August 18, 2005 in the village of Yandyki Astrakhan regionkalmykov collisions were collided with Chechens, caused by the murder in the mass fight of the young man-Kalmyk. After the funeral, 300 Kalmykov moved along the village, beating Chechens and setting together their homes. Later 12 Chechens and one Kalmyk were sentenced to imprisonment on the timing of two and a half to seven years.
June 25, 2006 in the city of Salsk (Rostov region)a quarrel because of the girl turned into a mass brawl of local residents with people from Dagestan. One resident was shot. The townspeople spent several rallies against Caucasians and the inaction of the authorities. Six Dagestanis accused of organizing fights and murder were justified by jury.
On the night of August 30, 2006 in karelian city of Kondopogatwo local residents were slaughtered in a fight with natives of the Caucasus. Their funerals resulted in pogroms, for participation in which more than 200 people were detained. Two local brawl insters received 8 months and 3 years 6 months in prison, six Caucasians - from 3 years 10 months to 22 years in prison.
July 25, 2010 in the Health Camp "Don" in the Krasnodar Territory A fight occurred between the resting from Chechnya and the locals, in which about 150 people participated. The reason was the conflict between Chechen adolescents and deputy director of the camp. In March 2012, six participants of the fight received two years conditionally.
December 11, 2010 in Moscow on Manezh Square Up to 20 thousand football fans gathered, dissatisfied with the investigation of the murder of the "Spartak" fan of Egor Sviridov, who died in a fight with Caucasians. As a result, 35 people were injured, 65 people were detained. During the next days, the unrest poured into separate clashes in different parts of Moscow. The killer of Egor Sviridov received 20 years in prison, five more people - for 5 years.
July 1, 2011 in the village of Sagra With 40 km from Yekaterinburg there was a shootout between the locals and the armed group of immigrants from the Caucasus. The latter came to the village to help the Gypsy family, with which local conflict, suspecting it in drug trafficking. As a result of the collision, a native of Azerbaijan was mortally injured. The Sagrinet's shot of him received the status of the victim, while 23 visits were charged with banditiism, participation in riots, the threat of murder.
July 7, 2013 in the murder of a local resident in the city of Pugacheva (Saratov region) It turned out in protest speeches, gathered several thousand people. The accusation of murder was charged with four Chechens, later they were sentenced to time from 3 years 6 months to 14 years of imprisonment.
October 13, 2013 People's gathering of residents metropolitan Biryulyovo, provoked by the murder of Muscovite Egor Shcherbakov, converts to unrest and pogroms against illegal migrants. 23 people were injured, 380 detained, about 70 were administratively punished. About 200 foreigners were deported for violation of migration legislation.
Throughout the history of our planet, peoples and whole countries were hosting. This led to the formation of conflicts, whose scales were truly global. The nature of life itself provokes to survival the strongest and most adapted. But, unfortunately, the king of nature ruins not only everything around, but also destroys themselves like.
All major changes on the planet over the past few thousand years are associated with human activity. Maybe the desire to conflict with yourself similar has a genetic basis? One way or another, but it will be difficult to recall this point in time when the world would be reigned everywhere.
Conflicts carry pain and suffering, but almost all of them are still localized in some geographic or professional field. In the end, such skirmishes end with interference with someone stronger or successful achievement of a compromise.
However, the most destructive conflicts include the greatest number of peoples, countries and just people. Classic in history are the two world wars that occurred in the past century. However, there were a lot of other truly global conflicts about which it was time to remember.
Thirty-year war. These events occurred between 1618 and 1648 in Central Europe. For the continent, it was the first global military conflict in history, which touched almost all countries, including even Russia. And the skirmish began with religious clashes in Germany between Catholics and Protestants, which turned into the fight against the hegemony of Habsburgs in Europe. Catholic Spain, the Sacred Roman Empire, as well as the Czech Republic, Hungary and Croatia faced a strong opponent in the face of Sweden, England and Scotland, France, Danish-Norwegian Union and the Netherlands. There were many controversial territories in Europe, which was heated by the conflict. The war ended with the signing of the Westphalian world. He, in fact, ended with feudal and medieval Europe, setting new boundaries of the main parties. And from the point of view of hostilities, the main damage suffered Germany. Only there were up to 5 million people, the Swedes destroyed almost all metallurgy, a third of the cities. It is believed that Germany recovered from demographic losses only after 100 years.
Second Congolese War. In 1998-2002, the Great African War unfolded on the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This conflict has become the most destructive among numerous wars on the Black Continent over the past half century. The war initially arose between the pro-government and forces and the militias against the regime of the president. The destructive nature of the conflict was associated with the participation of neighboring countries. In total, more than twenty armed groups were involved in the war, which were represented by nine countries! Namibia, Chad, Zimbabwe and Angola supported the legitimate government, and Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi - rebels, who sought to seize power. The conflict officially ended in 2002 after the signing of a peace agreement. However, this agreement looked fragile and temporary. Currently, a new war rages in the Congo again, despite the presence of peacekeepers in the country. And the global conflict itself in 1998-2002 was due to the life of more than 5 million people, becoming the most deadly since the Second World War. At the same time, most of the victims fell from hunger and disease.
Napoleonic wars. Under such a collective name, those hostilities that Napoleon led since his consulate in 1799 and to the renunciation in 1815 were known. The main confrontation was formed between France and the United Kingdom. As a result, combat battles between them were manifested in a whole series of sea battles in different parts of the globe, as well as a large ground war in Europe. On the side of Napoleon, who excited gradually Europe, performed and allies - Spain, Italy, Holland. The coalition of the Allies constantly changed, in 1815 Napoleon fell before the forces of the seventh composition. The decline of Napoleon was associated with the failures on the Pyrenees and a trip to Russia. In 1813, the emperor gave way to Germany, and in 1814 and France. The final episode of the conflict was the battle of Waterloo, lost by Napoleon. In general, those war took from 4 to 6 million people on both sides.
Civil War in Russia. These events occurred in the territory of the former Russian Empire in the period between 1917 and 1922. For several centuries, the country was controlled by the kings, but in the fall of 1917 the authorities captured the Bolsheviks led by Lenin and Trotsky. After the storming of the Winter Palace, they removed the temporary government. The country, which took part in the first world, immediately pulled into a new one, this time the internecine conflict. The People's Red Army was opposed by the Protsary Forces, who had been restored by the former regime, and nationalists who solved their local tasks. In addition, the Entente decided to support anti-Bolshevik forces, landing in Russia. The war raged in the north - the British landed in Arkhangelsk, in the east - the plated Czechoslovak Corps rebelled, in the south - the uprisings of the Cossacks and the campaigns of the Volunteer Army, and the West was almost all under the terms of the Brest world, Germany was departed. For five years of fierce fighting, the Bolsheviks broke the scattered forces of the enemy. The civil war split the country - after all, political views made even native to fight against each other. Soviet Russia came out of the conflict in the ruins. Rural production has decreased by 40%, almost all intelligentsia was destroyed, and the level of industry decreased by 5 times. In total during the civil war, more than 10 million people died, another 2 million in a hurry left Russia.
Taipin's uprising. And again it will be about the Civil War. This time she broke out in China in 1850-1864. In the country, the Hong Sucuan Christian has formed the Taith Heavenly Kingdom. This state existed in parallel with the Manychur Empire of Qing. Revolutionaries took almost all southern China with a population of 30 million people. Taipins began to conduct their sharp social transformations, including religious. The uprising this led to a series of like in other parts of the Qing Empire. The country was split into several areas that announced their own independence. Taipins took such major cities as Wuhan and Nanjing, and Shanghai also occupied the sympathetic troops. The rebels even made trips to Beijing. However, all the relaxation that Taipina was given to the peasants were reduced to "no" tightening war. By the end of the 1860s it became clear that the Qing dynasty could not end the rebels. Then the Western countries pursued their interests entered into the fight against Taithines. Only thanks to the British and French, the revolutionary movement was suppressed. This war led to a huge number of victims - from 20 to 30 million people.
World War I. The First World War laid the beginning of modern wars as we know them. This global conflict took place from 1914 to 1918. Prerequisites for the beginning of the war were contradictions between the greatest powers of Europe - Germany, England, Austria-Hungary, France and Russia. By 1914, two blocks were formed - Anntan (United Kingdom, France and the Russian Empire) and the Tripal Union (Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy). The reason for the start of hostilities was the murder of the Austrian Erzgertzog Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. In 1915, Italy joined the war on the side of the Entente, but Turks and Bulgarians joined Germany. Even countries such as China, Cuba, Brazil, Japan made on the side of the Entente. By the beginning of the war in the army of the parties there were more than 16 million people. Tanks and airplanes appeared on the battlefields. The First World War has ended with the signing of the Versailles Agreement on June 28, 1919. As a result of this conflict, four empires disappeared from the political map: Russian, German, Austria-Hungary and Ottoman. Germany turned out to be so weakened and geographically trimmed that it was gone by the revenge on the Nazis. The participating countries have lost more than 10 million killed soldiers, more than 20 million civilians died due to hunger and epidemics. Another 55 million people were injured.
Korean war. Today it seems that on the Korean Peninsula, a new war will break up. And the situation is such a beginning to make shape in the early 1950s. After the end of World War II, Korea turned out to be divided into separate northern and southern territories. The first adhered to the Communist Course with the support of the USSR, and the latter were influenced by America. For several years, relations between the parties were very tense, until Northene decided to invade their neighbors in order to unite the nation. At the same time, the Communist Koreans supported not only the Soviet Union, but also the PRC with the help of his volunteers. And on the side of the South, in addition to the United States also the United Kingdom and the UN peacekeeping forces. After a year of active hostilities, it became clear that the situation went to a dead end. Each party had a millionth army, and speech could not be a decisive advantage. Only in 1953 was signed a cease-fire agreement, the front line was fixed at the level of the 38th parallels. A peace treaty that would formally completed the war and was not signed. The conflict destroyed 80% of the entire infrastructure of Korea, several million people died. This war only aggravated the confrontation of the Soviet Union and the United States.
Holy Crusades. Under this title, military trips in the XI-XV centuries are known. Medieval Christian kingdoms with religious motivation opposed the Muslim peoples who inhabited sacred land in the Middle East. First of all, Europeans wanted to free Jerusalem, but then the cross passes began to pursue political and religious goals in other lands. Young warriors from all over Europe performed against Muslims in modern Turkey, Palestine and Israel, protecting their faith. This global movement was of great importance to the continent. First of all, it turned out to be a weakened Eastern Empire, which eventually fell under the power of the Turks. The crusaders themselves brought home the many Oriental will accept traditions. Hiking led to rapprochement and classes, and nation. In Europe, the sprouts of unity were originated. It was the crosses that created the ideal of the knight. The most important consequence of the conflict is the penetration of the culture of the East to the West. Also, the development of navigation, trade. On the number of victims due to many years of conflict between Europe and Asia, you can only guess, but this is undoubtedly millions of people.
Mongolian conquest. In the XIII-XIV centuries, the conquest of Mongols led to the creation of an unprecedented empire, which had even genetic influence on some ethnic groups. Mongols captured a huge territory at nine and a half million square miles. The empire spread from Hungary to the East-China Sea. Expansion lasted over one and a half centuries. Many territories were devastated, cities and cultural monuments were destroyed. Genghis Khan became the most famous figure of Mongols. It is believed that it was he who united the eastern nomadic tribes, which made it possible to create such an impressive force. In the captured areas there were such states as the Golden Horde, the country of hoolugidov, the empire yuan. The number of human lives that expansion took is from 30 to 60 million.
The Second World War. It passed only a little more than twenty years after the end of the First World War, as the next global conflict broke out. The Second World War has become, without a doubt, the largest military event in the history of mankind. In the troops of opponents, there were up to 100 million people who represented the 61 state (of the 73 all existing at that time). The conflict lasted from 1939 to 1945. He began in Europe from the invasion of German troops into the territory of his neighbors (Czechoslovakia and Poland). It became clear that the German dictator Adolf Hitler is committed to world domination. The war of Nazi Germany declared the United Kingdom with its colonies, as well as France. The Germans were able to capture almost the entire Central and Western Europe, but the attack on the Soviet Union was for Hitler's fatal. And in 1941, after an attack on the US, an ally of Germany, Japan, America entered war. The conflict theater was three continents and four oceans. Ultimately, the war ended with defeat and the surrender of Germany, Japan and their allies. And the United States still managed to use the latest weapon - a nuclear bomb. It is believed that the total number of military and civil victims on both sides is about 75 million people. As a result of the war, Western Europe lost a leading role in politics, and the United States and the USSR were world leaders. The war showed that the colonial empires have already become irrelevant, which led to the emergence of new independent countries.
Today, the following conflicts are typical for Russia:
- "status" conflicts of the Russian republics with the federal government, caused by the desire of the republics to achieve a larger amount of rights or in general, independent states;
Territorial conflicts between the constituent entities of the Federation;
Internal (occurring within the subjects of the Federation) Ethnopolitical conflicts associated with real contradictions between the interests of various ethnic groups. These are mainly contradictions between the title nations and the Russian (Russian-speaking), as well as not the "titular" population in the republics
A number of foreign and domestic researchers believe that inter-ethnic conflicts in Russia occur often between the two main types of civilizations, which characterize the European essence of the country - Western Christian as a basis and southern Islamic. Another classification of Russian "pain points" is based on the degree of acute conflict:
Zones of acute crisis (military conflicts or balancing on their face) - North Ossetia - Ingushetia;
Potentially crisis situations (Krasnodar Territory). Here, the main factor in interethnic conflict is the migration processes, as a result of which the situation is exacerbated;
Zones of strong regional separatism (Tatarstan, Bashkortostan);
Zones of secondary regional separatism (Komi Republic);
Zones sluggish current separatism (Siberia, Far East, a number of republics of the Volga region, Karelia, etc.).
Nevertheless, regardless of which group, the researchers of this or that conflict situation will be treated, it has quite real and sad consequences. In 2000, V. Putin stated in the message of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly: "For several years, the population of the country's population is on average annually decreased by 750 thousand people. And if you believe forecasts, and the forecasts are based on the real work of people who understand it - Already after 15 years, Russians can be less than 22 million people. If the current trend continues, the survival of the nation will be threatened. "
Of course, such a high concentration of "pain points" is due primarily to the extremely multinational composition of the population, and therefore much depends on the general government, since all the time new and new foci of discontent will be opened.
Inter-ethnic tension in a number of regions will be maintained due to the fact that there are still no issues of the federal device, equalizing the rights of the subjects of the Federation. Considering the fact that Russia is formed both in the territorial and ethnonational sign, the refusal of the extraterritorial principle of Russian federalism in favor of exterritorial cultural and national contradictions and can lead to conflicts.
Along with the ethnic factor, the economic factor is very important. An example of this can serve as a critical situation in the Russian economy. Here, the essence of social conflicts, on the one hand, is the struggle between the layers of society, whose interests express the progressive needs of the development of productive forces, and, on the other, are different conservative, partly corrupt elements. The main conquests of restructuring - democratization, publicity, expansion of republics and regions and others - gave people the opportunity to openly express their own and not only their thoughts at rallies, demonstrations, in mass communication. However, most people are psychologically, morally were not prepared for their new social status. And all this led to conflicts in the sphere of consciousness. As a result, "Freedom", being used by people with low levels of political and general culture to create non-free social, ethnic, religious, language groups, turned out to be a prerequisite for the most acute conflicts, accompanied by terror, pogroms, arson, the expulsion of non-saying citizens "someone else's" national affiliation .
One of the forms of conflicts often includes another and exposed transformation, ethnic or political camouflage. Thus, the political struggle "For the national self-determination" of the peoples of the North, which the autonomy authorities are leading in Russia, is nothing more than ethnic camouflage, because they defend the interests of not an aboriginal population, but the elites of household in the face of the center. For example, the political camouflage can be attributed, for example, events in Tajikistan, where the rivalry of Tajik sub-ethnic groups and the conflict between the groups of the peoples of the Mountain Badakhshan and the dominant Tajiks are hidden under the outer rhetoric "Islamic Democratic" opposition against conservatives and part-time. Thus, many collisions are more likely to take ethnic color due to the multinational composition of the population (that is, the "image of the enemy" is easily created) than they are ethnic, in essence.
Ethnic conflicts occurred both in Russia and with the participation of our country in other states. Two such wars fell on the second half of the 20th century.
The Afghan War (1979-1989) is an armed conflict between parts of a limited contingent of Soviet troops (OCSV) and the Promotional Government of Dr. on the one hand, and the anti-Soviet forces of Afghans (Mujaheds, or Dubanov), on the other hand, for control over the territory of Afghanistan. One of the reasons for the war was the desire to support supporters of Soviet power in Afghanistan, since the strengthening of Islamic fundamentalism caused by the Islamic Revolution in Iran 1979 could actually destabilize Soviet Central Asia through the Afghan Tajiks. At the international level, it was stated that the USSR was guided by the principles of "proletarian internationalism". As a formal foundation, the Politburo used the repeated requests of Hafizules Amina on providing him to military assistance to combat anti-government forces.
The losses of Afghans are considered to be more than a million people.
The historical roots of the Chechen conflict leave during the Caucasian War of the XIX century, when the Tsarist Russia sought to strengthen its position in the south and in the course of the territorial expansion came across the fierce resistance of the mountain peoples of the Caucasus.
The Chechen conflict in its modern form as a struggle around the question of the independence of Chechnya or its preservation in Russia originated, as almost all other national conflicts on the territory of the former USSR, in the second half of the 1980s, with the start of restructuring and the weakening of state and party control over All spheres of public life.
Two military campaigns clearly show the interest of certain foreign circles in continuing the escalation of hostilities and maintain instability in the region. It is no coincidence that the majority of domestic researchers are inclined to think that when studying the causes and mainly ways to resolve armed conflict in the North Caucasus region, it is necessary to identify not only the interests of the two conflicting parties to Ichkeria and the Center, but also the parties to the fighting of the conflict intensity.
Introduction
Conclusion
Introduction
Conflict - (from Lat. Conflictus - a collision) is a clash of opposite interests, views; Serious disagreement, sharp dispute.
Under the national conflict, it is customary to understand the type of social conflict, the peculiarity of which is the weakening of socio-ethnic and ethnosocial factors and contradictions. It is also worth paying attention to the nature of such a concept as nationalism, since the nation, as a subject and one of the parties of the inter-ethnic conflict, is the historical community of people who have developed in the process of formation of the territory of residence, economic ties, language, and cultural characteristics. Nationalism as part of conflictology is considered as a special concept of the world, from the point of view of which different ethnic groups are primarily rivals in the struggle for survival, for achieving the preemptive position and for various benefits, as a distorted form of natural national feelings, an emphasising factor of hostility towards other nations .
The source of exacerbation of conflicts between large groups is the accumulation of dissatisfaction with the existing position of affairs, increasing claims, radical change in self-consciousness and social well-being. As a rule, the process of accumulation of dissatisfaction is first slow and trembling, while some event does not occur, which plays the role of a kind of triggering mechanism outlooking this feeling of dissatisfaction. The dissatisfaction, acquiring an open form, stimulates the occurrence of social movement, during which leaders are put forward, programs and slogans are being implemented, the ideology of interest protection is formed. At this stage, the conflict becomes open and irreversible. It either turns into an independent and permanent component of public life, or ends the victory of the initiating side, or is solved on the basis of mutual concessions of the parties.
Almost all multinational states are subject to interethnic friction and conflict, whose roots go deep into history. In them, social, spiritual, state, legal, demographic and other problems of peoples are walked into the complex node. This also applies to industrialized, and developing countries, with the most of the different political orientation, the level of economic development, socio-political system, the state and constitutional device, of different confessional affiliation.
The conflict situation is usually generated by the opposite positions of the parties on essential issues, or a fundamental misappropriation of the interests of the parties, or multidirectional purposes, or mutually unacceptable means of achieving the goals.
The development of a conflict situation is usually beginning with the growth of ethnocentrism, which takes place to a greater or lesser extent in all ethnic communities, especially with a fairly developed national self-consciousness. Ethnocentrism is such a position in which its national is considered as the focus of the entire positive, and everything is inonation - as a deviation from the norm. The increase in the tension of the conflict situation contributes to the strengthening of negative ethnic stereotypes, that is, estimated judgments of representatives of some peoples about representatives of others. These judgments reflect the past and real experience of contacts between nations and can wear both positive and negative emotional color. In the latter case, an interethnic alienation occurs, tensions in relationships increase, which can break through the most unexpected way.
Attempts to develop a common theory of social conflict, inevitably comprising socio-philosophical generalizations, are being made in foreign social scientists from the second half of the 50s. XX century, when there is a formation of conflictology as an independent branch of public knowledge (works by K. Bowlding, R. Damarendorf, M. Doycha, L. Kosher, J. Lokwood, J. Rex and others). In the second half of the XX century. In foreign social science literature, there is a significant increase in interest in the ethnic and ethnoce conflict. In the works of M. Briton, K. Doycha, Kona, D. Campbell, R. Le Vaine, R. Segal, Mstton-Watson, P. Chibuta-ne, S. Enloou and other authors Ethnic conflict is if not An independent subject of research, it takes one of the main places.
The direct source of ethnic conflict is a collision of national interests, that is, the economic, political, social, etc. of interests, but at an angle of view of the hypertrophied national self-consciousness. In practice, as a rule, "General National Interests", taking a self-adhesive form, turn out to be cut off from real individual and group interests, and sometimes they oppose them. However, due to the significant emotional potential of the national self-consciousness, an accelerated consolidation of most of the nation is possible to protect their national interests (genuine or fictitious) in situations of threat (real or imaginary) these interests.
The structure of the national conflict includes the following components:
The object of conflict (contradictions that generate a conflict situation)
Subjects of conflict (parties, opponents),
The basis of the conflict (conflict situation).
However, the situation has turned into a conflict, a momentum is needed - an incident. In the event of a national conflict, such an incident is usually actions from opponents (as a rule, one of them first), aimed at carrying out their interests by infringement and restrictions on the interests of the other side (economic, political and legal, cultural-linguistic, confessional, etc. .). If as a result of this, the opponent corresponds to protective actions, the incident can be considered and the national conflict from the potential becomes real.
There are various points of view regarding schemes for the discharge of the stages of unfolding and developing the conflict. The most typical of these schemes is as follows:
A) stage of conflict situation (or potential conflict),
B) transitional stage (the stage of transition, processing potential conflict in real),
C) stage directly the conflict itself (stage of conflict activity, conflict actions),
D) the stage of permission or removal of the conflict.
According to the American ethnosociologist M. Heisler, national conflicts have an exceptional phenomenon only in two groups of countries: in industrialized countries with sustainable democracy and in countries with authoritarian regimes.
Even a superficial analysis shows that the root causes of the majority of conflicts lie in the disharmony of national interests. Consequently, an effective settlement is possible only by developing the norms of the peaceful coexistence of various peoples within the framework of a single social, political, economic system. Harmonization of national interests is possible only under conditions of conflict-free coexistence (conflict - does not mean trouble-free).
Conflict subjects can be one level - groups, communities, batch, organizations, states, and may be different levels, for example, on the one hand, an organization or party may appear, as an expressive of the interests of one conflict entity, and on the other hand, the state as Expressive of the interests of another subject. One of the largest problems of multinational states is that the state perceives itself and is perceived by many not as an expressive of the interests of the entire population, the whole society, but only the main ethnic group of the country. That is why many multinational states remain ethnic states of the title ethnos.
The first hypothesis that occurs when analyzing inter-ethnic conflicts in the territory of the Russian Federation is that they are explained by the polyethnics of the population itself. In order to assess the significance of this hypothesis, it is necessary to analyze the composition of the population of the Russian Federation under its angle of view. 2010 census shows that 80.9% of the population belongs to Russians by nationality.
Figure 1. - The percentage of Russians in the regions of Russia (2010)
As for the groups of the non-Russian population of Russia, it is distributed in a status ratio of at least two significant subgroups.
The first subgroup is the so-called title peoples with a fixed "its" territory, such as Tatars, Ossetians, Ingush. "Titness" of the relevant peoples is enshrined in the 1993 Constitution. In the names of the respective republics, autonomous districts and regions. For its basis, the title characteristic of the territory has in all cases, except for the Jewish JSC, "ethnic rooting" of the corresponding group in this area: here this people lived and continues to live, it is not "came", "moving" or "mixed", its historical Staying on this territory is not disputed and is not questionable.
The second subgroup of the non-Russian population is "nonetitular" peoples, i.e. Peoples are not fixed in legislative documents explicit territorial affiliation. Such, for example, Poles, Jews, Armenians, Greeks, Gypsies, Meskhetintsy Turks, etc., which, in turn, are divided into those groups that do not have any territorial affiliation at all, and those that have no territorial affiliation only on Russian territory.
Figure 2. - National Composition of the Russian Federation (2010)
In recent years, a flame of more than 40 armed conflicts, in Yugoslavia, Angola, Somali, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Angola, Somalia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, the North Caucasus region of Russia and others have been licensed in the near-EXVATORY SPACE. The absolute majority of conflicts wears an inter-election, interpretatic nature. They deployed on the territory of one or several countries, moving often full-scale modern wars. Many of them were complicated by religious and clan contradictions. Some are stretched by centuries, such as the Middle Eastern conflict between Jews and Arabs, the Transcaucasian conflict between Armenians and Turks (Azerbaijanis). The root causes of the mortgage conflicts are often erased by time, go to the subconscious and expressing in a difficult-scale almost pathological national intolerance. Direct reasons (reasons) periodically renewable collisions are usually the nearest "injustice".
The immediate cause of the emergence of interethnic conflicts is the discrepancy and collision of the interests of the subjects of interethnic relations (national-state formations, nations, nations, national groups). The conflict arises with inconsistent and untimely resolution of these contradictions. The powerful catalyst for the development of the conflict is the politicization of national interests, crossing the national and state. The crisis can be attributed to political reasons, and then the collapse of the USSR is a large transnational world power. This cause is universal, since the confrontation of ethnic, as well as confessional groups, is always sharpened during periods of decay of multinational asymmetric states. Soviet national policy was very effective from a functional point of view. The mode is skillfully frozen and suppressed the conflict potential of interethnic relationships. Not only direct repression and total resettlement of entire nations were used, but also more subtle methods: mixing and dilution of ethnic groups (the most obvious example is a targeted population of the Baltic states from the Slavic regions), the creation of "patchwork" administrative and political units (Chechen-Ingush ASSR, Kabardino -Balcar ASSR), and on the contrary, the division of the ethnos by the republican border (this was done with Ossetians and Tajiks), as well as other options for arbitrary borders (Central Asia). Formation in all republics associated with the interests of Moscow, Cromproprador national elites. It was a slightly conciliated ruster policy. Gradually, a multinational historical resentment came out. This is especially characteristic of the Caucasian and Baltic regions. Another derivative of the political cause of the conflict is the struggle of both new and old political elites for the redistribution of the "imperial inheritance". The national factor is used in this struggle without any shock. Here you can observe a shameless speculation on national feelings. Economic reasons are closely related to political on the one hand, here is largely similar to the political struggle for the redistribution of national wealth, on the other hand, the regions are traditionally poor, deprived of natural resources that do not have a developed economy, but receiving certain centralized support, now, having lost it, They are trying to somehow exit the position by appeal to the categories of national survival, the preservation of the national focus, while resorting to any available funds for economic pressure and even blackmail. In addition, economically more powerful regions seek to block the trends of national separatism, also using financial and economic levers. All of these factors are most likely not a purely economic nature, but economic and psychological, since they are based on subjective, often ethnically painted ideas about the unfair national-regional distribution of public wealth and, accordingly, on the injustice of differences in the life of the population of certain regions .
The causes of socio-cultural and socio-psychological are also distinguished. National Psychology is a certain style of thinking, the behavior of the ethnos. For seven post-revolutionary decades, a new metaethnic community has developed in the country - the so-called Soviet people. In a socio-psychological plan, this undoubted reality, which manifests itself very often, even among people who deny their belonging to the "Soviet people". The collapse of the USSR for many is a severe spiritual injury, conjugate with painful attempts by new self-determination. Hence the psychologically explained the desire of part of society to restore the mighty state. The processes occurring in recent years have stimulated the growth of national self-consciousness in a number of peoples, and both from relatively weak and really passed through humiliation and harassment, especially in Stalin's times and in such ethnic giants as the Ukrainian nation. Some of these ethnic groups have been included, using the expression of Solovyov V.P., in the "Stage of Exceptional Nationality", within which rational arguments, even an appeal to genuine national interests, have a little chance of being heard. Some ethnic groups, the level of development of which does not allow them to build full dialogue and exchanges within normal interethnic contacts, paradoxically tends to the isolation, to the detriment of their own, development. Here there is a conservative protective protective reaction to objective integration processes. For them, the preservation of a national focus, the national identity is more important than the full development of the people.
In the Russian Empire, the national sign did not have a decisive value in the organization of territorial division. A special status that provides a significant degree of independence was the provinces that became part of Russia, being already established independent states (Poland, Khiva Khanate and Bukhara Emirate in Central Asia, Georgia), as well as Finland. All other territories, even if the majority of the non-Russian population lived there, was part of the state on general reasons, that is, the national sign did not play a decisive role in organizing power structures on their territory.
In general, the policy of all the royal governments was loyal in relation to the indigenous population of the acceding territories, although without violence did not happen, but the "ethnic" violence in the history of the Russian Empire has never been directed against the ethnos as a whole. Conflicts between the central authorities and colonized ethnic groups had two sources: competition due to land and other natural sources and competition due to political power.
In the process of colonization from the turnover of the local population, some of the land passed to the Russian peasants, it caused resistance to local residents. Local lords did not always advocate defenders of their own peoples, preferring to compromise with the royal authorities.
The crisis of the Russian Empire, which listed in a series of revolutions and coups to the beginning of the 20th century, strengthened centrifugal trends on its national outskirts. The restoration of the unity of the territory (from the 20s to 40s) was based on the natural desire of the population to belong to the Russian civilization and to deceit and violence. At the same time, violence was used both to the top and to the ordinary population.
The basis of politics at this time was the desire to translate social tension from the inter-Russian channel in the channel. Also used the principle of "divide and conquer". Its implementation required primarily the allocation on each territory of a large social group who received certain advantages in cultural, political and economic compared to the rest of the population of this territory. Such a group was called the "indigenous" nation, or the "titular" nation.
First, in some cases, the native recognized the people who did not constitute the majority, example: Bashkiria, where 1/3 of Bashkir. Secondly, within the framework of uniform national-state formations, the natives who belonged to different language families often united and were often hostile to each other in history. Thirdly, in ethno-political purposes, the policy of consolidation of new nations based on sometimes related in language and culture was carried out, and sometimes sufficiently dissimilar elements. Fourth, in some case, a single ethnic array was separated by the boundaries, and several independent peoples were formed at its base.
In 1918-1922 A number of independent national states occurred on the territory of the former Russian Empire (Ukrainian, Belarusian, Georgian republics). At the same time, autonomous republics and autonomous regions arose. In 1923-1924. National-state scholarship in Central Asia. As a result, the influence of the national factor on the territorial structure intensified, began to appear in the territories of the Allied and Autonomous Republics National Sencons. The new phase of the national policy in the USSR began with the adoption of the USSR Constitution in 1936, as well as a number of decisions related to it and laws. From that moment on, the course for the accounting of national specifics was replaced by the unification of national life, but this is not violent Russification.
Russia is a complex polyethnic education that unites the peoples of various language groups, cultures and denominations. The ethnic core of the country is Russians that make up more than 80% of its population. However, this does not allow the country to attribute the country to the type of mono-ethnic states for a number of reasons: First, the territory of Russia is the historical homeland of many nations who have retained their cultural identity and not assimiced with the Russian majority; Secondly, for the Soviet period of Russia's history, many of its peoples have formed the foundations of their statehood, which is currently aware of the greatest value and historical achievement; Third, due to the controversibility of the national policy of the Soviet period (directed simultaneously to the unification of peoples, and on the organization of their statehood) throughout the USSR, and in Russia, including ethnic stratification, which is based on differences in economic, demographic and political status of peoples.
The destruction of the current political system in the USSR occurred in parallel with the emergence and development of ethnopolitical tensions and conflict. In Russia, this process had a certain specificity, which is determined by the historical and ethnocultural originality of its regions. The territorial expansion of Russia occurred over the centuries and therefore, different peoples in various ways were included in its composition. Such specificity was determined by the socio-economic level of the development of acceded peoples, and their ethnocultural proximity, and foreign policy conditions.
The Russian Soviet Republic emerged as a result of the victory of the October Revolution was a unitary state. She was proclaimed within the borders of the pre-revolutionary, tsarist Russia. However, the multinationality of Russia and the proclaiming of the Soviet government the rights of nations on self-determination stepped up the tendency to decay in Russia, which arose before October, when the national liberation movement of peoples awakened by the February Revolution of 1917 increased.
The declaration of the rights of the working and operated people, adopted by the III All-Russian Congress of the Councils of Workers, Soldiers and Peasant Deputies in January 1918, proclaimed Russia by the Federation. The desire to create really free and voluntary, and, consequently, the more complete and durable, the Union of Workers' Classes of All Nations of Russia.
Soon after the congress, practically the formation of the Russian Federation, the state construction of its components. Adopted in July 1918, the Constitution of the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic focused on the federal principle of organizing the state unity of the RSFSR.
In the first half of 1918, the main and the only form of autonomy was the Autonomous Republic. However, in the second half of 1918, a new form of autonomy is created - labor communes, and since 1920, another form of autonomy is widely used - an autonomous region. By the end of 1922, the bulk of the peoples of Russia completed the creation of their autonomy. All these autonomies, formed after the adoption of the Constitution, were formed on the basis of the laws of the central government. The highest form of autonomy was the Autonomous Republic, which was a state with its state mechanism, its constitution (or the law that performs its functions).
Along with the internal development of the Russian Federation in 1917-1922, its relationships with other independent republics formed at this time arise. The introduction of the RSFSR into the Union of the SSR coincided with the completion of the formation of the Russian Federation itself. Since 1923, a new stage begins in the development of the form of state unity of the republic. It is primarily characterized by a change in the forms of autonomy. National County As a new form of autonomy was a feature of only the Russian Federation. Not in one other Union republic they were created.
An important stage in the State Construction of the RSFSR was the adoption on January 21, 1937 of the new Constitution of the RSFSR. This constitution consolidated the presence of 17 autonomous republics and 6 autonomous regions in the Federation, which were transferred to the Constitution, as well as, we emphasize once again, mentioned when establishing a system of local government bodies on the presence of national districts in the Republic of National Districts. The constitution in the most general features determined the legal status of the Autonomous Republic and the Autonomous Region. After the adoption of the Constitution of the RSFSR 1937, the Constitution of these republics was adopted in all autonomous republics.
During the Great Patriotic War, the Stalinist totalitarian regime has taken a number of repressive measures towards entire peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation, some of which were accused of cooperation with the German-fascist invaders.
The Constitution of the RSFSR of 1978 again recorded the sovereign status of the RSFSR and its right to exit the USSR. In accordance with the Constitution, in the composition of the Russian Federation there were 16 autonomous republics, 5 autonomous regions and 10 autonomous districts (as the former national districts began to be called), which were listed in it by name.
The new Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted on December 12, 1993, consolidated the Federal Device of Russia as part of 89 entities, which were recognized as a republic as part of the Russian Federation, the region, region, the city of federal importance, the autonomous region and autonomous districts and which, as established in the article 5 of the Constitution, among themselves equal in relations with the federal authorities of state power.
At the heart of national conflicts on the territory of the former USSR, the following national-territorial problems lie:
1. Unresolved problems in relations between sovereign states - former Union republics. Contradictions between some of them are developing into armed clashes, for example, between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
2. Intraward problems. The absolutization of sovereignty usually generates separatist aspirations of national minorities within the sovereign states themselves. The movement of the territories (edges, regions) of the Russian Federation for their equal legal status with republics in the RF has emerged. Alignment of the legal status of constituent entities of the Russian Federation has become one of the key problems, the regional development of the country depends on the solution. Here it should also be noted that in the last period there is a process of consolidating the constituent entities of the Russian Federation by entering some, predominantly small subjects into the composition of larger. But it also has its own minus the fact that a larger subject, as far as possible to establish its economic independence, will begin to qualify for its national extinction.
3. Problems of separated peoples. Historically, it has developed that the borders between national-state formations, and political and administrative borders in the country have repeatedly shifted. As a result - the above-mentioned separation of many peopling people.
4. Violation of human rights identified by the Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenants on Human Rights; Problems caused by the violent eviction of a number of peoples from the places of permanent residence (deportation). The state-legal rehabilitation of such persons turned out to be a rather complicated and contradictory process. Here, the principle of recovery of justice faced with the principle of irreversibility of historical changes. Interests of rehabilitated peoples (Germans, Crimean Tatars, Meskhetian Turks, etc.) entered into a contradiction with the interests of the peoples who settled the places of their former residence.
5. Lack of a program to solve a national issue, analyzing the problems of interethnic relations and ways to resolve them.
6. Personal conflicts that are poured into conflicts between the indigenous and non-mentioned population. Here, the mentioned national psychology as an integral element of ethnicity is played here.
7. The struggle of criminal-mafia structures for the redistribution of territories.
According to its typological characteristics, the national conflict is, first of all, socially, since its subjects are large social groups, the interests of which are contradictory due to the inequality of the social statuses of these groups in this public system, in a particular country. At the same time, it is a conflict having a political aspect, because no civilized nation has been formed outside the political organization or state inherent in it.
The genesis of the national conflict depends on the problems and contradictions that actually exist in society, and at a certain point float to the surface in the form of a conflict. In its developed form, the conflict is a manifestation of certain trends in the development of national movements.
These movements can be classified as follows:
Separatist
Irredentian (reunifting),
Autonomist
Ethnolinguistic,
Ethnocon confessional,
Ethimaegalitarian (equalizing),
Antimigient.
The division into the above types is sufficiently conditionally, especially since one national movement can carry signs of several types of situations at once, to have various trends. For example, the Irish National Movement in Olster can be qualified simultaneously as a separatist (desire for separation from the UK), and as an irregular (desire to reunite with Ireland), and as an ethnocon confessional (Catholic movement against Protestantism Zasil).
Often, ethnolinguistic and ethnocon confessional movements are interrelated, especially if the religious minority is both linguistic. National movements can also be transformed during historical development, for example, autonomist movements to achieve their goals (obtaining national autonomy) can be proceeding into separatist or irregistys and so on.
The nature of the national conflict depends not only on the genesis, but also on the goals. Conflicts singled out on this basis:
Realistic
Unrealistic
Mixed.
Realistic conflicts suggest that conflict entities have clearly conscious purposes, and conflict actions act only as a means of achieving them. This implies the search for alternative ways to solve conflicts in the constancy of the goals of the Parties.
Unrealistic conflicts occur when subjects of the conflict are not very clearly aware of the goals and motives of the conflict, and it is only a means of aggressive emotional discharge. For unrealistic conflicts, the alternativeness is not characterized by non-decision methods, but conflict facilities. Unrealistic conflicts are more unpredictable, spontaneous, irrational, less subject to control and management.
Mixed conflicts are the most difficult case when subjects are completely polarized for purposes, ways and functions of the conflict. This happens, as a rule, when a conflict acts as realistic for one of the subjects, and for the other - as unrealistic. Examples of realistic conflicts can serve as Armeniazerbayagean, Georgian-Abkhaz, Moldavian-Transnistrian. Unrealistic conflicts - Ossetino-Ingush. Mixed conflicts - Tajik, Georgianingrelsky, Chechen, etc.
By the length of the course, national conflicts can be allocated:
Short-term;
Long-term (most conflicts in the Caucasus, in the Balkans, in the Middle East, etc.);
Intermediate.
The duration is associated, as a rule, another characteristic of the conflict - sharpness.
Short-term conflicts are usually sharp, long-term - chronic. However, acute long-term conflicts (Middle Eastern, South African, Afghan, etc.) are possible.
Another reason for dividing conflicts into groups is the intensity of conflict intensity, i.e. the role of violence during the origin and development of the conflict. In Western conflictology, the following types are distinguished: violent conflicts (accompanied by actual acts of violence and poorly managed); fraught with violence (ready to turn into real violent actions at any time); violent but managed; potentially violent (in the depths of prerequisites for violence, but not yet showing themselves); non-violent, managed.
It should be noted that the greater the role of violence in conflict, the less it is subject to control. The intensity of the situation of national conflicts is influenced by a number of factors: the emotional building of conflict, the number and organization of the groups involved in the conflict, the nature of the goals and means, etc.
Nowadays, Russia's collapse of Russia appeared on separate independent states, which is not only some nationally, but also administratively territorial entities as notice to proclaim themselves. Naturally, questions arise: whether it will repeat the fate of the SSR Union, is it possible to avoid this and how? To respond to them, on the one hand, to comprehend the state of interethnic communication, determine the origins of discontent and tension in this area that feed centrifugal trends, and on the other - to identify the conditions and factors that make up the integration potential of Russian multinational statehood, to identify ways and mechanisms for the consolidation of nations, Nativity, regions.
Table 1.
Indicators testifying to interethnic tensions,%
|
The reasons |
Petrozavodsk |
Cherkessk |
Yakutsk |
||||||
|
not Russians |
russians |
not Russians |
russians |
not Russians |
russians |
||||
|
Officials of National Policy |
|||||||||
|
Migration from other regions |
|||||||||
|
Worstification of the economic situation |
|||||||||
|
The inability of the central power to stabilize the situation |
|||||||||
|
The powerlessness of local authorities |
|||||||||
|
Disrespect for national language, customs, culture |
|||||||||
|
Activities of folk fronts, movements |
|||||||||
In the setting of an emerging ethno-regional separatism, even if there were positive changes in the economy and the political sphere (which in itself is now unlikely), the conflict of interethnic relations will not automatically disappear. It has its own logic of origin and development, and very decent inertia. Just as the historical memory of the peoples keeps the resentment, the massive consciousness of living generations is not able to quickly overcome the sense of national dislike due to the current injustices, which they would not be manifested. That is why the problems of accounting and implementing ethnic interests are particularly important, the infringement of which (it was noted among not the Russian population from 18% in Stavropol to 58% in Cherkessk) is able to become - and in fact became the catalyst for the alienation of people from each other.
The idea of \u200b\u200bthe imbalance of national expectations, as well as the claims of nations for priority rights, are not only one of the sources of public tensions at present. There is enough reason to believe that in the foreseeable future their impact will not decrease.
Under the influence of constant dissatisfaction with its own national status, a significant part of the society has formed a plant for active actions in a conflict situation on the side of its national group (Table 3). In Moscow, 70% of respondents declared this, and only 18% completely rejected from themselves such an opportunity.
Such a high readiness of the citizens to participate in such a disassembly cannot but cause concern if because the rate for power as a method of solving the mustered problems is becoming more noticeable.
Table 3.
Readiness of participation in conflicts,%
|
Cities |
Not Russians |
Russians |
|
Petrozavodsk |
||
|
Orenburg |
||
|
Ufa |
||
|
Ulan - Ude |
||
|
Yakutsk |
||
|
Stavropol. |
||
|
Cherkessk |
It was brightly manifested in the North Caucasus, especially in the Ossetian-Ingush conflict, when, as a result of actions, the National - extremist elements shed blood, on both sides there are victims and destruction, refugees and hostages appeared. In a difficult situation, the Russian authorities were forced to make the use of power methods to create the necessary conditions in order to localize the conflict and overcoming it. But this forced step has strengthened the negative attitude towards the center, the growth of anti-Russian moods. By the way, the overwhelming number of respondents (30-40%) everywhere appreciated the peacekeeping attempts to lead the country as delaying and not contributing to the prevention of conflicting clashes.
Outracking and smoldering foci of interethnic confrontation in the southern tips of our Fatherland create a serious danger of its expansion and distribution of deep into. The feeling of the instability of the social climate increases the anxiety of mass consciousness, makes the population susceptible to different types of 'phobiams', fear for tomorrow, creates the desire to get rid of 'aliens' or in any case limit their rights in the hope of securing security and well-being.
In a number of reasons leading to ethnic stripping, there are spatial claims and the unfolding struggle for the redistribution of the territory, inspired by national movements, sometimes becoming as its radicalization is clearly nationalist. Let most of them do not use wide support (loyalty to parties defending independence from the center, from 1% of the survey participants in Stavropol to 6% in Ufa and Yakutsk), it is possible that with further deterioration of social and economic conditions and deepening the crisis, it sharply will increase.
In general, the concept of state national policy has a progressive nature, but also differs in halfness, uncertainty, which narrows its possibilities in terms of resolving and solving diverse ethnic problems, and in some situations even aggravate them. The tendency of substitution of national policies to solve conflict problems on interethnic soil. But national policy in principle cannot be aimed at solving issues of today's day, to be temporary measures, albeit relevant to the country.
The concept of national policies currently implemented in Russia is theoretical basis for state regulation of interethnic relations.
In order to create a legislative base, comprehensively ensuring the implementation of the State National Policy of the Russian Federation for all nations, federal laws "On National and Cultural Autonomy", "On Guarantees of the Rights of Native Minority Peoples of the Russian Federation", were developed and adopted, a single list of indigenous small peoples of the Russian Federation .
National policy should take into account not only the analysis of the dialectics of national interests in their concreteness, but also take into account changing national moods. The draft federal law "On the Fundamentals of the State National Policy of the Russian Federation", the following basic principles of the State National Policy are allocated:
Preservation of state integrity and federal device of the Russian Federation;
Equality of the rights of citizens and peoples of the Russian Federation for national development;
Recognition of the unity of the Russian society;
Free definition by each citizen of its nationality;
Compliance with laws and other regulations in the field of national policies, generally accepted principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation;
The inevitability of punishment for inciting cross-ethnic hostility, insult honor and dignity on ethnic sign;
Recognition of the unifying role of Russian people, his language and culture;
The interaction of the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local governments with public associations, national-cultural autonomies of all levels, national ethnocultural public organizations, communities.
National politics only in the event will be a consolidating factor if it will reflect all the diversity of the interests of the peoples of Russia, including the most important, may be ethnocultural. When implementing national policies in the spiritual sphere, the following tasks must be implemented by society and the state:
The formation and distribution of the ideas of spiritual unity, friendship of peoples, interethnic consent, cultivation of Russian patriotism;
Dissemination of knowledge about the history and culture of the peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation;
Preservation of historical heritage, the development of the national identity of the traditions of interaction between the Slavic, Turkic, Caucasian, Finno-Ugric and other peoples of Russia in the Russian Eurasian-national and cultural space, the creation of an atmosphere of respect for their cultural values \u200b\u200bin society;
Ensuring optimal conditions for the preservation and development of languages \u200b\u200bof all nations of Russia, the use of the Russian language as a nationwide;
Accounting for the mutual influence of national customs, traditions and rites of religion, support for the efforts of religious organizations in peacekeeping activities.
The Russian question is the most important as part of the Russian national question. Interethnic relations in the country will largely be determined by the national well-being of the Russian people, which is supporting Russian statehood. This provision determines the historical role of the Russian people, which, by virtue of the relevant national policy of the USSR, was not officially considered the object of national policy.
Ethnic problems are closely related to the problems of federalism, which gives them a special relevance. Life, including the experience of national policy in the USSR, showed that artificial nationality leads to contradictions between ethnic groups and the state. Ethnocratic processes are applied explicit damage to the territorial integrity of Russia, affecting geopolitical processes. The problems of federalism are among the most complex and multifaceted. But they are key for the further fate of Russia. Without optimally built state national and regional policies, any socio-economic and political transformations cannot be carried out. As long as the situation in the sphere of federated and inter-ethnic relations, it is impossible to overcome the systemic socio-economic crisis, and inter-ethnic consent is still ensuring a minimum of stability and allows you to operate in the direction of reform.
State national policy should be focused on creating conditions that allow each people to preserve national dignity, self-consciousness, to implement their national independence and free development, to determine their fate. And at the same time, national policy should be a factor in the national consolidation of the peoples of Russia. This policy should be aimed at maintaining the spirit of interethnic communication. The principle of self-identification of the peoples and the principle of their communication among themselves, cooperation should not be contrary to each other. This will avoid inter-ethnic tensions, conflicts between nations, as well as confrontations with power structures. The politician of friendship between nations and the policy of their freedom and independence should be not different politicians, but by the United States National Policy of Russia.
The harmonious ratio of two factors - ethnic, national, and international, universal, should be the essence of the state national policy of Russia in modern conditions.
In recent years, the state of interethnic relations and the nature of conflicts in this area has changed quite strongly. It was possible to reduce the intensity of open mass armed conflicts and their consequences (Chechen conflict, Ossetinoinsky conflict).
The current conflicts have an obvious local nature and manifest themselves in clashes of relatively small groups of people. At the same time, there is an increase in the number and cruelty of such conflicts in various regions (murders and attacks using racial and national motif), enhancing hostility, reflected in the language, especially in the weakly controlled segments of the information space - the Internet, as well as the trend of the process of developing small conflicts Group clashes. It is also characteristic that conflicts are manifested, including in regions that are considered very calm in interethnic terms. These facts have evidenced that latent tensions are growing in many regions.
Among the factors that can be viewed as directly provoking are weakly controlled migration processes, socioeconomic unpleasurities and hypertrophied inequality of ethnic groups, ethnization of many processes in a number of republics, the spread of psychology of violence.
In order to prevent interethnic conflicts, the strengthening of interethnic relations in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation requires a holistic system of legislative support of state national policy in the field of interethnic relations, which should contain the foundations of regulating the national policy state; the powers of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the regulation of interethnic relations; the forms of participation of local governments, public associations and citizens of the Russian Federation in the implementation of national policies; Measures aimed at preventing conflict situations.
National policy relates to theoretical and relevant practical problems of modernity. This is a complex phenomenon, covering all spheres of society. It has both relative independence as a system of measures carried out by the state aimed at recording and implementing national interests. The State National Policy includes the strategic objectives of the life of the state, this is the policy of the interests of the entire nation. That is how it is customary to understand all over the world.
The internal policy of the state for ethnic communities and inter-ethnic relations is usually called ethnic policies or policies for ethnic minorities. National Policy is also targeted activity on the regulation of ethnopolitical processes, which is based on theory, purpose, principles, main directions, a system of implementation measures. The main task of the State National Policy is to coordinate the interests of all those living in the country of peoples, ensuring the legal and material basis for their development based on their voluntary, equal and mutually beneficial cooperation. Accounting for ethno-national peculiarities in the life of society should be carried out within the borders of human rights. The path to the harmonization of inter-ethnic relations is largely through the culture.
The basic principle of the modern state national policy is the equality of human rights and freedoms and citizen, regardless of his race, nationality, language, relations to religion, belonging to social groups and social movements. Other principles can be distinguished, which may be based on the basis of the State National Policy:
1. The principle of national parity and an interethnic partnership is to recognize all the peoples of Russia by state and in approving that no people can have preferential right to control over the territory, government institutions and natural resources.
2. The principle of national self-organization - means the state creation of conditions that allow representatives of different nations to independently determine and implement their national-cultural needs.
3. The principle of national paternalism is the obligation of the authorities of all levels to protect human rights in the national field and provide support to the least protected ethnic groups, categories of ethnic refugees, immigrants.
National politics are the most distinguished two aspects: political and cultural.
The political aspect is presented through the activities of state, including local, authorities, for example, through the allocation of relevant articles in budgets, legislative acts, decisions on specific issues (for example, on the return of cult buildings, the opening of classes or national schools).
The cultural aspect is the immediate activities of national-cultural centers, associations, national schools, presses, etc. National-cultural autonomy can be considered as an element of civil society. This is an extraterritorial education, it is not endowed with some powerful powers, and its activities are determined in the field of ethnocultural problems.
Thus, the core of the national policy of the state can be considered to be accomplished, and in the event of a peaceful resolution of national-ethnic conflicts.
Conflict settlement is always a very complex process bordering art. It is much more important to prevent the development of events leading to conflicts. The amount of effort in this direction is defined as conflict prevention.
In the process of conflict management, ethnosocystra performs experts to identify and verify the hypotheses about the causes of the conflict, to evaluate the "driving forces", the mass participation of groups, with a different embodiment of events, to assess the effects of decisions made. But the main thing is that they can present the main base of information to prevent conflicts. "
Conclusion
Political and legal methods of solving a national issue should include civil society mechanisms and be aimed at such coordination of the activities of the executive bodies, which gives the effectiveness of managing the process of ethnocon confessional consent in the country. This involves ensuring citizens' rights to meet ethnocultural, language and other needs, regardless of religion, national origin and social status, support for the culture and languages \u200b\u200bof the country's peoples, support for compatriots abroad, flexible migration policy.
The federal structure of our country, which established on the basis of its nationally territorial division, determines the imperative need to postpone the initiative of activities to address national problems in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Technologies for solving national problems should be developed not in the federal center, but in regions with the most complete information on the content of national conflicts and contradictions, the mentality of the population.
The basic principle of the modern state national policy is the equality of human rights and freedoms and citizen, regardless of his race, nationality, language, relations to religion, belonging to social groups and social movements.
National politics only in the event will be a consolidating factor if it will reflect all the diversity of the interests of the peoples of Russia, including the most important, may be ethnocultural. In implementing the national policy in the spiritual sphere, the following tasks must be implemented by society and the state: the formation and dissemination of the ideas of spiritual unity, friendship of peoples, interethnic consent, cultivation of Russian patriotism; dissemination of knowledge about the history and culture of the peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation; preservation of historical heritage, the development of the national identity of the traditions of interaction between the Slavic, Turkic, Caucasian, Finno-Ugric and other peoples of Russia in the Russian Eurasian-national and cultural space, the creation of an atmosphere of respect for their cultural values \u200b\u200bin society;
State national policy should be focused on creating conditions that allow each people to preserve national dignity, self-consciousness, to implement their national independence and free development, to determine their fate. And at the same time, national policy should be a factor in the national consolidation of the peoples of Russia. This policy should be aimed at maintaining the spirit of interethnic communication. The harmonious ratio of two factors - ethnic, national, and international, universal, should be the essence of the state national policy of Russia in modern conditions.
The one-time and unambiguous option of resolving the emerging contradictions and conflicts in the interethnic sphere does not exist, as there are no two completely identical conflicts.
To resolve inter-ethnic conflicts, it is necessary to form common countries for all peoples of interests that can be built on the basis of economic relations that combine the market and planning, on the equality of peoples, democracy and human rights guarantees. The presence of nationwide interests makes it fundamentally possible to seek both public consent and the rational balance of national interests and on this basis harmonize national relations.
Thus, to effectively resolve the contradictions and reduce the severity of conflicts between nations in modern Russia, it is necessary to provide conditions for the full social and national-cultural development of all nations of the country, to achieve the hardening of all-Russian civil and spiritual and moral communities based on respect for human rights and freedoms.
The method of resolution of conflicts between nations should not be antagonistic type, i.e. The method for which the destruction of one of the parties is the only condition for the resolution of the conflict. In the field of interethnic relations, only a way to remove the contradiction through the transition to a compromise is acceptable. Submission of one of the parties, and even the more interethnic war exacerbates the contradiction, drives it deep into, makes the resumption of conflicts.
The success of the past few years to curb the actions of the ultra-right, and in some regions and organizations of a frankly fascist sense of confidence that Russia comes out of the state of indifference and takes an active position in Europe on the desire to approve himself in the eyes of the world community as a democratic state. Stability in the economic sphere, as well as in the political life of the country, will give the opportunity to all the peoples of our multinational state and representatives of religious denominations contribute to the benefit of the development and prosperity of Russia. And the time of the raging britheads of the youth, the organizations of the nationalist orientation with the slogans "Russia - for Russians" will take place in the past, and at the same time the fear of their future has many representatives of various peoples and ethnic groups inhabiting modern Russia. Russia will take its decent place in the civilized community of states, retaining its integrity and polyethnicity, and will become the guarantor of rights, freedoms and democracy on the Eurasian continent.
List of used literature
Page \\ * MergeFormat 34
Collisions and other conflict situations on interethnic soil are a rather serious problem in the modern world. In more detail about what it is will be told in the article, as well as consider when ethnic conflicts arose. Examples from history will also be shown below.
The collisions based on national contradictions are called ethnic. They are local on the household level when people are conflicted within one settlement. They are also divided into global. An example of an ethnic conflict at the global level is Kosovo, Palestinian, Kurdish and the like.
Situations, accompanied by the heat of interethnic relations, began for a long time, one can say that since the emergence of states and nations. But in this case it will not go about them, but about those confrontations that are known from relatively recent historical events.
After the Soviet Union broke up, the peoples who were once a single Soviet nation once become alone, individually. Various conflict situations aggravated. An example of an ethnic conflict in the post-Soviet space is a situation in Nagorno-Karabakh, a collision of the interests of the two states: Armenia and Azerbaijan. And this situation is far from the only one.
The opposition of national interests, military actions on the territory of the former USSR touched Chechnya, Ingushetia, Georgia and other countries. Even today's relationship between Russia and Ukraine can also be considered as an example of ethnic conflict.
To date, the focus has been a conflict that has a very long history. Since ancient times between Armenia and Azerbaijan, there is a confrontation on the issue of whose territory is Nagorno-Karabakh. In part, this situation clarifies the answer to the question when and why ethnic conflicts arose. Examples are numerous, but this one is more understandable within the framework of the post-Soviet space.
With its roots, this conflict goes to the distant past. According to Armenian sources, Nagorno-Karabakh was called Artsakh and was part of Armenia during the Middle Ages. Historians of the opposing side, on the contrary, recognize the right of Azerbaijan on this area, since the name "Karabakh" is a combination of two words in Azerbaijani.
In 1918, the Azerbaijani Democratic Republic was established, which recognized his rights to this territory, but the Armenian side intervened. However, in 1921, Nagorno-Karabakh became part of Azerbaijan, but on the rights of autonomy, and quite wide. For a long time, the conflict situation was permitted, but closer to the collapse of the USSR it resumed.
In December 1991, the population of Nagorno-Karabakh expressed his will on a referendum to get out of Azerbaijan. This was the reason for the start of the fighting. At present, Armenia advocates the independence of this territory and protects its interests, while Azerbaijan insists on the preservation of its integrity.
The following example of the ethnic conflict can be remembered if back in 2008. His main participants are South Ossetia and Georgia. The origins of the conflict lie in the 1980s of the 20th century, when Georgia began to pursue a policy aimed at gaining independence. As a result, the country "raised" with representatives of national minorities, among which were Abkhaz and Ossetians.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, South Ossetia was formally left as part of Georgia: it is surrounded by this state, only on the one hand bordered with North Ossetia - a republic located as part of the Russian Federation. However, it is not controlled by the Government of Georgia. As a result, armed conflicts have happened in 2004 and 2008, many families had to leave their homes.
At the moment, South Ossetia declares itself as an independent state, and Georgia is aimed at improving relations with it. However, mutual concessions to resolve the conflict situation, none of the parties goes.
Situations, which were above - not all ethnic conflicts. Examples from the history are much more extensive, especially in the territory of the former USSR, since after his decay it was lost that which was united by all the peoples: the idea of \u200b\u200bpeace and friendship, the Great State.
