ACFC/56DOC(2016)001 Part VIII Conclusions 84. The common understanding of the protection of national minorities and what it entails has changed over the two decades since the adoption of the Framework Convention in 1995. At that time the concept of minority rights was mainly associated with the preservation of minority identities and with their protection from assimilation during partially violent state-formation and nation-building processes. Since then, the increased global and regional mobility of populations has transformed the demographic profile of European societies, and attention has shifted to the challenge of forming integrated and inclusive societies where diversity is acknowledged and welcomed as their integral feature. The present-day European context is further marked by migratory movements of an unprecedented scale which, coupled with the effects of recurrent economic crises and with growing security concerns, are destabilising societies and altering the manner in which minority rights are perceived in society and by policy makers.117 85. The Framework Convention was deliberately designed as a living instrument that is neither constrained by static definitions, nor by the question of who should be considered as a national minority or who should not. Rather, its interpretation must evolve and be adjusted to the prevailing societal context to ensure effective implementation. Adopted as a result of the courage and commitment shown by state leaders in the 1990s to prevent further interethnic violence through the promotion of individual rights and in the spirit of dialogue and solidarity, it is based on the understanding that minority identities are not exclusive. Persons belonging to national minorities must be allowed both to preserve their identities and to participate effectively in public life as an integral part of society. The Framework Convention therefore lays out a catalogue of rights that are of particular importance in order to maintain and encourage diversity while also promoting integration and social interaction. 86. While in some cases increasing diversity is embraced and conceived as a resource for societal development, in other cases there are references to the dangers of diversity and the threat to an asserted cultural homogeneity of the nation state. The latter perspectives disregard the fact that linguistic, ethnic and cultural diversity has been an integral part and an asset of European society over centuries. Moreover, they lay the foundations for two increasing trends that are of deep concern to the Advisory Committee. Firstly, hate speech and racist, xenophobic and extremist discourse, which is on the rise throughout Europe, often directed at anybody who is perceived as “different”, including persons belonging to national minorities. Secondly, a deepening polarisation along ethnic and linguistic, and at times religious lines, which has in some countries been cemented in parallel education systems that deepen divisions over generations. 87. The Framework Convention was designed as a tool for states to manage diversity in a way that carefully balances broader societal concerns, such as cohesion and democratic stability, with the protection of individual rights. As such, it is of particular relevance today when courage and commitment are again needed to meet the contemporary societal challenges, such as intensifying polarisation, the continued exclusion of some minorities, and the resultant threat of radicalisation in many European countries. Europe today must again meet urgent societal challenges that undermine stability, democratic security and peace. 117. See also the Tenth Activity Report of the Advisory Committee, covering the period from 1 June 2014 to 31 May 2016. 33