PECULARITIES OF USE THE MIGRATION PROCESSES AS A MEANS OF POLICY AND HYBRID DESTRUCTIVE ACTIONS IN THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN CONTEMPORARY GEOPOLITICAL CONDITIONS

  • Y. Danyk National Defence University of Ukraine, named after Ivan Cherniakhovskyi, 28, Povitroflotskyi av., Kyiv, 03049 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6990-8656
  • М. Semenkova National Defence University of Ukraine, named after Ivan Cherniakhovskyi, 28, Povitroflotskyi av., Kyiv, 03049 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4143-5671
Keywords: migration, horizontal inequality, conflict potential, manipulative influence, directed migration, hybrid destructive actions

Abstract

The factors that create conditions for the use of migration processes as a means of policy and hybrid destructive actions in the international relations in contemporary geopolitical conditions as well as the peculiarities of this use are analyzed in the article. In particular, new tendencies and patterns of the migration processes and the main approaches and theories that explain the mechanisms of the reproduction and the self-support of migration were studied and characterized. The peculiarities of the achievements of the political goals by the world policy actors in the contemporary geopolitical conditions, that determine the feasibility of the use of the migration of population as a means of policy and hybrid destructive actions were characterized.  The conditions that make it possible for the interested internal and external policy actors to direct the migration processes. The root causes and the mechanisms of the obtaining the conflictogenous properties by the migration processes were found out and studied. Besides, the transformation of the intergroup horizontal inequality between migrants and locals as well as among the migrants was determined as the precondition of the migration processes conflictogenity. In its turn it was substantiated that this intergroup horizontal inequality is caused by getting migrants into the new social and economic condition in the new place of living. The principal threats to the national and regional security in case the migration processes are used by the interested actor as a means of hybrid destructive actions were investigated. The necessity to constantly monitor the migration processes conflictogenity in order to prevent the achievement by the migration the level of conflictogenity that threatens the security was substantiated. The signs of using the migration of the population as the instrument of the political influence were determined. The set of indicators whose values should be constantly monitored in order to watch the current level of migratory processes conflictogenity, including in case of their use with the hybrid destructive goal, was worked out.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Y. Danyk, National Defence University of Ukraine, named after Ivan Cherniakhovskyi, 28, Povitroflotskyi av., Kyiv, 03049

Prof., Dr. Techn. Sc.

М. Semenkova, National Defence University of Ukraine, named after Ivan Cherniakhovskyi, 28, Povitroflotskyi av., Kyiv, 03049

Lecturer.

References

REFERENCES

IOM 2018. World Migration Report, Internally displaced people. URL: http://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr_2018_update_idps.pdf.

UNHCR. 2018. Forced displacement in 2018. Global Trends. Geneva.

Massey, D.S. 1990. “Social structure, household strategies and the cumulative causation of migration”, Population index, 56 (1): 3-26.

Kritz M., Lim M., Zlotnick H. 1998. International Migration Systems: A global approach, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Livi-Bacci M. 2012. A short history of migration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Zelinsky W. 1971. The Hypothesis of the Mobility Transition. Geographical Review, 61(2): 219-249 URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/213996.

Danyk, Y., Semenkova, M. 2019. Migration within the context of hybrid warfare and its potential for conflict, SDirect 24, 3(8).

Gurr T. 1970. Why men rebel. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ostby G. 2008. “Polarization, horizontal inequalities and violent civil conflictˮ, Journal of Peace Research, 45(2): 143-162.

Stewart F. 2000. Crisis prevention: Tackling horizontal inequalities. Oxford Development Studies, 28(3): 245–262.

Winder R. 2013. Bloody foreigners. Abacus, London.

Pacek. P., Danyk. Y., Semenkova, M. 2019 “Patterns of the migration during the hybrid warfare and its conflictogenity”, Torun International Studies, 12: 61-73.

Hoffman F. 2009. “Hybrid Warfare and Challengesˮ, Joint Force Quarterly 52: 34–39.

Danyk Y., Maliarchuk T., Briggs Ch. 2017. Hybrid War: High-tech, Information and Cyber Conflicts, Connections 16 (2): 5–24. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/26326478.

Lind. W., Nightengale. K., Schmitt. J., Sutton. J., Wilson. G. 1989. “The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generationˮ, Marine Corps Gazette 10: 22-26.

Todaro, M., Smith, S. 2015. Economic Development. Pearson.

Sceldon, R.1997. Migration and Development: the global perspective. Harlow.

Рущенко, I. 2015. “Підривні соціальні технології в структурі гібридної війни”, Право і безпека 2 (57).

Rehrl J. 2017. “Migration and CSDPˮ, Handbook on CSDP. Vienna.

REFERENCES

IOM 2018. World Migration Report, Internally displaced people. URL: http://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr_2018_update_idps.pdf.

UNHCR. 2018. Forced displacement in 2018. Global Trends. Geneva.

Massey, D.S. 1990. “Social structure, household strategies and the cumulative causation of migration”, Population index, 56 (1): 3-26.

Kritz M., Lim M., Zlotnick H. 1998. International Migration Systems: A global approach, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Livi-Bacci M. 2012. A short history of migration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Zelinsky W. 1971. The Hypothesis of the Mobility Transition. Geographical Review, 61(2): 219-249 URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/213996.

Danyk, Y., Semenkova, M. 2019. Migration within the context of hybrid warfare and its potential for conflict, SDirect 24, 3(8).

Gurr T. 1970. Why men rebel. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ostby G. 2008. “Polarization, horizontal inequalities and violent civil conflictˮ, Journal of Peace Research, 45(2): 143-162.

Stewart F. 2000. Crisis prevention: Tackling horizontal inequalities. Oxford Development Studies, 28(3): 245–262.

Winder R. 2013. Bloody foreigners. Abacus, London.

Pacek. P., Danyk. Y., Semenkova, M. 2019 “Patterns of the migration during the hybrid warfare and its conflictogenity”, Torun International Studies, 12: 61-73.

Hoffman F. 2009. “Hybrid Warfare and Challengesˮ, Joint Force Quarterly 52: 34–39.

Danyk Y., Maliarchuk T., Briggs Ch. 2017. Hybrid War: High-tech, Information and Cyber Conflicts, Connections 16 (2): 5–24. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/26326478.

Lind. W., Nightengale. K., Schmitt. J., Sutton. J., Wilson. G. 1989. “The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generationˮ, Marine Corps Gazette 10: 22-26.

Todaro, M., Smith, S. 2015. Economic Development. Pearson.

Sceldon, R.1997. Migration and Development: the global perspective. Harlow.

Rushchenko, I. 2015. “The undermining social technologies in the structure of the hybrid warfareˮ, Pravo i bezpeka 2 (57) (in Ukrainian).

Rehrl J. 2017. “Migration and CSDPˮ, Handbook on CSDP. Vienna.

Published
2020-01-13
How to Cite
Danyk, Y., & SemenkovaМ. (2020). PECULARITIES OF USE THE MIGRATION PROCESSES AS A MEANS OF POLICY AND HYBRID DESTRUCTIVE ACTIONS IN THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN CONTEMPORARY GEOPOLITICAL CONDITIONS. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Issues of Political Science, 36, 89-100. https://doi.org/10.26565/2220-8089-2019-36-11