Turkmenistan

This report introduces some of the most fundamental concepts, trends and challenges with regard to nationality in five Central Asian States - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. It identifies trends and patterns in the evolution of citizenship policies in this region.

Peculiarities of Russian immigration-related legislation can to a large extent be explained by the fact that citizens of neighbouring countries ? former USSR republics ? do not require a visa to enter the Russian Federation (except for the Baltic states, the Republic of Georgia and Turkmenistan)1 . Meanwhile, major immigration flows to the RF originate from these very countries, and they are largely spontaneous in nature.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation has become one of the most important destinations for immigration in the world. It is also a very particular case of a destination country in which two types of flows have shaped the character of immigration. Massive waves of Russians returning to their ancestral (or actual) motherland from other republics dominated throughout the 1990s, diminishing in 2000s. At the same time, the growing Russian economy started to attract immigrant workers from other parts of the post-Soviet space, especially from less developed central Asian countries, namely Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Nowadays, they are the main working migrant group, whose presence is contested on cultural grounds. The Eurasian migration system is thus a central theme for migration research in the region. This report proposes a deep comparative analysis of the place of Russia and Kazakhstan (Russia’s emerging economic rival) in the Eurasian migration system. The analysis is accompanied by an analysis of data collection in Russia and the development of Russia’s migration policy.

The Russian law 'On Refugees' in terms of its principles and key provisions complies with the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Still, this general compliance has turned out to be insufficient for the institution of asylum to operate effectively in the Russian Federation. The unsettled nature of the procedure of determining refugee status and the lack of procedural guarantees for asylum-seekers creates the possibility for denials of granting asylum, on the grounds of political rationale. In the first place, this refers to refugees from the countries ? former USSR republics (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan) as well as DPRK (North Korea) and PRC (China). Even in cases when the instance of persecution cannot be doubted, they are not granted refugee status but temporary asylum, although this institution by definition serves a different purpose, and granted protection is of considerable volume. Decisions about the denial to grant refugee status in many cases do not contain the motives of the denial or are limited to the reference to the fact that an asylum-seeker has left the place of residence for economic reasons. In the majority of cases the asylum-seeker is not provided with the negative decision as such, which makes it much more difficult to appeal against it. As regards the rights, especially social rights, of an individual granted refugee status, the lack of the mechanism of their realisation in legislation creates serious obstacles for refugee integration.

The integration of migrants is becoming an increasingly important question in Belarus. As socio-economic cooperation between Belarus and other countries is developing the list of participants in the integration process of migrants is growing. For several decades, the traditional participants were citizens from neighboring countries: Russia, Ukraine and Poland. At the present there is also, though, rapid growth in migration flows from other areas, particularly from the south: Turkmenistan, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Turkey and the countries of South Asia including China and Vietnam. This paper presents a study of the scope and structure of the main participants in the integration process, in terms of country of birth and country of citizenship. The main data sources are the census, data on vital and education statistics. The results suggest that integration in Belarus is not a serious problem, being similar to other social processes. One of the key explanations for this is the influx of people from the former Soviet Union, above all, those who lived in Belarus themselves or had relatives there. The integration of migrants in Belarus is most evident in the labor market. The most common areas of integration for labor migrants from the older migrant nations are in industry, agriculture and trade. Citizens from the new areas are, on the other hand, concentrated in trade, health and education. The new migrants include more young males with higher-level skills. Among these, more than half are professionals. The vast majority of the new migrants come to Belarus to pursue higher education or under the guise of education. The old trends mean greater integration dispersion in terms of employment, skill levels and education, but also in terms of age. The study emphasizes the need for a special policy for the adaptation and integration of migrants, something particularly important for citizens from unusual areas due to differences in culture, language and religion. Special attention should be paid to the knowledge of Russian and Belarusian, the possibility of buying or renting housing, the use of free education and health care services, etc. At this point in Belarus there are no obstacles for migrants wishing to integrate, but there are no authorities specifically allocated for that purpose. Self-integration for these migrants is a problem which will take a good deal of time to work itself out.

The integration of migrants is becoming an increasingly important question in Belarus. As socio-economic cooperation between Belarus and other countries is developing the list of participants in the integration process of migrants is growing. For several decades, the traditional participants were citizens from neighboring countries: Russia, Ukraine and Poland. At the present there is also, though, rapid growth in migration flows from other areas, particularly from the south: Turkmenistan, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Turkey and the countries of South Asia including China and Vietnam. This paper presents a study of the scope and structure of the main participants in the integration process, in terms of country of birth and country of citizenship. The main data sources are the census, data on vital and education statistics. The results suggest that integration in Belarus is not a serious problem, being similar to other social processes. One of the key explanations for this is the influx of people from the former Soviet Union, above all, those who lived in Belarus themselves or had relatives there. The integration of migrants in Belarus is most evident in the labor market. The most common areas of integration for labor migrants from the older migrant nations are in industry, agriculture and trade. Citizens from the new areas are, on the other hand, concentrated in trade, health and education. The new migrants include more young males with higher-level skills. Among these, more than half are professionals. The vast majority of the new migrants come to Belarus to pursue higher education or under the guise of education. The old trends mean greater integration dispersion in terms of employment, skill levels and education, but also in terms of age. The study emphasizes the need for a special policy for the adaptation and integration of migrants, something particularly important for citizens from unusual areas due to differences in culture, language and religion. Special attention should be paid to the knowledge of Russian and Belarusian, the possibility of buying or renting housing, the use of free education and health care services, etc. At this point in Belarus there are no obstacles for migrants wishing to integrate, but there are no authorities specifically allocated for that purpose. Self-integration for these migrants is a problem which will take a good deal of time to work itself out.

The MACIMIDE Global Expatriate Dual Citizenship Dataset charts the rules that existed in near all states of the world since 1960 with regard to the loss or renunciation of citizenship after a citizen of a respective state voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another state. The central variable of the Dataset is the dualcit_cat variable. This is a categorical variable whose values may be used to interpret, in broad lines, the position of a country with regards to the expatriate dual citizenship. The dualcit_cat variable reflects what consequences the legislation and legal practice of a country attaches to the voluntary acquisition of a foreign citizenship. The value of this variable depends on a number of criteria, including whether a citizen of the reference country who voluntarily obtains a foreign citizenship automatically loses – in principle – the citizenship of the origin country, and whether a citizen of the reference country can renounce that citizenship. The value assigned to dualcit_cat reflects the position of the country on the 1st of January of the reference year. Any subsequent changes in legislation will be reflected in the dualcit_cat value of the following year and included in updated versions of the Dataset. The dualcit_binary variable is a recoding of the dualcit_cat variable. This variable can be used for broad comparisons of the dual citizenship positions around the world. The possible values reflect whether the legislation of a country, in a given reference year, provides for the automatic loss of the origin citizenship (1) or not (2). All data have been centrally collected and refer to specific provisions in national law.

Since the mid-1970s, the World Population Policies Database, last updated in 2015, provides comprehensive and up-to-date information on the population policy situation and trends for all Member States and non-member States of the United Nations. Among several areas, the database shows the evolution of government views and policies with respect to internal and international migration. The migration strand covers internal migration, immigration, emigration, and return. The Database is updated biennially by conducting a detailed country-by-country review of national plans and strategies, programme reports, legislative documents, official statements and various international, Inter-governmental and non-governmental sources, as well as by using official responses to the United Nations Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development.

The Research Team is supporting the PPTI Team in implementing Specific Objective 2 of the Prague Process Targeted Initiative: Knowledge Base. This objective builds on the results of the “Building Migration Partnerships” (BMP) project implemented in 2009-2011. Objective: The aim of this component is to maintain, update and/or further improve the BMP knowledge base, through gathering information in the form of Migration Profiles for countries in Eastern Europe, Southern Caucasus, Central Asia and Russia. Information and data gathering will be a continuous process throughout the whole implementation period with the purpose of collecting and analysing data, statistics and information on migration flows, trends and dynamics between the countries participating in the Prague Process. The information gathered will be presented in form of Migration Profiles and the i-Map. Activities: • Expert-level Workshop on data management/data and sources utilisation for the elaboration of Migration Profiles or other documents of similar nature • Expert Missions of a group of 3 EU experts nominated by the Project Steering Committee to the 11 participating beneficiary countries. The target of these missions: 1. To re-introduce the purpose of Migration Profiles, their history and format to the relevant state authorities both on policy and expert level; 2. To confirm existing or identify new responsible national bodies for development or update of the Migration Profiles and agree on the methodology and timeframe for development of the Migration Profiles; 3. To gather key information and data, identify existing gaps and propose solutions for how to address them on the national level; 4. To exchange information on selected thematic areas of the Action Plan of the Prague Process which are not covered by the 4 Pilot Projects of the Prague Process Targeted Initiative or to meet a request for information from Prague Process states which do not participate in the Specific Objective 2 Knowledge Base. • Elaboration of 4 and update of 7 existing migration profiles including additional research, expert input, data gathering and analysis. The Support team (ICMPD project team) will act as the help desk for the national authorities in charge of coordination of development of the Migration Profile and will ensure communication between the national authorities and experts from the leading states including ensuring translation of relevant documents in English and Russian language. The support team will collect and store all information and communication, translate relevant information into the PP Knowledge Base and the i-Map and will keep the Knowledge Base up-to-date. • 2 Study visits of 11 beneficiary states’ experts (1 expert on migration analysis and statistics for each state) to project partner states (Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Sweden). The purpose of the study visits is to get acquainted with the work of analytical units of the partner states (e.g. the Analytical Centre for Border Protection and Migration within the Ministry of Interior in the Czech Republic) Outcomes: • Interactive online i-Map updated and improved. • 4 beneficiary states' Migration Profiles developed and used. • 7 existing beneficiary states' Migration Profiles updated and used. • Strengthening the capacity of the 11 beneficiary states to gather and process data on migration.

The Inquiry gathers critically important data for monitoring the implementation of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and other international agreements, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Inquiry, mandated by the General Assembly in its resolution 1838 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, has been conducted by the Secretary-General at regular intervals since 1963. The Twelfth Inquiry consists of multiple-choice questions, organized in three thematic modules: Module I on population ageing and urbanization; Module II on fertility, family planning and reproductive health; and Module III on international migration. In 1994, Member States attending the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo agreed that “population-related goals and policies are integral parts of cultural, economic and social development” and recommended that actions be taken “to measure, assess, monitor and evaluate progress towards meeting the goals of its Programme of Action”. The year 2019 will mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Cairo conference and adoption of the ICPD Programme of Action, which continues to provide crucial guidance for addressing the fundamental development challenges facing the world today. Population issues are also at the core of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted in 2015. The United Nations Inquiry among Governments on Population and Development (the “Inquiry”) gathers critically important data for monitoring the implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action and other international agreements, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Inquiry, mandated by the General Assembly in its resolution 1838 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, has been conducted by the Secretary-General at regular intervals since 1963. The most recent Inquiry, the Eleventh, was implemented in 2014.

The index is based on three types of entry visa restrictions: visa required, visa not required for short stays and visa not required. The author identifies country pairs which changed their visa regime during 1998–2010. This immigration policy index is constructed for all countries and territories in the world for both March 1998 and November 2009. This index is heterogeneous across destination and origin countries as well as over time.