Abstract
The purpose of this article is to analyse the practice of defection as an illegal emigration mechanism. The set of tasks is outlined by the questions about the explanatory schemes used by the "fugitives", as well as the study of the reaction of state authorities and repressive organs to fugitive practices. The research methodology is based on a combination of interdisciplinary methods, including critical discourse analysis, narrative analysis, historical-comparative and historical-systemic methods. The scientific novelty of the study is that the defections and non-returns of the perestroika period have never been considered as a social phenomenon and social practices, as they were not scenarios through which the path of reforms was paved. Conclusions. The defections continued to be a channel of emigration throughout the period of so-called perestroika. These were planned actions included both in the practices of legal border crossing and in criminal practices related to the hijacking of aircraft. People of different ages, nationalities, professions, places of residence, and family status have resorted to defection. A common feature of their behaviour was a deep distrust of the authorities, such that they did not perceive any changes and reforms as possible or real.The explanatory schemes used by the fugitives depended on whether the attempt at illegal emigration was successful or unsuccessful. During the period under study, the KGB's rhetoric and practice of preventing defections from the Ukrainian SSR changed significantly. If at the beginning of perestroika, information on defectors submitted to the Central Committee of the CP(U) ended with a promise to make efforts to return them to their homeland, at the end of the period, they were reported as "working to clarify the circumstances and motives."Another sign of the times was the fact that the image of a defector began to be formed not according to the templates of an "enemy of the people", "traitor – member of a spy network", but according to formulas for devaluing the social importance of the offender. Fugitives were described in both official reports and the press as petty criminals, fraudsters, alcoholics, and people with mental disorders.