The problem of repatriation is not new in the Armenian reality. Repatriation, as a process coordinated by the state (through official policy), with its periodicity and massiveness, draws special attention especially in the Soviet period of the Armenian history (in particular, in the case of the wave named "Great Repatriation" in 1946-1948 (Stepanyan, 2020)). Later, in the post-Soviet realities, although repatriation processes continue, they differ from previously organized manifestations, which creates the need for new studies reinterpreting the phenomenon. Along with the historical observations which provide important analytical perspectives, it is important to consider the conceptual foundations of the phenomenon of repatriation from a methodological point of view. In particular, according to distinct dictionary definitions of repatriation, it is the return from exile to the homeland, the return of prisoners of war and civilian population who are outside the borders of their homeland to their homeland as a result of military operations (Aghayan, 1976). Nevertheless, refraining from private definitions of the phenomenon, we will rely on the most general modern interpretations of repatriation, according to which repatriation is the process of returning to the country of departure or the ethnic homeland (regardless of the fact that sometimes the country of departure is not considered a homeland after generations (Barseghyan, 2019)). Moreover, it is important to study repatriation not only from the point of view of opportunities, but also from the point of view of the complex problems of the integration nature following the process. Turning to integration as a social phenomenon, we have used the approaches of Bosswick and Heckmann, according to which social integration is the inclusion of the immigrant in the context of the institutional relations of the host country, as well as in the context of social roles and statuses. The authors consider social integration at four interrelated levels: structural, cultural, interactive, and self-identification. In particular, at the structural level, the necessary rights and opportunities provided for immigrants to participate in the host country's social statuses and basic institutions (such as the economy and labor market, the education system, civic participatory processes, housing services) are considered. At the cultural level, the authors emphasize the inclusion of the immigrant in the cultural experiences of the host country, in which the acquisition of communication skills (i.e. language skills) about the host country's culture is of special importance. The interactive aspect of integration, in turn, implies the incorporation of the immigrant into the area of social networks and relationships of the host society. At the level of self-identification, Bosswick and Heckmann consider the immigrant's perceptions of self-identification and belonging to social groups in the host country (Bosswick, Heckmann, 2006). Together with all of this, in the context of the integration issue, we have highlighted the experience of young repatriates, in which risks of integrative nature, with their possible negative impact, can lead to irreversible consequences. Thus, from the point of view of the socialization process, young people are seen as a key stage of human development, during which a person transitions from childhood to adulthood, or, in other words, from a state of dependence to a state of independence or interdependence. It is during youth that the individual creates foundations for the roles of maturity with their decisions (moral, social, economic, cultural, civil) (UNICEF, 2011). Moreover, the problems characteristic of this stage are even more pronounced in the conditions of the migration experience of young people, which is accompanied by unique risk factors. Their short-term and long-term negative manifestations can have irreversible harmful consequences in an individual's life. In particular, at the personal level, these problems can be expressed by the loss of the possibility of full human development, and at the societal level, they can be seen by the waste of the social, economic and cultural development potential of both sending and host countries (IOM Glossary on Migration, 2019). Thus, within the framework of this article, the results of the analysis of the research data are presented, based on which the main features of the factors that serve as obstacles in the integration processes of the repatriated young people are identified. The article presents the heterogeneity of the mentioned factors (structural-institutional, social, cultural, identity), providing a multifaceted view of the current manifestations of repatriation.
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Jan 1, 2024
Viktor E Saikinov + 3
Open Access