Nonstate Actors in Intrastate Conflicts

4. A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Roles of Diasporas in Intrastate Conflicts

C h a p t e r 4 A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Roles of Diasporas in Intrastate Conflicts Gabriel Sheffer Recent worldwide social, economic, and political developments have had a significant impact on diasporas, in particular on their relations with hostlands , homelands, and other states in which their kin permanently reside (Sheffer 2007a: 187–88). Consequently, many diasporic communities have been increasingly involved in the politics of their host-lands: for example, maintaining effective lobbies or directly and indirectly influencing politicians , political organizations, and institutions. At the same time, diasporans tend to remain involved in their homelands, either through transferring funds or more directly in local politics. Currently, ethno-national-religious diasporas are more demanding and active than before in attempts to promote their own and their homelands’ interests, including involvement in intrastate conflicts. But are all diasporic communities identical? Do diasporas have common characteristics, or rather are they quite different? Do such differences explain variation in degrees of diasporic communities’ engagement in the political, social , and economic systems in their host countries and homelands? The general public, politicians, and media tend to indiscriminately group together dispersed individuals and entities and their various legal and illegal activities. Regardless of their different ethno-national-religious origins and identities, for example, dispersed Muslims, Polish immigrants, and the stateless Roma are lumped together in the same category of people who reside outside their coun- A Conceptual Framework for Roles of Diasporas 85 tries of origin. It is not surprising then that diasporas are typically seen as having the same motivations and engaging in identical activities. It should be noted that significant differences exist among various diasporas , and that these differences explain the variation in diasporic communities’ engagement in the political, social, and economic systems in their host countries and homelands. Furthermore, it should be realized that essential theoretical , analytical, and actual differences exist in the motivations of various types of dispersed communities to become involved in intrastate conflicts. This blurring of analytical differences has profound effects on understanding diasporic communities’ involvement in the social, political, and economic spheres in general, and, more specifically, to accurately show why and when diasporans and diasporas become involved in intrastate conflicts. This chapter examines various clusters of the deeper causes and more immediate motivations for the involvement of various ethno-national-religious diasporic entities—Cuban, Armenian, Pakistani, Basques, Persian, Jewish/ Israeli, and Palestinian diasporas, to name a few—in conflicts that take place in either their homelands or host countries. Ethno-national-religious diasporas stand out among the various categories that will be discussed in this chapter as being more demanding and active in their attempts to promote their own and their homelands’ interests, including through involvement in conflicts. The chapter begins with a discussion of the various types of dispersals, focusing on ethno-national-religious diasporas. After classifying and characterizing these groups, the main reasons why diasporas become involved in intrastate conflicts will be discussed. The next sections examine the various types of conflicts in which diasporas are engaged, address the aggressive activities of diasporas in intrastate conflicts, and offer some propositions about the actual effects of the involvement of diasporas in these conflicts on the policies and actions of other involved actors. Finally, the main arguments are summarized in the concluding section. Why Distinctions Between Dispersals Are Needed When considering diasporas’ engagement and activities in intrastate conflicts , it is essential to remember six critical facts: first, none of the dispersed persons or groups involved in intrastate conflicts (and in violence, terrorist, or criminal activities) form homogeneous entities; second, these activists 86 Gabriel Sheffer consist of individuals and groups whose historical, or more recent, origins are not in the countries of their present permanent residence (i.e., their hostlands ); third, some of these groups are involved in conflicts in both their host countries and their countries of origin (homelands); fourth, not all these individuals and groups are involved in any given conflict to the same extent and intensity; fifth, there are important variations in diasporas’ bellicose involvement in intrastate conflicts, and when these conflicts are resolved, the diasporas ’ peaceful behavior is resumed; finally, dispersed individuals and groups are also actively involved in positive cultural, social, political, and economic activities in both their homelands and their host-lands. In short, when dealing with the sensitive issue of diasporic activities, especially involvement in intrastate conflicts, there is a substantial need to avoid unjustifiable generalizations...