Positive and Negative Diaspora Governance in Context: From Public Diplomacy to Transnational Authoritarianism

Abstract

Abstract: The diaspora studies literature recently has indicated an expansion in state-led diaspora engagement initiatives and burgeoning diaspora governance institutions around the world. Home states have correlated concepts such as public diplomacy and soft power with these nascent incentives to cultivate and mobilize diasporas for state interests. Despite the interpretation of these developments as the expansion of citizenship rights for the diaspora and their systematic incorporation back into the home nation, some authors remain skeptical about the multifaceted motives behind such initiatives. Authoritarian states particularly employ diaspora governance as a mechanism to monitor and control diaspora groups, which home communities perceive as dissidents. Using Turkey and its recent diaspora governance policy as a case study, this article demonstrates that diaspora governance enables the state to create, depending on the context, potentially ideological and repressive transnational state apparatuses that can assume both positive and negative forms.

Key Words:

• Authoritarianism
• Diaspora
• Migration
• Public diplomacy
• Turkey

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Professor Hakan Yavuz for organizing and hosting a one-day workshop on Turkey on April 1, 2019 at the University of Utah at which this paper was presented.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Eva Østergaard-Nielsen (2003) The Politics of Migrants' Transnational Political Practices, International Migration Review, 37(3), pp. 760–786; Elaine Lynn-EE Ho (2011) ‘Claiming’ the Diaspora: Elite Mobility, Sending State Strategies and the Spatialities of Citizenship, Progress in Human Geography, 35(6), pp. 757–772; Simon Turner & Nauja Kleist (2013) Introduction: Agents of Change? Staging and Governing Diasporas and the African State, African Studies, 72(2), pp. 192–206; Alenxandra Délano & Alan Gamlen (2014) Comparing and Theorizing State–Diaspora Relations, Political Geography, 41, pp. 43–53; Francesco Ragazzi (2014) A Comparative Analysis of Diaspora Policies, Political Geography, 41, pp. 74–89; Gerasimos Tsourapas (2015) Why Do States Develop Multi-Tier Emigrant Policies? Evidence from Egypt, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(13), pp. 2192–2214; Ahmet Erdi Ozturk & Hakki Tas (2020) The Repertoire of Extraterritorial Repression: Diasporas and Home States, Migration Letters, 17(1), pp. 59–69; and Yehonatan Abramson (2017) Making a Homeland, Constructing a Diaspora: The Case of Taglit-Birthright Israel, Political Geography, 58, pp. 14–23.

2 Laurie A. Brand (2006) Citizens abroad: Emigration and the State in the Middle East and North Africa, Vol. 23 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

3 Asli S. Okyay (2015) Diaspora-Making as a State-Led Project: Turkey's Expansive Diaspora Strategy and Its Implications for Emigrant and Kin Populations, PhD thesis, European University Institute, Florence, Italy; Hung Liu & Els Van Dongen (2016) China’s Diaspora Policies as a New Mode of Transnational Governance, Journal of Contemporary China, 25(102), pp. 805–821; Zeynep Yanasmayan & Zeynep Kaşlı (2019) Reading Diasporic Engagements through the Lens of Citizenship: Turkey as a Test Case, Political Geography, 70, pp. 24–33.

4 Alan Gamlen (2008) Why engage diasporas? ESRC Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, Working Paper No. 63, University of Oxford.

5 ⁵ Ho, ‘Claiming’ the Diaspora, pp. 757–772.

6 Ragazzi, Comparative Analysis, pp. 74–89.

7 Sebnem Koser Akçapar & Damla Bayraktar Aksel (2017) Public Diplomacy through Diaspora Engagement: The Case of Turkey, Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, 22(3), pp. 135–160.

8 Bhattiprolu Murti & Rhonda S. Zaharna (2014) India’s Digital Diaspora Diplomacy: Operationalizing Collaborative Public Diplomacy Strategies for Social Media, Exchange: The Journal of Public Diplomacy, 5(1), p. 3; and D. Stone &, E. Douglas (2018) Advance Diaspora Diplomacy in a Networked World, International Journal of Cultural Policy, 24(6), pp. 710–723.

9 Laurie A. Brand (2002) States and their expatriates: Explaining the development of Tunisian and Moroccan emigration-related institutions. Working Paper (University of Southern California).

10 Simon Turner (2013) Staging the Rwandan Diaspora: The Politics of Performance, African Studies, 72(2), pp. 265–284.

11 Ibid, p. 273.

12 For a previous study on Turkey’s negative and positive diaspora engagement from the perspective of citizenship, see Yanasmayan and Kasli Reading diasporic engagements, pp. 24–33.

13 We build on the concept of “claiming diaspora” from Ho, ‘Claiming the diaspora.’

14 M. Hakan Yavuz (ed.) (2006) The Emergence of a New Turkey: Islam, Democracy, and the AK Parti (Utah: University of Utah Press).

15 Bahar Baser & Ahmet Erdi Öztürk (2017) Authoritarian Politics in Turkey: Elections, Resistance and the AKP (London: Bloomsbury Publishing).

16 Yasar Aydin (2014) “The New Turkish Diaspora Policy: Its Aims, Their Limits and the Challenges for Associations of People of Turkish Origin and Decision-makers in Germany,” SWP Research Paper, accessed March 1, 2019.

17 Bahar Baser (2017) Turkey’s Ever-Evolving Attitude-Shift Towards Engagement with Its Diaspora, Emigration and Diaspora Policies in the Age of Mobility, pp. 221–238 (Springer, Cham).

18 Yanasmayan & Kasli, Reading Diasporic Engagements, pp. 24–33

19 Can Unver (2013) Changing Diaspora Politics of Turkey and Public Diplomacy, Turkish Policy Quarterly, 12(1), p 183.

20 Claudine Kuradusenge (2016) Denied Victimhood and Contested Narratives: The Case of Hutu Diaspora, Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal, 10(2), p. 59.

21 Laurie A. Brand (2006) Citizens Abroad: Emigration and the state in the Middle East and North Africa, Vol. 23 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

22 S. Turner (2013), Staging the Rwandan diaspora, p. 266.

23 We borrow these concepts from Louis Althusser (2006) and apply them to the Turkish context from the angle of diaspora governance. Repressive state apparatuses (RSA) such as government, courts, and police are implements to suppress the masses through violent and non-violent means. Ideological state apparatuses (ISA) such as education, media, church, and mosques also disseminate the ideology of the ruling class in multifaceted ways. We argue that the institutions and organisations of which the diaspora governance policy comprises are also state apparatuses that employ RSA and ISA as transnational strategies to control diaspora populations.

24 Laurie A. Brand (2017) State, citizenship, and diaspora: The cases of Jordan and Lebanon, Working Paper No. 146 (University of California, San Diego), p. 1.

25 Harris Mylonas (2013) The Politics of Diaspora Management in the Republic of Korea, The Asian Institute for Policy Studies, 81, pp. 1–12.

26 Ho, Claiming’ the diaspora, pp. 757–772.

27 Gamlen, Why Engage Diasporas, p. 3.

28 Peggy Levitt & Rafael De la Dehesa (2003) Transnational Migration and the Redefinition of the State: Variations and Explanations, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 26(4), pp. 587–611.

29 Brand, States and Their Expatriates; and Brand, State, Citizenship, and Diaspora.

30 Nicole Hirt & Abdulkader Saleh Mohammad (2018) By Way of Patriotism, Coercion, or Instrumentalization: How the Eritrean Regime Makes Use of the Diaspora to Stabilize Its Rule, Globalizations, 15(2), pp. 232–247.

31 Østergaard-Nielsen, The Politics of Migrants,' pp. 760–786.

32 Ying Fan (2006) Branding the Nation: What Is Being Branded? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(1), pp. 5–14.

33 Rhea Abraham (2012) India and Its Diaspora in the Arab Gulf Countries: Tapping into Effective ‘Soft Power’ and Related Public Diplomacy, Diaspora Studies, 5(2), pp. 124–146.

34 Gerasimos Tsourapas (2018) Authoritarian Emigration States: Soft Power and Cross-Border Mobility in the Middle East, International Political Science Review, 39(3), pp. 400–416.

35 Michael Barr (2012) Nation Branding as Nation Building: China’s Image Campaign, East Asia, 29(1), pp. 81–94.

36 Hongmei Li (2012) The Chinese Diaspora and China’s Public Diplomacy: Contentious Politics for the Beijing Olympic Float, International Journal of Communication, 6, p. 35.

37 Brand, Authoritarian States and Voting from abroad, p. 81.

38 H. Mylonas, The Politics of Diaspora Management, pp. 1–12.

39 Turner, Staging the Rwandan Diaspora, p. 265.

40 Ibid, p. 266.

41 Gamlen, Why Engage Diasporas, p. 3.

42 Turner and Kleist, Introduction: Agents of Change, pp. 198–199.

43 Turner, Staging the Rwandan Diaspora, p. 266.

44 Turner & Kleist, Introduction: Agents of Change, p. 200.

45 N. Hirt &, A. Saleh Mohammad, By Way of Patriotism, Coercion, or Instrumentalization, pp. 232–247.

46 David Lewis. (2015) “Illiberal Spaces:” Uzbekistan's Extraterritorial Security Practices and the Spatial Politics of Contemporary Authoritarianism, Nationalities Papers, 43(1), pp. 140–159.

47 Dana Moss (2016) Transnational Repression, Diaspora Mobilization, and the Case of the Arab Spring, Social Problems, 63(4), pp. 480–490.

48 Emma Lundgren Jorum (2015) Repression across Borders: Homeland Response to Anti-Regime Mobilization among Syrians in Sweden, Diaspora Studies, 8(2), pp. 104–119.

49 Lewis, Illiberal Spaces.

50 Hirt and Saleh Mohammad, By Way of Patriotism, Coercion, or Instrumentalization, p. 8.

51 Turner, Staging the Rwandan Diaspora, p. 266.

52 Mylonas, The Politics of Diaspora Management, pp. 7–8.

53 Turner, Staging the Rwandan diaspora, p. 266; Jorum, Repression across Borders p. 107.

54 Turner and Kleist, Introduction: Agents of Change, p. 203.

55 Hirt and Saleh Mohammad, By Way of Patriotism, Coercion, or Instrumentalization, p. 8.

56 Ibid, p. 3.

57 Jorum, Repression across Borders, p. 108.

58 Lewis, Illiberal Spaces p. 141.

59 Turner, Staging the Rwandan Diaspora, p. 265.

60 Marlies Glasius (2018) Extraterritorial Authoritarian Practices: A Framework, Globalizations, 15(2), pp. 179–197.

61 Lewis, Illiberal Spaces p. 141.

62 Brand, States and Their Expatriates.

63 Jorum Repression across Borders, p. 105.

64 Alexander Cooley & John Heathershaw (2017) Dictators without Borders: Power and Money in Central Asia (Connecticut: Yale University Press).

65 Jorum, Repression across Borders, p. 107.

66 Lewis, Illiberal Spaces, p. 141.

67 Turner, Staging the Rwandan diaspora, p. 267.

68 Ibid, p. 277.

69 Ibid, p. 275.

70 http://www.mfa.gov.tr/the-expatriate-turkish-citizens.en.mfa, accessed 3 June 2019.

71 Akcapar and Aksel, Public Diplomacy through Diaspora Engagement, p. 138.

72 Baser, Turkey’s Ever-Evolving Attitude-Shift Towards Engagement with Its Diaspora.

73 For more information on Turkey’s Public Diplomacy Coordinator see: https://kdk.gov.tr/, accessed 3 June 2019.

74 Aydin, The New Turkish Diaspora Policy.

75 Akcapar and Aksel, Public Diplomacy through Diaspora Engagement, p. 138.

76 Mencutek and Baser, Mobilizing Diasporas, pp. 86–105.

77 Baser, Turkey’s Ever-Evolving Attitude-Shift Towards Engagement with Its Diaspora.

78 Mencutek and Baser, Mobilizing Diasporas, pp. 86–105.

79 Akcapar and Aksel, Public Diplomacy through Diaspora Engagement, p. 138.

80 Firat Yaldız (2019) A Critical Approach to the Term Turkish Diaspora: Is There ‘the’ Turkish Diaspora? Bilig, (91), pp. 53–80.

81 Cited in Asli Selin Okyay (2015) Diaspora-making as a state-led project: Turkey's expansive diaspora strategy and its implications for emigrant and kin populations, PhD dissertation, European University Institute, p. 183.

82 Yaldiz, A Critical Approach to the Term Turkish Diaspora, p. 64.

83 Ibid, p. 65.

84 Ahmet Erdi Öztürk & Semiha Sözeri (2018) Diyanet as a Turkish Foreign Policy Tool: Evidence from the Netherlands and Bulgaria, Politics and Religion, 11(3), pp. 624–648.

85 Turner, Staging the Rwandan diaspora, p. 269.

86 Unver, Changing Diaspora Politics of Turkey, p. 188.

87 Cornell, “Weaponizing” the diaspora, p. ??.

88 Østergaard-Nielsen, The politics of migrants'; Cornell, “Weaponizing” the Diaspora.

89 See, for example, https://www.dw.com/en/another-german-citizen-arrested-in-turkey-for-political-reasons-german-media/a-49923177, accessed 3 June 2019.

90 For a detailed analysis on the diasporization of the Gulen movement, see Watmough and Ozturk, ‘From ‘diaspora by design’ to transnational political exile.’

91 Ozturk and Sozeri, Diyanet as a Turkish Foreign Policy Tool.

92 For an example of the discussions regarding imams spying on Turkish dissidents, see “Does Turkey use ‘spying imams’ to assert its powers abroad?” (2017), Available at: https://theconversation.com/does-turkey-use-spying-imams-to-assert-its-powers-abroad-75643, accessed August 30, 2019.

93 https://www.dw.com/en/turkey-using-interpol-to-track-down-dissidents/a-51159723, accessed on August 30, 2019.

94 https://stockholmcf.org/interpol-has-rejected-646-red-notice-requests-from-turkey-since-2016-coup-attempt/, accessed on August 30, 2019.

95 See, for instance, https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/3/21/senegal-closes-dozens-of-schools-linked-to-turkeys-gulen, accessed August 30, 2019.

96 https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/turkey/.premium-erdogan-s-long-arm-the-turkish-nationals-kidnapped-from-europe-1.6428298, accessed August 30, 2019.

97 Cornell, “Weaponizing” the Diaspora.

98 Jorum, Repression across Borders, p. 113; and Moss, Transnational Repression, pp. 480–490.

99 Moss, Transnational Repression, pp. 480–490.