 was under the control of the Turkish armed forces. This action of Ankara led to the fall of the military regime in Athens. After that, 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 persists to this day.

During the 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 should be federal, bicommunal and bizonal. However, the different vision 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 see it as a confederation of two independent states. The contradictions between the communities on this issue led to the proclamation by the Turkish community in 1983 of the independent Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) - the first unrecognized state in post-war Europe. 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 an independent state. It enjoys the full diplomatic, economic and military support of this state. Negotiations on the settlement of the Cyprus problem are being conducted within the framework of the good offices mission of the UN Secretary General, established in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 186. However, there is practically 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 used by Greece and the Republic of Cyprus, which joined the EU as a full member. In this regard, it should be noted the change in the leadership of the TRNC, which was largely facilitated by the United States, Great Britain and Turkey. 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 in international relations by Turkey and the TRNC. 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 circumstances of a geopolitical nature launched the process of actual recognition of the TRNC by the world community. The USA, Great Britain, France, some OIC countries began to recognize TRNC passports. The same countries have representative offices in the northern part of the island, partially performing diplomatic functions. There are 22 diplomatic, trade and honorary representations of the TRNC in 17 countries of the world. Bilateral contacts of the TRNC with the EU, the Council of Europe, the OIC are expanding; leaders and officials of this unrecognized state are received at a high state level in the USA, Great Britain, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and other countries of the world. This situation was the result of not only efforts to achieve recognition of the TRNC, made by the Turkish Cypriot side, its allies. 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 legal 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. Chief among them is that "the Serbs are to blame as a people." This openly racist and anti-Serb formula, by the way, was invented and publicly defended by none other than the UN Special Representative for Kosovo Marti 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 - "the Greeks are to blame as a people." It is obvious that it is unacceptable and even shameful for anyone to use such arguments in the 21st century, especially for politicians who have power, authority and appropriate powers. Recognition of an "independent Kosovo" became possible only because the United States, having decided that they had won the Cold War, believed in their own infallibility, believing that only their political system had the right to exist. Therefore, any disagreement with the position of Washington is immediately declared "trampling on freedom and democracy." In reality, there is neither freedom nor democracy in such behavior. The events around Kosovo have become the clearest embodiment of this style of behavior, based on the principle of "what I want, I turn back."

At the same time, the American president, who predetermined back in June 2007 that Kosovo's independence was inevitable, and all those who supported him, for the sake of elementary objectivity and justice, should also 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 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 confused 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 Bosniaks made up 43.7% of the population, Serbs 31.4%, Croats 17.3%. 61.5% of Montenegrins lived in Montenegro, 77.9% were Croats in Croatia, 65.8% were Serbs in Serbia, these are with autonomous regions: Vojvodina, Kosovo and Metohija. Without them, in Serbia, Serbs accounted for 87.3%. In Slovenia, Slovenes make up 87.6%. Thus, representatives of ethnic groups of other titular nationalities, as well as a significant number of Hungarians, Turks, Italians, Bulgarians, Greeks, Gypsies and Romanians, also lived in each of the republics.

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

The linguistic factor also played an important role. About 70% of the population of the former Yugoslavia spoke Serbo-Croatian or, as they say, Croatian-Serbian. These are primarily Serbs, Croats, Montenegrins, 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 the 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 ones. Books and magazines were published. However, in recent decades the language has become the subject of political speculation.

The economic factor must also be taken into account. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro and the autonomous province of Kosovo lagged behind Serbia in economic development. This led to differences in the income of various national groups and increased the contradictions between them. The economic crisis, years of unemployment, severe inflation, devaluation of the dinar intensified the centrifugal tendencies in the country, especially in the early 80s. There are dozens more reasons for the collapse of the Yugoslav state, but one way or another, by the end of 1989, the one-party system disintegrated, and after the parliamentary elections in 1990-1991. hostilities began in Slovenia and Croatia in June 1991, and in April 1992 a civil war broke out in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was accompanied by ethnic cleansing, the creation of concentration camps, and robberies. To date, the "peacekeepers" have achieved an end to open fighting, but the situation in the Balkans today remains complex and explosive.

Another hotbed of tension arose in the province of Kosovo and Metohija - on the original Serbian lands, the cradle of Serbian history and culture, where, due to historical conditions, demographic, migration processes, the dominant population is Albanians (90 - 95%), who claim to separate from Serbia and create independent state. The situation for the Serbs is aggravated by the fact that the region borders on Albania and Albanian-populated regions of Macedonia. 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 the state that coincides with the name of one of the regions of Greece. Bulgaria has claims to Macedonia because of the status of the Macedonian language, considering it as a dialect of Bulgarian.

Serb-Croatian relations are aggravated. This is due to the position of the Serbs in Croatia. The Serbs, forced to stay in Croatia, change their nationality, surnames, accept Catholicism. Dismissal from work 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 the countries of the "third world". Interethnic conflicts in Africa

With a population of 120 million, Nigeria is home to over 200 ethnic groups, each with its own language. English remains the official language in the country. After the civil war 1967-1970. national strife remained one of the most dangerous diseases in Nigeria, as, indeed, in all of Africa. It blew up many states of the continent from within. In Nigeria, even today there are ethnic clashes between the Yoruba people from the southern part of the country, Christians, Hauss, and Muslims from the north. Given the economic and political backwardness of the state (the entire history of Nigeria after gaining political independence in 1960 is an alternation of military coups and civilian rule), the consequences of constantly flaring conflicts can be unpredictable. So, 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 residents of the city left their homes in search of shelter.

Unfortunately, racial conflicts between representatives of "white" (Arab) and "black" Africa are also a harsh reality. In the same 2000, a wave of pogroms broke out in Libya, leading to hundreds of victims. About 15 thousand black Africans left their country, which is 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 speeches, although such settlements would greatly boost the Somali economy.

Moluccan conflict

In modern Indonesia, more than 350 different ethnic groups live together, the relationship of which has evolved over the centuries-old history of this largest archipelago in the world, which is a kind of geographical, cultural and historical community. The economic crisis that broke out 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 interethnic contradictions smoldered, as a rule, implicitly, openly expressing itself usually only in periodic Chinese pogroms. Meanwhile, the democratization of Indonesian society that began in May 1998 led to an increase in the freedom of expression of various ethnic groups, which, coupled with the weakening of the central government and a sharp drop in the influence of the army and its ability to influence events on the ground, led to an explosion of inter-ethnic contradictions in various parts of Indonesia. The most bloody 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 Molucca (Moluccas), the city of Ambon. Already in the first two months in various parts of the province there were hundreds of dead and wounded, tens of thousands of refugees and huge material losses. And all this in the province, which was considered almost exemplary in Indonesia in terms of the relationship between various groups of the population. At the same time, the specificity of this conflict is that, having begun mainly as interethnic, aggravated by religious differences, the Ambon conflict gradually turned into an interreligious one, between local Muslims and Christians, and threatens to blow up 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 on Ambon this ratio is 47% and 43%, respectively, which does not allow either one side 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 contradictions appeared on the island in the first decades of independence, and every year they intensified. The fact is that the Sinhalese people come from North India and mainly profess Buddhism; The Tamils ​​came from South India, and the predominant religion among them is Hinduism. There is no record of which ethnic groups first settled the island. The 1948 constitution created a parliamentary state. It had a bicameral parliament, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. According to the constitution, the Sinhalese language was proclaimed the main state language. This sharply aggravated relations between the Sinhalese and Tamil sides, and government policy was by no means conducive to appeasing the Tamils. In the 1977 elections, the Sinhalese won 140 out of 168 seats in parliament, and Tamil became an official language along with English, while Sinhalese remained the official language. No other significant concessions were made by the government regarding the Tamils. Moreover, the president extended for another 6 years the term of the parliament, which remained without a significant representation of the Tamils ​​in it.

In July 1983, anti-Tamil riots took place in the capital Colombo and other cities. The Tamils ​​responded by killing 13 Sinhalese soldiers. This led to more violence: 2,000 Tamils ​​were killed and 100,000 were forced to flee their homes. A full-scale ethnic conflict began, which continues today. Tamils ​​are now receiving great financial support from compatriots who have emigrated from the country and have the status of political refugees in various countries of the world. The members of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam are heavily armed. Their number is from 3 to 5 thousand people. Attempts by the Sri Lankan leadership with fire and sword to destroy the grouping did not lead to anything. Collisions 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 The experience of the modern state in resolving ethnic conflicts

For the normal development of the state, it is necessary not only to identify problems, but also to constructively solve them. 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 state 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 fail to mention positive shifts in this direction.

The most important step towards resolving ethnic conflicts is the awareness of the existence of the problem not only by ethnic communities, but also by government bodies, which usually entails a transition from a verbal habit to legal, political and financial forms of its solution. All subjects and objects of the national conflict must understand that the ethnic factor today has acquired a pronounced political significance. This includes regionalism in national-political thinking, the desire within one federation to solve the national problems of its region in its own way, 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 enterprising people striving to remove national and national-state obstacles in 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, national autonomy is more important for national minorities (an example of this is Kosovo). Many experts believe that in the 21st century it is necessary to address the issues of the formation of new autonomous regions, districts, national regions 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, one should not forget that, as a rule, the most acute issue in the framework of granting autonomy is the issue of changing borders and administrative territories.

Along 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 in order 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 in the practice of upbringing and education of their original folk systems, including systems for 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 the danger for folk culture. Of course, laws and, in general, state support for the policy of preserving and developing national minorities, their natural and cultural resources, are called upon to play a particularly important role. At the same time, it is necessary to support the thesis about the need to conduct 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 the state national policy.

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

When forming a regional national policy, the main efforts, according to scientists and practitioners, should 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, sociocultural issues become the core of programs for solving national problems and preventing interethnic conflicts.

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

· preservation and development of the existing cultural potential;

· formation of a new mechanism of cultural continuity;

· exploiting the commercial potential of national cultures;

· solving the problems of teaching national languages;

· development of a comprehensive program of 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 strip 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, freely move around the territory of our people, feel our equality in society, regardless of skin color, eye shape or religious views. Today it is almost impossible, despite the fact that most of the world's population wants it with all their hearts.

Undoubtedly, ethnic conflicts are an integral part of modern politics, because. the problem of ethnic conflicts requires an immediate solution. It is state regulation and state stability in the field of nations' politics that can give a positive impetus to solving a problem that has existed practically since the emergence of civilizations. Unfortunately, today no country can boast of the complete elimination of this problem, at least in its own territory.

Every day all over the world, numerous organizations, together with various politicians and government officials, take 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 USED SOURCES

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

www.en.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,. Ya.M. Drobizheva "Ethnosociology: past and new horizons"// Sotsis.- 2000.- No. 4.

I. Ivanov "The Kosovo crisis: a year later"// Dipkurier NG. - 2000. - No. 5

Galina Starovoitova, "National Self-Determination: Approaches and Case Study", 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 learning a topic?

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