Ethnic conflicts do not only produce domestic results, but also affect international relations and foreign policy. Thus, the political demands of some ethnic groups (eg secession) may affect the legitimacy of the state's territorial borders. In some cases, other states consider it necessary for their own interests to intervene in domestic conflicts. In addition, ethnodiaspora organizations can also carry out such interventions from the outside to help the "ethnic compatriots". Ethnic conflicts have international feature in each of these cases.

The scientific approaches to the process of internationalization of ethnic conflicts in the Cold War were purely from a domestic aspect. It is not so difficult to realize this. Because the rigid bipolar system did not allow such confrontations to take violent character and expand. However, the bankruptcy of a rigid bipolar system has led to loss of control over ethnic controversies and threats to international interests. In particular, the intensification of local ethno political conflicts in the complicated ethnic areas such as Balkans and the Caucasus, which have fallen into the global geopolitical alteration zone, have given them an international inter-state character.

Soviet researchers did not use the term "internationalization" in their works. Instead, the notion of "external intervention in internal conflicts" was used. It is understood by the fighting sides that the direct intervention of the other state's armed forces in the internal conflict. Since this explanation is more "intervention" than "internationalization", the USSR experts even proposed a term called "foreign interference in internal conflict." In 1997, foreign intervention took place in two conflicts: the Angola army in Congo and the Rwandan army in Zair.

One of the other concepts used against the "internationalization" of conflicts is the notion of "great military confrontation." It may be agreed that replacing the term "external intervention in internal conflict" with a very narrow sense of the term "large-scale military confrontation" that does not meet the modern reality, limits the precise definition of the number of internationalized conflicts [1].

The concept of internationalization in modern situation has a broader content. Under the name of internationalization of ethnic conflicts, it is understood that any act of interference by external actors in the internal - political ethnoconflicts, including conflict resolution and management.

From the 90s, it is agreed with such a subjective opinion of the nature of the conflicts that internal internationalized conflicts combine the more dangerous lines of international and domestic conflicts. First of all, it should be noted that modern ethnic conflicts are rapidly spreading. The main reason for this is that internal internationalized conflicts are considered as part of a wider geopolitical confrontation and the threats posed by them are complex. In the first half of the 1990s, a number of areas around the world have developed a major conflict zone, with constant military-political tensions and regular inflammation. An example is the "crisis arc" that extends from South East Europe to the Middle East. Other gigantic conflict areas include Sudan, Ethiopia, Angola, and so on.

One of the more dangerous aspects of such conflicts are their connection with transnational (asymmetric) threats - ethnic cleansing, genocide, terrorism, drug trafficking and drug trafficking, human trafficking, illegal arms trafficking and so on [2]. Such threats lead to massive human rights violations and humanitarian disasters that is why the international community is withdrawing from the idea of "absolute sovereignty" to protect the innocent civilians from the severe suffering of such conflicts and this policy is implemented through humanitarian intervention. NATO's preventive steps in the Balkans have been implemented within the framework of the "humanitarian intervention" strategy. As a result of this operation, NATO liberated the Balkans from Serb aggression and genocide, carried out delimitation of ethnic borders, where there was a post-confrontation restoration in the monopoly of donor organizations.

The reality of the enlargement of ethnic conflicts is directly dependent on the concrete proportions of the direct and indirect participant forces, the policies of interested states and the general climate of international politics. In his behavior approach the British theorist John Berton sees the international character of the domestic conflict in the lack of balance of power between the participants in the conflict. The weak side's getting help from the outside, the superiors are also pushing for a similar step, and the conflict is widening. According to the author, any particular case of the domestic conflict should be considered in the background of the interaction of its internal and external aspects.

One of the reasons for the internationalization of the conflict is the peacekeeping operation. The peacekeeping operations of the postbipolar era have been seriously affected by global geopolitical change. If the neutrality of the multinational peacekeeping forces was partly guaranteed under the auspices of international organizations, primarily the UN in the Cold War, nowadays such operations aim to gain access to strategic areas covering the conflict zone or to consolidate there. Indeed, Russia views the peacekeeping operations within the CIS space as a defense mechanism for its geopolitical interests in the post-Soviet conflicts. The West considers the participation of multinational peacekeeping forces in conflicts in the post-communist countries acceptable. They consider the internationalization of peacekeeping action in the post-Soviet region as an effective instrument of limiting Russia’s influence in the most important countries of CIS space.

A simple thesis is based on this concept: the party that plays the peacekeeping role seeks political control over the conflict zone and tries to maintain and strengthen this control in the post-conflict settlement process. This can be seen in the policy pursued by the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, Russia in the post-Soviet conflicts.

The analysis we have made gives us reason to say that ethnic conflicts that have become a subject of a clash and are a geopolitical sphere protected by a clear and hidden protectionist system. German scientist Georgi Zimmel, who is considered to be the founder of the "functional" theory, rightly states that "only apperance of the third party" opens opportunities for understanding diversity, formation compromise and group solidarity in multilateral relations.

R. Stavenhagen, who attempts to analyze the complexities of ethnic conflict in Europe, points out that these factors include the relocation of ethnic affiliation abroad, external ideological support, caring neighbors, high enlisted states, historical burden, ethno demographic balance and direct intervention? These reasons can play an effective empirical role in illuminating the problem. However, in the author's research, the regional dimensions of the conflict and the activities of the third party were very narrow. On the other hand, this research does not cover geopolitical realities inherent in modern-day conflict because it covers the conflicts that took place during the Cold War."

In contemporary literature in the study of internationalized domestic conflicts wide attention is paid to these issues: motives of foreign intervention for ethnic conflicts, actors, forms and their consequences on the international system and so on.

The "external intervention" (the policy pursued by the neighboring state and states, as well as supra-national institutions) in ethnic conflicts is differentiated on five motives: humanitarian intervention, interference in defense, interference in protection, selfish intentions, and war for selfish purposes. Under the name of foreign interference in the internal conflict Is understood the diplomatic initiatives, expansion of economic aid and application of economic sanctions, In one form or another expanding military aid to rebel groups or state forces, as well as sending armed forces to the conflict zone. Many forms of intervention are complicated by their structure, states are acting for many reasons, but the real motive of this activity is more concealed under the curtain of diplomacy.

1. Humanitarian intervention. Occasionally, foreign intervention arises from humanitarian thought and attempts to reduce the scale of violence. This happens when the behavior of the conflicting parties violates international values and norms; it is observed by the brutality of the parties to the conflict and leads to genocide and ethnic cleansing. In such cases neighbor states and states, supra-national institutions (United Nations, European Union), as well as internationally recognized subjects: NGOs, human right organizations, humanitarian organizations (Borderless Doctors, Borderless Journalists, Greenpeace) have to act for humanitarian purposes. The mission of this activity is to ease the suffering of people in a conflictaffected country and to restore peace and security there.

This kind of activity comes from more intentions and altruistic goals. However, it should be noted that the regional states are unwilling to take advantage of such circumstances for the sake of their own security interests. For example, the end of the conflict in Afghanistan fully meets the interests of the national security interests of the regional states bordering it.

2. In practice, the neighboring state must resort to "defensive interventions" to prevent the flow of refugees and military raids, to prevent the spread of hostilities in new areas or to stop the war. In such cases, the movement motives of the states in the region can be called self-defense. In 1982 and 2006, the Israeli army entered Lebanon to neutralize the Palestinian radicals (Hezbollah). It is also possible to add Turkey's anti-terrorist campaign against Kurdish (PKK-KADEK) terrorists in northern Iraq and YPG in northeast of Syria.

It is also possible to link this type of intervention to national, regional and global security considerations. Thus, ethnic violence in one country is capable of causing serious instability in the regions of ethnicity in neighboring countries. (Especially if there is a danger of spreading ethnic conflicts through international borders). If the network of terrorist organizations emerged as a result of prolonged ethnic conflicts and the weapon of mass destruction passes into the hands of ethnic rebels in that case the motives of international intervention would serve the global security interests. This type of intervention is associated with the national interest of the country or intergovernmental organizations represented by group of countries. NATO's military intervention to Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya can be attributed to this classification.

3. Ethnic origin or ethnic kinship in abroad promotes escalation of ethnic conflict. In such a situation, the leaders of the neighboring state resort to "intervening in order to protect" or support their ethnic minorities involved in military operations in another country. In such cases, the steps taken by the neighboring state cannot be characterized as a self-defense step in terms of international law, although that state always declares that it only protects its members. Serbia's military intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Russia's Georgia is an example.

There are three models of this type of transnational policy: a) policy of ethnic irredentism; b) ethnic diaspora policy; c) the activities of transnational ethnic organizations [1-4].

Policy of ethnic irredentism. Under the name of ethnic irredentism is understood the unifying or reuniting movement of ethnic groups divided between two or more states with state boundaries. There are many cases where ethnic groups live in the territory of several states. First, the area where the ethnic group lives is artificially fragmented and the resulting new state may arise. (1949-1990 Germany, Korea). Second, the ethnic group may live in the territory of different states, but none of them can form a majority (Kurds). 3rd, the widespread example is related to the diaspora. Thus, the dominant group in one state has fallen apart from "ethnic compatriots" in one or more neighboring states. As a result, irredentist movements have a basis for emergence. Trying to change existing intergovernmental borders in order to reintegrate separated ethnic compatriots is considered as the basis for any form of irredentism. History shows that ethnic minority, who have ethnic kin in neighboring countries are the basis for ethnic irredentism policies since the time when the ruling ethnic minority began to perceive as a tool of political hegemony [5].

In such a situation, in the neighboring state where ethnic minorities constitute the majority status and control the political system, some political circles may consider the propaganda of expansionist ambitions and ethical demands for their political purposes. Ethnic minority living abroad or its fraction may be vulnerable to such calls, so that their cultural, economic and political dissatisfaction can easily become irredentist demands.

Naturally, the irredentist demands of the state imply not only the involvement of foreign ethnicities but also the inclusion of their populated areas. The realization of these demands means changing international borders. Ethnically motivated irredentist demands can not only lead to inter-ethnic and can also lead to interstate wars. One of the main reasons for the former Yugoslav tragedy was the idea of Serb politicians to create Greater Serbia at the expense of the territories of the neighboring Slavs. Greek’s Cypriot policy, Armenia's Nagorno- Karabakh, Hungary's policy towards Hungarian and Slovakis originates from irredentist goals [6-9].

Etnodiaspor policy

Under the name of diaspora are envisioned immigrant ethnic groups settled in an alien country. They maintain emotional and financial relations with their country of origin. Initially, ethnodiaspor communities are organized to protect mutual rights and to support cultural, social and religious needs of its members in a foreign-hosted environment. Large ethnodiaspor communities can politicize and may raise the issue of protecting the collective interests of its members. (Non-discriminatory access to employment, education and other economic opportunities).

Ethnic diaspora can affect the foreign policy of the state where it lives for the sake of the government of the country where it was born. It can be illustrated as an example of the activity of the German lobby in the US in the early 20th century to prevent the US from joining the World War I and the anti-Turkish activity of the Greek and Armenian community in the US Congress for a long time. The initiatives aimed at activating the transnational ethnodiaspor policy can be derived not only from the governments that accept migrants or from the fractions within the diaspora, but also from certain political fractions within the government of the state where migrants came from. The official policy of the Algerian government until 1993 is an example.

The activities of transnational ethnic organizations

Another manifestation of transnational ethnic policy is the activity of non-governmental ethnic organizations with branches in different countries around the world. This includes the transnational companies operating in Chinese capital in Southeast Asia and North America, the political organizations of Palestinian refugees in the Arab countries and the activity of Zionist organizations in the period of the establishment of the State of Israel.

The neighboring state tries to use "interference for selfish purposes" to gain profits from internal conflicts in another country, to achieve economic, political and military goals in the region and to strengthen its positions there. By helping the conflicting sides, regional competitors use their clash for own geopolitical interests. Support is provided in the form of financial assistance, supply of military equipment and manpower, provision of material and technical assistance and a base or asylum.

There are some cases in international practice that some states look into ethnic conflict as a means to disseminate their ideological views. It has been much written over Libya's (led by Gaddafi) involvement in several such conflicts: his support for nationalist extremist movements such as ETA and IRA, the Moro rebellion in the Philippines and later played a leading role in organizing negotiations between Moro leadership and Government of the Philippines. An example of this is the role played by Iran in the Middle East conflict. Official Tehran has attempted to export the Islamic Revolution to that region by providing financial and arms support to terrorist organizations, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, established by the Palestinian radicals in the war on Israel.

5. Finally, the neighboring state can use internal irregularities and enter the opponent's territory. The distinction between selfish intentions and intervention is that in the first case the neighboring state supports the rebels and takes the war with the other hand. In the latter case, the neighboring state implements the large-scale offensive plan with the application of its military power. At the time of the civil war in Jordan in 1970, Syria attacked that state. The Iraqi invasion of Iran in 1980 could also be related to this policy.

The analysis of these interference motives generally allows the difference between the two types of "third parties" in the conflict process. In the first case, activity is reflected in helping, and in other cases mediating efforts. So often, a third party joins the conflict, helping to end the conflict as an ally of this or that party [7]. For example, the United States entered the First World War by the Antanta against the Union of Three. The meaning of this type of third party's activity is to help one side win the war or achieve at least a good result.

Partisan behavior of a third party may increase the capability of one of the parties in a conflict situation and may help the party to prejudice the opponent or to reduce such actions by the opponent, or may conclude an agreement with him. Third-party mediation is carried out with a view to reaching a compromise solution during the settlement of disputed issues between the two parties or put an end to the conflict behavior of both parties.

Internationalization of ethnic conflicts as a result of interference of foreign actors may take different forms. Direct and indirect forms of intervention are distinguished.

International mediation, arbitration and peacekeeping carried out by a separate state, as well as international organizations, are part of the direct intervention from outside the domestic ethno conflict.

The indirect forms of intervention are policies and strategies to support ethnic compatriots abroad. Ethnic solidarity feelings that deserve the support of ethnic compatriots can be considered as one of the priorities of the state's foreign policy (the policy of Hungary and Russia towards their ethnic compatriots) and can be found in bilateral agreements.

In the event of ethnic conflict as a result of migration and in case of changing ethno-demographic balance in separate countries, country of ethnic migrants may express dissatisfaction at international and bilateral levels concerning the rights of migrants. Indeed, India was interested in the fate of Indians in East Africa and the Pacific (Uganda, Fiji). Turkey and Algeria have signed agreements with Western European governments on the situation of migrant workers from their countries [3].

Strategic intervention as another form of intervention in the ethnic conflict is characterized by a country's indirect impact on ethnic conflict in another country. This intervention is not the result of ethnic solidarity feelings; it is motivated by the concept of national interests at the state level. For example, a country's government may use the ethnic conflict in another country to realize and protect its interests. Internal ethnic conflicts are used to weaken and break down the enemy state.

In addition, strategic intervention occurs at sub-national level. The ethnic group is trying to implement its goals during geopolitical transit. This kind of activity presents itself as a strategic use of ethnic factor in international politics. An influential German researcher K. Offe notes that "internal minority is foreign minority" [10].

As noted, the main target of the internationalized ethnic conflicts is the neighboring states. The mentioned impact can be classified in five categories: refugee problem, economic problem, military problem, instability problems and interstate warfare [8].

Refugee problem

Each conflict chooses a target along with military targets, nonmilitary facilities, including the civilian population. As a result, homeless people have to become refugees or internally displaced and have to move to neighboring countries. The giant refugee wave creates serious economic problems for countries with limited natural resources. If refugees cross into their own country of origin, their status may radicalize their compatriots in that country. The expulsion of Azerbaijanis who left their ancestral land as a result of Armenia's aggressive policy to neighboring Iran caused the massive Azerbaijani community living there to hold peaceful actions condemning Armenia's aggressive policy [4].

It is possible to draw similar examples from the Middle East conflict. In 1967, as the Israeli occupation of the Western Coast of the Jordan River, Palestinian refugees arrived in Jordan and their radical parts were involved in a civil war in 1970. Local governments have deported radical Palestinian groups to prevent civil war. Most of them took shelter in Lebanon, and a few years later, there was another civil war.

Economic problem

Internal conflicts have a killing effect on deeper geo-economic relations between states in trade, transport, communications, energy resources and transportation. The wars in Azerbaijan and Chechnya have hindered the process of transporting Caspian oil to the European energy market. Wars in Afghanistan and Tajikistan violated trade in Central Asia, has closed the trade routes that had served for hundreds of years to exchange goods, restricted trade and foreign investment, as a result, many groups have been involved in drug trafficking 6, pp. 32-45].

Military problems

Internal conflicts are capable of creating military problems for neighboring states. First of all, the territory of the neighboring state can be used as a corridor for logistic support to a rebel separatistterrorist group. Afghan Mujahideen used Pakistan as a military and food placard. Tamil separators in Sri Lanka receive their weapons from state Tamil – Nadu in India.

The second version is that rebel groups use the territory of the neighboring state as a base for operations or shelter. The Khmer Reichists in Myanmar have created a base in the areas where their compatriots live in neighboring Thailand. PKK terrorists have made northern Iraq a base for their operations in Turkey.

Third, sometimes the local government is forced to carry out antiterrorist operations on the territory of the neighboring state to destroy separatist and terrorist groups and their bases. Several times, Israeli military forces entered the Lebanese territory and the Gaza Strip belonging to the Palestinian Authority, there were air strikes on bases belonging to Hamas and Hezbollah militants. Since 1995, the Turkish Armed Forces have carried out anti-terror operations in Iraq at some intervals in order to destroy Kurdish terrorists' military bases and are still continuing to do so. Turkey is currently conducting anti-terrorist operations against the YPG in the northeast of Syria.

Problems with instability

All of the reasons listed above are undoubtedly capable of affecting neighboring countries as a problem of instability. This situation can be attributed to the fragmented nations, which are located far beyond international borders. Because fragmented national groups are considered the best transit of the conflict. The conflicts in the polyethnic regions of the world (Caucasus, the Balkans, the Middle East, Central Asia, etc.) cannot be solved because national problems are mutually transmitted from one country to another.

War between the states

A military company against rebellious and terrorist groups who take refuge in the territory of the neighboring state may create interstate clashes. A similar situation could arise if a state, which has become a military operation area between a neighboring state and a terrorist group, strives to protect its territory.

Undoubtedly, the consequences of internal ethnic conflicts have a serious impact on international politics and inter-state relations. In general, it is possible to show 3 possible types of outcomes of ethnic conflicts: 1. peaceful ethnic reconciliation; 2. peaceful ethnic separation; 3. conflicts enter the long-term stage [11,12]. In other words, conflicting ethnic groups can continue to live together or continue living separately or can continue to struggle for control over the situation without compromising each other. In each case, the consequences of ethnic conflicts have a significant impact on international relations.

Peaceful ethnic reconciliation

If ethnic groups are able to resolve their disputes peacefully and independently (agreement on the creation or expansion of ethnoregional autonomy, providing ethnic minorities like the ethnic majority with equal opportunities and political status) then ethnic conflict will not cause serious problems for neighbor and foreign countries and international situation will remain unchanged.

If negotiations on the conflict are the main means of settlement, In this case foreign actors may assist as a third party (mediation, assistance in the development of more stringent guarantees for minorities, proposing proposals for possible constitutional changes) in the peace negotiations. After the end of the negotiations, international actors can also assist in the conclusion of trade agreements with new regional actors.

Peaceful ethnic separation

In some cases, conflicting ethnic groups are unable to draft a new constitution that will satisfy all interesting sides and in certain circumstances may decide to establish an independent state. Cultural separation is rarely encountered, as ethnic geography is too complex, so many groups perceive fragmentation as a threat to their identity, regional influence and weight in international politics. The fragmentation and collapse of multinational states, the secession of ethnic minorities, the creation of an independent state or the unification with other states, etc. leading to the most serious changes in the international system and inter-state relations.

Other states that are subjects of international relations cannot be indifferent to potential ethnic separatism and irredentism threatening regional security. In this regard, serious instability within multinational countries leads to the interference of foreign states.

Reaseful ethnic separation causes some serious problems for international security due to several reasons. First, the previously considered internal borders should be recognized as international borders; secondly, foreign countries are facing the task of establishing diplomatic relations with the new state; thirdly, foreign states should resolve the issue of the new state's accession to international and regional organizations; fourthly, to reconsider the terms of previously concluded international agreements with the collapsed state; fifth, to solve the issue of the necessity and development of new trade and financial relations with the new state; sixth, it is necessary to assess the impact of these changes on regional and global stability and consequently, change the internal and international security policy.

Conflicts enter the long-term stage and ethnic wars

Such a scenario of internal ethnic conflicts is capable of causing serious problems for international systems and states' foreign policy. One of the main reasons is the spread of such sharp ethnic conflicts to international borders. There are two ways to spread ethnic conflicts - diffusion and escalation.

Under the name of international diffusion is understood the conditions that increase the likelihood of prolonged and persistent ethnic violence within a state that may lead to serious conflicts in other states as well as the effects of infection and ideological impact on the minority group. Diffusion has often been influenced by the flow of information into the mentality of ethnic groups in other countries. On the one hand, events abroad can directly alter the ethnic balance of power in the country, can break existing ethnic agreement and exacerbate violence (flow of refugees).

On the other hand, ethnic conflicts in one country may push ethnic groups in another country to radicalize their demands. In addition, a prolonged violent conflict in one country can force ethnic groups in another country to rethink the effective political conditions of their status. The international escalation of ethnic conflicts refers to the fact that ethnic conflicts involve new foreign participants in their orbit through traditional intergovernmental alliances, irredentism, directing the attention of its people from domestic problems to the problems of other states and to use the internal vulnerability of their neighbors for own benefit. In other words, under the name of escalation is understood the condition in which ethnic confrontations in a country play a role of a detonator of the international conflict. Both diffusion and escalation of internal ethnic conflicts can have devastating results not only for the ethnic groups involved in this conflict but also for the central government, as well as for other states and the entire region.

As a result, we come to the conclusion that the internationalization of ethnic conflicts can have different consequences for each conflict:

• The conflict may be exacerbated by external interference;

• Conflict can be the result of the interference of foreign interests;

• Mitigating conflict as a result of international care and pressure;

• A mediation or interference of external forces may result in reconciliation between the parties to the conflict;

• Conflict inversion, that is, ethnic conflict can be non-ethnical due to the special interests of foreign partners and in general it can turn into another kind of conflict (for example, events that have taken place in Iraq since 2003, Arab spring since 2011).

This article dedicated to the problems of internationalization of the ethnic conflicts. Author analyses the reasons of internationalization of the ethnic conflicts, motives and forms of foreign interventions and problems rose for neighbouring states and tries to substantiate that such conflicts may result in dangerous consequences for entire poliethnic regions and for the international security system as a whole.