Migrant-phobia turns from the traditional ideological favourite subject of right radicals into the convenient means for mass political mobilization, often used by quite respectable European leaders. The partisan item of propaganda of “Patriot of Ukraine”, the Tajik sync of the official from the Federal Migration Service of Russian Federation and the item on French TV about Romanian Roma are often united by what is pictured as the image of insidious migrant-enemy, who goes miles and miles away to bring exotic diseases, crime and drug addiction, to poorly perform the work, stolen from local residents, not to pay taxes, consuming somebody else’s social benefits, fray nerves and spoil way of life of indigenous population.

Migrant-phobia differs from the rather grounded requirements to the quality and quantity of non-residents by the presumption of hatred and distrust, fixation of indelible differences, assignment of unusual qualities and attitude to others as to defective ones. The inadequacy of such attitude is emphasized by the fact that the philistine consciousness is ready to consider as “Ravshan and Jumshut” everybody, who is stigmatized with anti-migration propaganda, and at the same time to treat with piety the guest stars, such as sportsmen, expats managers, foreign stars of TV and show business. As if the matter is in people from different planets.

The Institute of Human Rights and Prevention of Extremism and Xenophobia, together with the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology carried out the sociological research among foreigners, who arrived to Ukraine in different time to live, work and study. As the research data and real destinies of people show, the popular migrant-phobic myths do not stand up to any sociological criticism, and a foreigner, who arrives to study, live and work to Ukraine is absolutely not that “devil incarnate”, which is strenuously pictured for the average citizens by professional xenophobes and populist politicians.

The first myth – “lately we observe the unprecedented increase of the number of migrants”.

Despite this common opinion, sociology indicates that during the previous 20 years there were no particular booms of migration activity in Ukraine. In 1991-1994, 20.2% of currently living in Ukraine migrants arrived, in 1995-1999 – 25%, in 2000-2004 – 21.2%, in 2005-2009 – 25.3%, from 2010 to 2011 – 7%. If to consider the dynamics by decades, than the periods 1991-2001 and 2001-2011 will be mutually comparable. It is obvious that before 1991 the tendency was less marked, as only the number of foreign students and workers, who arrived to the USSR in order to adopt the Soviet practices, was significantly higher than today. Thus, the rather steady process is observed for already minimum 20 years without hints of booms and prospects of considerable increase.

The second myth – migrant, as “asocial element” and “social parasite”.

The groundlessness of this myth is demonstrated by the range of data. First, the migrants in Ukraine have rather high educational characteristics: 51% have higher education, 22% - the secondary specialized one, 34% - complete secondary one, i.e. they are not degraded people. Second, the vast majority of migrants – 74% are working people. Among those, who currently do not work: 42% are studying, 19% are in maternity leave or pensioners, 13% are officially unemployed and search for job, 8% have no official documents to become legally employed. Third, migrants seek legalization of their status and obtaining of legal incomes. 81% of respondents constantly live in Ukraine on legal ground (obtained citizenship, registration, permission), and only 9% live illegally or are refugees. The remaining 10% are students of temporary labour migrants. 56% of migrants have official permit for work, 14% work as privet entrepreneurs and have official documents for entrepreneurial activity. The others work by verbal arrangement or conduct entrepreneurial activity without license – 62% of them plans to obtain the necessary licenses and permits in near future. About a half of respondents is characterized by labour sedentism, i.e. works on the same work place all the time, a quarter changed work place once in 2-3 years.

The sociological fact – in most cases the typical migrant in Ukraine is the economically needed person, as well as the industrious tax- and other assessments payer.

The third myth – Ukraine is some kind of magnet for migrants.

The groundlessness of this thesis is confirmed with the life itself, or more exactly with its social and economic realities. When appraising life in Ukraine, only 23% of respondents noted that life in Ukraine is better than in their native countries, 21% consider that life in Ukraine is worse than in their native countries today, 17% consider that it is good to live in Ukraine, but earlier life in the native countries was much better, than it is today in Ukraine, and 31% of respondents consider that life in Ukraine is the same as in the native countries.

Only 17% of respondents consider that life in Ukraine is better than in other CIS countries. 30% of them see no differences between life in Ukraine and other SIC countries. One in four respondents note that life is better in other CIS countries, than in Ukraine.

During the research, the respondents were asked the questions about emigrant attitudes among their relatives, friends, who stayed to live in their native countries. 48% of respondents noted that their compatriots are not going to leave their native lands at all. 21% expressed the opinion that their compatriots may move to the European countries, but not to the CIS countries and Ukraine. 6% consider that their compatriots may move to the other CIS countries, but not to Ukraine. Only 15% called Ukraine as the country, where their relatives and friends may settle down.

The fourth myth – in case of land reform in the country, migrants will colonize Ukrainian village.

Such opinion may be encountered more frequently now, but neither hopes, nor fears in this regard have any serious sociological grounds.

The absolute number of migrants, before moving to Ukraine, lived in cities – 78%. 7% of them lived in towns, and 13% - in villages. In Ukraine, the majority of respondents – 81% of migrants live in cities with population of 50 thousand people and more. The structure of employment of migrants as well have no hints of the fact, that they may be attracted by agrarian sector: 48% of respondents currently work in the area of trade, 11% - in the area of medicine, education and science, 8% - in the area of construction, and 7% for the areas of security services, catering, marketing and tourism, 5% in the area of industry.

It is obvious, that the vast majority of migrants are bearers of urban culture; they seek to live in cities with rather high level of life and employment.

The fifth myth – migrants do not integrate the Ukrainian society.

80% of migrants fluently communicate the local population in Russian or Ukrainian. 65% of respondents with under age children, communicate with them in their native language along with Ukrainian and Russian, 23% - communicate only in Ukrainian or Russian, and 12% - only in their native language. At the same time, 66% of children of migrants study in common schools, 7% - in specialized schools, and only 2% - in schools under the embassies and consulates. 62% of respondents want their children to obtain higher education in Ukraine. A half of respondents with under age children consider that their children will stay to live in Ukraine, 27% found difficulty in replying, 7% consider that their children will return to their native country, and 11% - that they will go abroad.

As for the relations between migrants and indigenous Ukrainians, 80% of respondents consider that they always may rely on the help of their neighbours, 91% have friends among local population, which they can always ask for help, 63% do not consider, that in case of need, they may only ask only their compatriots for help, 93% can freely practise their religion and honour national traditions, 91% note that their neighbours and colleagues respect their views and convictions. By the results of replies to these questions, by way of conversion of replies by scale from 0 to 100, and addition of average values, it is possible build the index of integration of migrants. The value of this index is 78, which indicates a very high level of integration.

It may sound ironic, but it is a fact – as of the 21st year of the state independence, there is still no state migration policy in the country (prediction of needs, quotas, official statistics, single regulating body, European legislation, control, etc.), but the Ukrainian society and real economy, nevertheless, spontaneously somehow arrange everything in proper places!!!

It should only be added that migrant-phobic propaganda, as the rule, suppresses some important facts in the area of migration policy:

- states, which use labour of migrants (without providing citizenship), as the rule, bear no pension liabilities before them and save colossal budget means on this;

- states with efficient migration policy are able, due to the labour of migrants, to ensure high standards of life for indigenous population (sometimes even life of idleness and life, not burdened with labour obligations, as in the UAE);

- in most cases migrants themselves finance creation of own work places, purchase or renting of dwelling etc., i.e. they contribute their own money or money of accepting community into the accepting country and its economy.

Well, that is the sociology… And to be more precise – the real life.

Oleksandr Feldman for “Livyi bereg”