+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Diaspora Conf

Diaspora Conf

Date post: 06-Apr-2018
Category:
Upload: nermina-cakic
View: 254 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend

of 50

Transcript
  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    1/50

    DIASPORA AND THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN PEACE PROCESSES

    Conference Report June 2007

    Bahar Baser Mirella Pej i

    Uppsala University, Sweden

    Department of Peace and Conflict Research

    Organized by the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, with the support of the Swedish Ministry for

    Foreign Affairs

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    2/50

    Table of contents

    List of Presenters 3 Introduction 4

    Opening remarks

    4

    Session I Kenneth Bush 5 Diasporas and Civil Wars: Considerations for Analysis, Policy, and Practice

    Mandy Turner 9 Diasporas and PostConflict Reconstruction

    Session I Discussion 12

    Session II

    Vjeran Katunari 15 Migration, Conflict and Peace Processes in the Former Yugoslavia

    Roland Kosti 18 Bosnian and Herzegovinian Diaspora

    Session II Discussion 21

    Session III Feargal Cochrane 23

    The Potential

    of

    Diaspora

    Communities

    in

    Peace

    Building:

    The

    Irish

    Case

    Eva stergaard Nielsen 25 The Kurdish Diaspora from Turkey

    Session III Discussion 29

    Session IV Terrence Lyons 32

    Diasporas and Transnational Politics in Ethiopia

    Camilla Orjuela

    36

    The Tamil and Sinhalese Diasporas and the war in Sri Lanka

    Session IV Discussion 40

    Roundtable Discussion 43

    List of participants 49

    2

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    3/50

    List of Presenters:

    Kenneth D. Bush Associate Professor in Peace and Conflict Studies, Conflict Studies Programme,

    Faculty of

    Human

    Science,

    Saint

    Paul

    University,

    Canada

    Feargal Cochrane Director, Richardson Institute for Peace and Conflict Research, Department of Politics and International Relations, Lancaster University, UK

    Jonathan Hall PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, Sweden

    Vjeran Katunari Professor, Department of sociology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb, Croatia

    Roland Kosti PhD Candidate, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, Sweden

    Terrence Lyons Professor, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University, USA

    Camilla Orjuela Researcher, Department of Peace and Development Research, Gteborg University, Sweden

    Ashok Swain Professor of Peace and Conflict Research, Department of Peace and Conflict

    Research, Uppsala University, Sweden

    Mandy Turner Honorary Visiting Research Fellow, Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, UK

    Eva stergaard Nielsen Ramon and Cajal Fellow, Department of Political Science, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain

    3

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    4/50

    Introduction The Conference Diasporas and their involvement in peace processes, organized and hosted by the Uppsala University Department of Peace and Conflict Research with the support of the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, took place on May 1416 2007 at First Hotel Linne, Uppsala. The conference marked the beginning of a research project on this subject initiated by Mr. Ashok Swain, Mr. Roland Kostic and Mr. Jonathan Hall at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research. The purpose of the project is to investigate why certain elements of the diaspora opt for radical solutions to homeland conflicts while others take a peace building approach. Previous research finds that some diaspora, or certain elements within them, promote peace building and reconciliation, and others the instigation of, or return to, war. However the determinants of these attitudes, and the respective capabilities that translate attitude into action, have yet to be accounted for convincingly. The aim of this project is thus to flesh out the origins, structure and dynamics of diaspora attitudes towards homeland conflicts. The empirical cases through which the research will be conducted are diasporas originating from Turkey and Bosnia Herzegovina.

    This conference was intended to kick start this project by offering insights from various empirical cases. In addition, in order to situate the project securely in the research field, the aim was to identify the extent of knowledge available on the role of the diaspora in promoting conflict and peace processes in general. It is also hoped that through stimulating interactions among internationally renowned scholars and members of relevant diaspora communities in Sweden, a lasting network will be maintained that will provide long term input to the project. In the future, we hope to bring forward this cooperation through joint publications, conference panels, and additional conferences and seminars.

    Opening Remarks In the opening remarks, Mr. Ashok Swain, Professor at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University, introduced the background of the diaspora project and pointed out that the idea was born after the participation in the University for Peace, Expert Forum on Capacity for Building Peace and Development: Roles of diaspora in Toronto in October 2006, which resulted in deeper thoughts about the peace making potential of the diaspora communities. The project came to existence when the idea received initial monetary support from the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Mr. Swain is currently together with Jonathan Hall and Roland Kosti working to consolidate and finalize the structure of the research project.

    Mr. Swain further emphasized the difficulties with the definition of diaspora and underlined that the dispersion of the nation was a definition that the researchers could after some consideration agree on. Previous research has shown that diaspora have the capacity to support violent conflicts, sometimes to the extent that they even take part in those conflicts. However, research has also shown that diaspora can significantly contribute to the peace building process. Both findings indicate that diaspora as both conflict promoting and peace building have an influence over the situation in the homeland before, during and after the conflict. The research project is mainly going to focus on the Turkish and Bosnian diaspora. Nevertheless, the project is also interested in a larger diaspora contribution to peace building, conflict management and democratic consolidation.

    4

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    5/50

    The previous research on diaspora has mostly been a collection of single case studies that often end with the concluding remarks about the behavior of diaspora. No serious efforts have been made to find patterns and to draw conclusions from a series of studies. One of the ambitions of the project is to be able to draw generalized conclusions about the influence and trends within the diaspora community. The aim and the crucial element of the research project is to find out why some diaspora support moderation and coexistence while others support extremists and succession.

    It is known that diaspora responds to the changing dynamics of the conflicts but what are the most influential factors that influence the behavior of diaspora? What about the quality of integration in the hostland? The research has thus far mostly looked at diaspora and their homeland business; however, it has not yet looked at their integration and their status in the hostland environment. What kinds of integration influence the behavior of diaspora? Is there a connection between the level of integration and the behavior of diaspora? Can it be that the diaspora that failed economic and political integration in the hostland is more likely to support conflicts in their homeland?

    Some of the preliminary findings indicate that economically and politically well integrated diaspora are less likely to support conflicts in their homeland. However, we do not wish to jump to the conclusions since there are various elements that influence the process and they all need to be carefully examined. The project wishes to adopt a perspective on integration of diaspora by attempting to answer the following questions: Does well integrated diaspora promote peace building? Does poorly integrated diaspora promote conflicts? Do the aspects of integration in the hostland affect the action towards the homeland?

    The issue of diasporas involvement in peace building is nowadays highly relevant, especially with regard to the post 9/11 issues. Diasporas are not only conflict promoting but also peace and democracy building. Mr. Swain finally stated that todays conference is the beginning of exploration and building a network for future research and cooperation.

    Session I Chair: Terrence Lyons

    Kenneth Bush , Saint Paul University, Canada

    Diasporas and civil wars: considerations for Analysis, Policy, and Practice

    The first session of the conference focused on the relationship between diasporas and civil war as well as the relationship between diasporas and post conflict reconstruction. Mr. Kenneth Bush addressed in his presentation the relationship between diasporas and civil wars with a principle consideration regarding analysis in policy and practice about involvement of diaspora in peace processes. Mr. Bush acknowledged the lack of micro level understandings of what the various diaspora patterns are and expressed an ambition for a broader sense of generalized trends

    Mr. Bush compared James Rules aphorism about social violence who once said; We know a lot of things to be true about social violence; we just do not know when they will be true.

    5

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    6/50

    The similar predicament is valid about the question and role of diaspora in peace building: We know a lot of things to be true about diaspora, peace and conflict; we just do not know when they will be true. We know that the opposite is sometimes true, but we still do not know when, why or how they will be true. It is a well known fact that diaspora sometimes engages in peace building processes and other times in conflict promotion activities. However, we do not know when, why and how they engage in peace building vs. conflict promotion. Mr. Bush further addressed the necessity to use case studies in a systematic and policy sensitive way. Each case study moves us towards a more nuanced understanding of when, why, and how diaspora contributes to peace building in particular cases, in specific circumstances. Methodologically speaking, this approach is particularly well suited to generating practical, policy relevant research. One of the greatest challenges the researchers are going to face during the conference will be the comparison and contrast of the case studies in order to move from specific understanding of specific truths in specific contexts to higher levels of systematic generalization and application. The goal is to reach more generalizable findings that could provide the researchers with general patterns and thereby the importance to focus on a variety of case studies in order to extract the details and information about the evolvement of the relationships.

    Mr. Bush continued his presentation by presenting an overview of the political dynamics of transnational communities with an ambition to impose a conceptual order to the transnational phenomenon of diaspora that in itself contains various waves and phases. The political overview included complex visual images of the Pre Wave or Proto diaspora, the First Wave diaspora as well as the Second and third Wave diaspora. The images portrayed networks of political, social and economic relationships that constitute Diasporic communities intra nationally and internationally. The mapping of Diasporic dynamics allows us to delineate and begin analyzing a diverse set of nested inter connected relationships that constitute the narrative foundation for the peace building and conflict sustaining stories that are captured in the case studies.

    The Pre Wave diaspora refers to the internal dynamics of the push and pull forces such as the economic, political and social factors that influence the necessity to migrate whereas the First Wave diaspora indicate the displacement and migration towards neighboring countries along with the development of multiple relationships with the home country. The heterogeneous nature of the diaspora communities was further emphasized with the overseas displacement of the Second Wave diaspora that moved to host countries in Europe and North America, where the economic and political relationships evolved and organizations were formed. The final Third Wave diaspora is a compounded overseas displacement that reflects settling in a variety of communities around the world. The four categories form a global neighborhood and transnational linkages of diaspora networks that include political, economic and social factors. There is a vibrant interaction between the home country, the neighbor country and the host country. Depending where one looks there are different policy actions that begin to appear. An overview of current thoughts about diaspora engagement in peace building and development requires that we first develop a sense of the political dynamics of transnational communities. The Diasporic interaction is highly complex and within the Global South there is interaction within a homeland, between homeland and neighboring hostlands as well as within neighboring hostlands. Between the Global South and Global North there is interaction between distant hostlands and

    6

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    7/50

    homelands as well as within hostland and between hostland and between distant hostland and neighboring hostland. The complex Diasporic relationships are characterized by economic, political, and social interaction in the broadest sense, however, as diverse and varied they follow clear structural patterns.

    The examination of diaspora tends to be driven by case studies of specific experiences: the Irish, the Philippino, the Ethiopian, the Eritrean, the Jewish, the Sri Lankan, the Somali etc. The challenge that we have before us is to herd these rich, complex, and unique stories into shared understandings of the structures and processes that common in most cases. These studies allow us to identify and examine common patterns and experiences. They therefore present the opportunity to move from idiographic understandings of individualizing, particularizing and interpreting to nomothetic understanding of generalizing, rule seeking and integration. Once we establish a basic model for analyzing complex Diasporic communities we will gain a better understanding where and how we may contribute to their peace building efforts. The important feature is the relationships which evolve during the process of displacement, regardless of whether diasporas are compelled by economic, social, political, or security concerns. The mapping of Diasporic dynamics allows us to delineate and begin analyzing a diverse set of nested inter connected relationships which constitute the narrative foundation for the peace building and/or conflict sustaining stories that are captured in the case studies.

    In the second part of his presentation Mr. Bush focused on the affect of Diasporic groups on peace and conflict. He emphasized that Diasporic groups affect peace and conflict by means of political, economic and social influence. The political influence on peace building includes human right advocacy and consciousness raising among the hostland public and decision makers and direct political support for pro peace actors in the homeland. It also includes participation on homeland advisory councils, negotiation teams and other from war topeace mechanisms. Members of diaspora may further serve to facilitate pro peace contacts and communications in the homeland and allies in the hostland. The political influence of diaspora on conflict sustaining has to do with manipulation or lobbying by extremist diaspora organizations of the hostland public and politicians to support their cause. Extremist diaspora organizations may further use their hostland as means of channeling weapons and war related equipment to warriors in their homeland.

    The economic impacts of Diasporic groups on peace building include a variety of factors such as the use of professional skills and economic support for pro peace political parties, organizations and campaigns in their homeland as well as remittances for post war development projects and engagement in development and reconstruction. The economic impact on war sustaining includes funding for pro war political parties, organizations and campaigns as well as armed groups in their homelands. Within the hostland Criminalized Diasporic groups may contribute to local, national and global criminalized economies by linking local crime such as drugs, prostitution and human trafficking to global criminal networks. This type of development has led to Diasporization of gang communities in countries such as Canada where criminal gangs consciously recruit and target children and young people from certain diaspora groups.

    7

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    8/50

    The social influence and impact of diaspora on peace building encompasses creation of neutral space, cultural contributions to peace, social remittances and informal influence on people back home. The social impact of diaspora on conflict sustaining has to do with demonization and psychological militarization as well as a tendency to replicate the conflict pattern from homeland to hostland. The questions that arise have to do with the ability of academics to support Diasporic organizations that are advocating peace building but in order to do that we need to know who we are dealing with. It can be difficult to deal with fragmented and fractured communities especially when there are connections to paramilitary organizations. Who are we dealing with? We need to make sure that we are dealing with the right group passing on the right message. The variety of political influence and access in a form of language, cultural affinity, colonial legacy and educational background are some of the important factors when addressing the assistance to diaspora communities that engage in peace building. How come that certain diaspora organizations and communities are more effective than others on getting their issues on the agenda? This becomes a question of policy qualifications. Timing and political opportunities are important as well as questions of influential allies and organizational capacity. The issue of organizational capacity of various groups is important especially when one is dealing with groups that want to make positive constructive change but have no capacity to do so. What is the role of academics in building this capacity? The linkages between diaspora communities and host state communities bring up the constant issue of integration.

    The connection between the homeland and the hostland is highly important but is there a connection of economic affluence and participation in peace building? Mr. Bush expressed doubt in regard to correlation between higher level of integration and incentive to promote peace and he is not convinced that the more affluent Diasporic communities are less war prone due to the complexity of the actions that fuel support. Nevertheless the connection between diasporas economic affluence and their participation in conflict in their homeland should be further examined.

    Mr. Bush finalized his presentation with conceptual and analytical consideration, including a list of policy and logistical considerations. Conceptual and analytical considerations emphasize the role of globalization on diasporization. Aspects of globalization, particularly mass electronic communication and easy intercontinental travel, are critical elements in the contemporary manifestations of the diaspora phenomenon. In a less globalized past, attachments to the homeland would gradually attenuate, and allow for more locally focused

    forms of attachments to the homeland to evolve. This opens up the sociological possibility that the hostland over a generation or two would eventually be reconfigured in subsequent generations into homeland. Within the unavoidable context of globalization, this sociological re alignment of affinities is not as reliable as in the past. This raises the question of what policies and practices are most useful in facilitating the integration of diaspora into homelands.

    The second analytical consideration has to do with heterogeneity, complexity and fluidity of diaspora. Diaspora consists of a heterogeneous set of actors with multiple and often competing conceptions of homeland. Diaspora in itself does not act; it is the organizations and members of diaspora that act towards articulation and the pursuit of goals. The third analytical consideration has to do with calibrate expectations. Diaspora Groups have positive

    8

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    9/50

    or negative impacts on structures and processes of peace and conflict in their countries of origin. However it is important to note that they cannot on their own cause war or broker peace. Mr. Bush further elaborated on normative considerations in terms of supporting discriminate violence and posed the question if we should reject the use of diaspora supported violence to overthrow corrupted and illegitimate regimes? The final analytical consideration referred to the diaspora policy in post 9/11 and post 10/7 worlds since everything about migration and diaspora within a governmental perspective inevitably gets framed with reference to war on terror. In this context, it is reasonable and rational for diaspora groups to distrust assistance until sufficient trust is cultivated. There is therefore a necessity to cultivate genuine trust within and among diaspora communities that goes hand inhand with policy innovation. The relationship between migration and diaspora is intensely politicized and the lessons that we might draw from diaspora experiences may or may not be directly applicable to the current world or they may need to be reframed to recognize the constrained political space within which we currently live and work.

    The policy considerations indicate a necessity to adopt a whole government approach and the need to work with all aspects of government. The contemporary phenomenon of diaspora is blurring of lines between the domestic and the international. This fact needs to be integrated into the policy approach and practice. We need a coherent approach reinforcing the peace building roles of diaspora and dismantling of conflict generating roles by means of a whole government approach that engages diaspora in peace building on local, national and international levels. This consideration requires new models of engagement and cooperation, for example between the foreign Ministry and Municipal government who host diaspora communities. When considering heterogeneity, complexity and fluidity of diaspora, one should avoid dimensionalization and over generalization by distinguishing person to person networks from those that mediate through Diasporic organizations. There is additionally a necessity for a two face approach. Support for peace building capacities of diaspora needs to go hand in hand with efforts to defuse conflict sustaining activities of some Diasporic organizations. Whatever programme of activity is launched it has to be both constructing the structure of peace and deconstructing those structures of violence. The acknowledgment of the two faces of diaspora in conflict prone setting, the positive and the negative, could result in development of the adequate policy programme.

    The logistical considerations include expanding on applied research due to a lack of adequate conceptual models and analytical tools. There is a need to move towards the systematic comparative analysis that allows empirically grounded and contextually rooted generalizations based on solid research which is conceptually coherent, theoretically rigorous practical and policy relevant. There is also a need for a means of systematically monitoring and evaluating support for diaspora led peace building initiatives as well as for the impact of government policies on diaspora relations with homelands. Diaspora possesses a wealth of knowledge of the customs, language, culture, traditions, rule, and homeland politics and therefore should not be limited to information depots for hostland initiatives. Genuine participation of diaspora would drastically transform standard government approaches by transforming the policymaking, including the aspect of trust. There is no reason to expect trust when diaspora is framed in a security context rather than a development context.

    9

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    10/50

    Mandy Turner , University of Bradford, UK Diasporas and postconflict reconstruction

    Ms. Mandy Turner continued building and adding upon what Mr. Bush had previously presented by focusing on the diasporas and post conflict reconstruction. The focus of the second presentation was the current interest in diaspora by policymakers and activities that connect diaspora to the homeland. Diasporas is an extraterritorial political constituency and a powerful third level transnational actor that is neither purely domestic nor purely international. Diasporas have transformed from victims into important transnational actors that are representing globalization from below from a developmental perspective. They should not be ignored due to their potential influence on both the host and the home country. The definition of diaspora is problematic and should therefore be kept fluid due to the complexity of the identity formation and identity association. The activities that connect diasporas with their home countries are four dimensional. They include economic dimension such as individual and family remittances, investments and charitable donations. The political dimension is expressed though civil society, NGO and participation in campaigning from host countries as well as participation in political parties, elections and the government. The social dimension involved transmission of ideas and values whereas the cultural dimension preserves and passes on language and tradition as well as it promotes arts connections. These solidarity networks and informal economic systems make up the moral economy of the diaspora.

    The recent interest in diaspora activities from policymakers come from the current view on diaspora as an active and contributing development actor. The World Bank study from 2005 showed that remittances to developing countries have risen to US$167bn and its impact become even more obvious when compared to the official development assistance from 2004 which was US$79bn. National Development agencies are starting to view remittances as a key tool in economic development and as a major source of foreign exchange. Diaspora remittances are seen as a more stable flow of capital since diaspora groups are investing for a longer period of time. This type of investment is also seen as globalization from the below by means of bypassing corrupt elite and state structures. The recognition of diasporas as important development actors was confirmed in 2003 when the African Union officially recognized diaspora as the 6th region in AUs organizational structure.

    The relationship between diaspora and conflict The important role of diasporas is multiplied in countries in conflict and in post conflict transition to peace. The research has this far mainly emphasized the negative, conflict inducing role of diaspora. Anderson refers to diaspora as nationalists without having to deal with the consequences while Kaldor uses the term aggressive globalizers. Collier & Hoeffler have found that countries with larger diasporas are more likely to engage in war. Why is there a phenomenon of conflict generating diasporas? Lyons suggested that the conflict generated diasporas sustain memories of the trauma and are therefore less willing to compromise. There is also the intense feeling of alienation from both home and host countries. The level of integration and the perceived role within the host society can influence the view on the conflict in the homeland. The role of integration or the lack of

    10

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    11/50

    integration is important, especially nowadays when there is tendency in the western world to look at migration as a security issue because of perceived support for insurgent groups in homeland and potential for terrorist activities in host country. The securitization of migration have major policy implications.

    Research is divided and it has shown that diasporas can promote both nationalist and belligerent ideals as well as democratic peaceful ideals. The diasporas ability to possibly alter perceptions on a homeland conflict should be of interest for peace researchers and peace builders. Diasporas can be both peace makers and peace wreckers at different periods and at the same time because they are not unitary actors. They are differentiated according to class, gender, age, ethnicity and religion. There is also the plurality of voices based on individual or family relationships or organized relationships.

    Current post conflict peace building agenda The post conflict peace building agenda has become a core concern of the international community since the end of the cold war. The shift has occurred from peace keeping towards peace building and the main goal of the current peace building efforts have been to bring war shattered states into conformity within international systems prevailing forms of governance. The peace building processes after the cold war era have become highly ambitious and the attempts include a wide range of goals from the reshaping of the warn torn societies towards end products found in the west such as market economy and liberal state. Ms. Turner points out that the same agenda might not be appropriate for all post conflict societies. The emphasis on market economy and the opening up economics have created problems in many post conflict societies. The right emphasis on open markets rather than job creation is problematic since it prioritizes privatization rather than social welfare. There should be more focus on socialization in these deeply divided post conflict societies that have gone though deep trauma. There is an apparent contradiction between getting the right elite into power and actually building a state rooted in civil society.

    The challenges of the societies in transition from conflict to peace When looking at post conflict situations we often find impoverished through displacement, damage to microeconomic activities as well as severe damage to education and health. The infrastructure is often destroyed and there are damages to social capital and coping strategies while the state structure is highly discredited. Changes in social composition occur, increase in women heading households and depletion of middle class that have fled the country are common. Emergence of exploitative alternative political economies are anathema to liberal post conflict peace building interventions. Ms. Turner criticized the international communitys desire to quickly refashion post conflict societies. That desire tends to be very short term and there is a tendency to do quite a lot very quickly, which creates friction with the local stakeholders. Diasporas are seen as a good way to avoid that friction because of their good local connections and good knowledge. Diasporas can promote particular values that the west wants to see in the post conflict societies and thereby effectively aid in the process.

    11

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    12/50

    Ms. Turner expressed further criticism towards the one size fits all approach to post conflict peace building. There is a strong ambition to create post conflict states that are sympathetic to western interests. However the challenge is to create a state rooted in civil society which is also pro western and the diasporas can be used in this regard.

    Five main tasks for post conflict reconstruction include security, governance and participation, humanitarian assistance and social well being, economic stabilization and infrastructure, justice and reconciliation. Diasporas have been involved in all tasks apart from the security and they have been effective in promoting human rights. As previously mentioned diasporas influence post conflict peace building with economic, political, social and cultural means.

    The key factors that influence diasporas contribution are capacity, opportunity and desire. Capacity is connected to the secure legal status in the host country as well as jobs and training. The opportunity is on the other hand connected to the host countrys attitude and international normative environment that supports or condemns diaspora activity and reliable mechanisms to remit. It can become a difficult issue when it comes to defining a legitimate political struggle since one mans freedom fighter can be another mans terrorist. The final factor that influences the diasporas contribution is the desire or political attitudes among diaspora towards post conflict governments. Nevertheless it is important to keep in mind that there are divisions within diasporas.

    Some of the key issues for policymakers include the need to secure diasporas legal status in the host country. There is a contradiction between excitement generated around remittances and tightening of asylum regulations. Making sure that current financial regulations are sensitive to hawala systems. The host state could provide tax breaks on remittances and do more to court the diaspora, including special status and issuing of bonds. Since the problem of lack of skilled personnel remains home states could encourage middle class professionals to return, even if only temporarily, to address problems of skill shortages. However, they should not be a substitute for building local capacity and ownership.

    Problems with diasporas involvement Diaspora individuals and communities who can afford to remit are predominantly from relatively privileged families in the homeland which can indicate that the most poor and vulnerable population is less likely to benefit from those remittances. Remittance flow can be strongly partisan and thus divisive. It is important to emphasize the difference between the capital and the country side. Community organizations in diaspora and homeland are mostly dominated by male elites, which is not representative. This creates a problem in terms of gender division and women have no access to land and livelihood. Diaspora remittances tend to go towards immediate poverty alleviation, which is important, however not towards productive investment. The current policy interest in diasporas fuelled by desire to fit into current post conflict peace building agenda dominated by PostWashington consensus in a form of neo liberal microeconomic policies and only with some community consultation is perceived as a social policy on the cheap. There is danger on emphasizing the role of diaspora since it reduces the pressure on political actors to provide services and thus reduces need for political accountability. The current interest in diasporas role in development and

    12

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    13/50

    peace building have become a way to relinquish the governments responsibility. It is however; important that political actors provide responsibility and remittances cannot be a substitute for long term nationwide development plans.

    Session I Discussion There are agenda settings and agenda policy taking and diasporas are somewhere in between the agendas. Everyone seems to be framing the agenda, the international community, the development agencies and the hostland governments. In 2002 the Swedish government gave monetary support to f. Yugoslav diaspora in Sweden under one condition; the projects need to deal with the integration in the hostland and they should not deal with cultural and political aspects of the home country. The Swedish government does not support diaspora involvement in issues concerning the home country. Diasporas might be more effective as peace building than conflict sustaining if they were enabled as peace builders and development actors. What is the role of diaspora, are they actors or reactors?

    Kjell Magnusson raised the question of diaspora independence since their support is not always voluntary. Magnusson additionally gave the example of Yugoslav migration to Sweden during the 1960s and 1970s. It was a large group of migrants that had their own organization; however the organization was supervised by the Yugoslav authority which resulted in politically passive standpoints towards the homeland. The political passivity was further strengthened because the Swedish government had a positive view of the Yugoslav government. To what extent are diaspora nowadays organizations operating in the same manner as the Yugoslav organization in Sweden during 1960s and 1970s? Is the

    governments

    involved

    and

    active

    in

    trying

    to

    control

    their

    opinions?

    Ostergaard Nielsen agreed with Magnusson by adding that the states have attempted to keep connection with diaspora and she agrees that it is an important fact. However, there are differences according to countries of origin.

    Roland Kosti pointed out that we are presuming that the international actors are interested in including diasporas in the process and interested in having them on board during the process. Are the international community and major actors interested in including diaspora in the process? Is the homeland interested in diaspora? From the Bosnian experience there

    seems to

    be

    no

    major

    place

    for

    diaspora

    in

    the

    rebuilding

    of

    the

    society

    and

    when

    the

    educated diaspora returns there is an enormous lack of trust and suspicion directed towards them. Kostic expressed skepticism in regard to the international communities interest in diaspora contribution to peace building as well as he pointed at the lack of place in the homeland for returning diaspora.

    Mr. Feargal Cochrane commented on the assumption that diasporas are being used in the process and raised the question about the true nature of diasporas as partners. Are the diasporas buying into the ideological dynamic of the neo liberal post Washington consensus? Are they being coopted?

    13

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    14/50

    Mr. Ashok Swain stated that diasporas are contributing to both the hostland and the homeland. Mr. Swain agreed with Mr. Kosti about the difficult role and the place within the homeland of returning diasporas. An Estonian example illustrated the difficulties when diaspora returned and received high positions within the new government but within the society in general was not welcomed by the Estonian population. The Estonians felt that the diaspora did not contribute by taking part in the struggle and now they have returned to enjoy the benefits. There are apparent difficulties when diasporas return to the homeland to contribute in development and peace building due to the lack of trust and negative attitudes towards diaspora.

    Mr. Vjeran Katunari posed the question about the use of remittances in more specific projects. There are no initiatives in former Yugoslavia where remittances are project oriented and those who sent remittances should support specific projects. Remittances are major important contributions and the receiving country should use it to create balance. The majority of remittances are aimed at kin and relatives. The diaspora seem to be investing only in factories in monoethnic areas while the suspicion and fear that the money will go into other hands remain. We lack projects and funds to build the community and to facilitate the will in the areas where Croats and Serbs are living together in the same area. Are there any examples of diaspora that do not care where the money goes?

    Ms. Turner responded on first point on the empirical question about diasporas as independent actors. The World Bank thinks that diasporas are coopt, however, diasporas have their own agenda and they do not buy into the agenda of the World Bank and the development agencies. In Iraq and Bosnia donors supported specific diaspora actors. However, when the diaspora did not agree with the policy of those donors they were pushed

    out because the development community did not like the new agenda that the diaspora was imposing. Diasporas do not agree with the policy of the development agencies. Diasporas have their own agendas that do not fit into the agenda of the development agencies, which sometimes creates problems and friction with the local and political elite.

    The second point was the possibility of using remittances for integrated cross cultural and cross religion programs. There are problems with that ambition because diasporas will only remit to communities that it wants to remit to. Remittances can be seen as an alternative to integrated programs since they will remain guided by peoples private agenda.

    Mr. Bush added that diaspora remittances are not piggy banks. Remittances are highly specific and used for consumable goods, not for a long term sustainable development. Remittances can be politicized and thereby contribute in creating tensions. Remittances to Cuba from Toronto and USA affected the racial tensions between the groups since only Hispanics received the money and the Blacks did not.

    Mr. Bush added that the numbers and the focus on remittances by the World Bank are disturbing. Diasporas are exploited in their own home country. Diasporas are exploited in the host country and now the World Bank is looking to exploit them by getting off the hook. The International meetings that take place about the development agenda carry the idea

    about instrumentalization or about how other actors can be adjusted to their own agenda. Mr. Bush expressed that he is therefore not convinced that the development agencies are

    14

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    15/50

    interested in the inclusion of diasporas in the development and peace building process. He additionally added that if they were interested, then they would have to restructure their thinking by becoming more far sighted and more process oriented.

    15

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    16/50

    Session II Chair: Feargal Cochrane

    Vjeran Katunari , University of Zagreb, Croatia Migration, conflict and peace processes in the former Yugoslavia

    Mr. Katunari opened his presentation with a Hawaiian proverb about the return of the inhabitants during the time of peace in order to articulate an ethnical message of todays conference, which is that peace in the region of former Yugoslavia is a proper chance for people who emigrated during the recent war to return to their places of origin and to live in peace with their neighbours. The question is, however, whether such a chance really exists? The focus of the conference is diasporas contribution to development and post conflict peace building which is also tied to the possibility of the diaspora return to their homelands.

    The Balkan has been described by geographers as a historically highly migratory area. Jovan Cviji who studied the human mobility in the Balkans caused by the Turkish Ottoman invasion also included economic causes such as fertility of land and drought and claimed that there are some psychic propensities to migration in the Balkan region. Although migration caused by economic hardships in emigration areas, i.e. on the push side, represents a significant component of the migratory processes in the Balkans, the majority of population and migration dynamics were generated through different wars. Wars have complicated the migration dynamics in emigration areas, due to local destructions and animosities caused by war. The expulsions in those areas became in a double sense both political and economic.

    Wars in former Yugoslavia during the 1990s have coincided with the beginning of a tremendous economic change which was detrimental to many companies and employees swept by the policy of restructuring or privatization. This is consequential to the central topic of todays conference, which is that peace processes are coupled with local economic regeneration and development. However, we do not know how and in what ways? Marita Eastmond (2006), who researched returns and reconstruction in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina, found that the opportunities for finding a job, for most returnees, emerge somewhere else, in a transnational network of market spaces, and not in the home place.

    The central point is that the creation of the newest diasporas in the area of former Yugoslavia is informed by a variety of interconnected processes, both historical and contemporary, as if path dependence exists in the sense that the past determines the future. The creation of former diasporas is somehow connected with the creation of the newest diaspora, mostly made of refugees. According to the estimations of some researchers, rebellion of Serbs in Croatia in the beginning of 1990s have replicated the map of Serb upsurges against the establishment of the so called Independent State of Croatia in 1941. Even motives and declarations were similar, as the new Croatian state was blemished being the heir of the genocidal Croatian state. The massive Serbian exodus from Croatia in 1995, the largest one after the Second World War, followed both as a consequence of the Serb historicist perception of the new Croatian state and as a consequence the politics of intolerance toward Serbs exercised by the new Croatian state. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, wars in the 1990s were waged under similar derivations of the historical stereotypes.

    16

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    17/50

    Mr. Katunari maintains that a path dependency exists between migration and creation of the new states, especially reflected in new states policies toward minorities, which suffered tragic results such as purge and ethnic cleansing. Thus, the newest wave of the large scale

    migration has been caused by wars in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Croatia in the 1990s, and partly in Kosovo/Serbia at the end of the 1990s, and the (FY) Republic of Macedonia in the beginning of 2000.

    A new refugee diaspora has arisen that spreads through the Western countries, and also neighboring countries, which are also their countries of origin: Croatia was used as the refuge for Bosnian Croats and Republika Srpska and Serbia as a refuge for Croatian Serbs, whereas Bosnians had chosen mostly Croatia for their refuge, while Bosnia and Herzegovina is both their homeland and their country of origin. A massive international intervention was necessary to break the path and discontinue the bad political habits of harming or removing

    the others. It was central to the strategy of the actors, at least Serbian and Croatian, to paraphrase Ernst Gellners definition of nationalism, to bring state boundaries in conformity with ethno national boundaries. Although, there are reasons to believe that ethnic cleansing is not anymore on the agenda of the present day politics in Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia, some consequences of the initial strategy seem irrevocable.

    The migrants outlook for return to their places of origin in the various areas of the Balkans are rather bleak. In general, most refugees have neither hopes nor plans for return. Populations, especially of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Kosovo, thus seem to be recomposed permanently due to the wars.

    In Croatia many homes or apartments owned by Serbs were taken by or given over to Croats who came from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nowadays, the Croatian government, pushed by its policy agenda of approaching to the EU membership, invests into building of new apartments for Bosnian Croat refugees, so that Serb inhabitants may reenter into their homes. The project is expected to be finalized by the end of 2007. The inflow of Croatian refugees from the north western part of Bosnia was mainly the result of the ethnic engineering and implicit agreement between the Croatian and Serbian government, i.e. the late presidents Tudjman and Milosevic. This particular arrangement in North West Bosnia, nowadays Republika Srpska, was made on the account of the establishment of an independent Herzegovinian Croats territory in the southeast part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which existed for a short period of time. The goal of the military operations in the area was to achieve ethnically homogeneous territories as possible. Accordingly, the new diasporas represent a solid and hardly reducible component of the post Yugoslav mosaic.

    The new transnational cosmopolitans The new diaspora is not constituted only of refugees and displaced persons. Some Croatian researchers indicate the rise of transnationalism of the cosmopolitan variety among the new wave migrants. The cosmopolitan migrants are mainly professional or middle class cohorts from the period of 1980s to 2000s, unlike working class cohorts that made the bulk of diaspora from 1960s to 1970s. Furthermore, the former are mobile people whose identity

    17

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    18/50

    does not hinge on the ascribed, blood and soil ethnic principle. They may or may not be candidates for return in the country of origin. Their standpoint is rather pragmatic and they will move and work where there are opportunities. Not withstanding their antinationalistic and cosmopolitan stance, it is unclear how this cohort, or individuals among them, might contribute to the peace process in former Yugoslavia.

    Concluding remarks The outlooks of the peace process and reintegration depend mostly on local conditions in the areas of former Yugoslavia. The Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe is the strongest international arrangement in the area for the sake of building the peace processes. The strategy consists of three elements education , economic renewal and growth and building of democratic institutions. What do these elements mean and how may diaspora contribute to their consolidation?

    Education is meant to permeate actually existing educational programs with multicultural/intercultural aspects. This is primarily aimed at transcending the narrow nationalistic interpretations and politicization of the national histories, particularly the periods of the 1990s. The role of non biased intellectuals from diaspora may be precious in this regard, for example, by virtue of their cooperation with domestic (i.e. Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian) designers of national curricula in the subjects such as history, national literature, or civic education.

    Economic regeneration and growth is probably the most important long term process constituting the life of local community composed of different ethnicities/nationalities. The

    likelihood of peace is bigger in economically prosperous areas, than in poor areas which, unfortunately, characterize almost all areas with higher portions of refugees or returnees. Economic hardships, such as high unemployment rates, close the vicious circle of meagerness. These areas are underdeveloped and economically non attractive because economic entrepreneurs avoid such areas because they are economically disadvantageous and risky for the outburst of communal violence. Whether entrepreneurs from diaspora may break this circle with a surplus motivation on top of the usual profit making, e.g. with a patriotic enthusiasm or an interest into making public private partnership arrangements with national or local governments, or some international donor agency is something that remains to be seen.

    The building of democratic institutions as a condition of stability in the former Yugoslavia is important not only in managing and solving ethnic conflicts, but also in preventing conflicts that may occur in the multiethnic settings in the future. In this regard, the role of diaspora would be most adequate if it would be able to demonstrate its willingness to communicate or cooperate across ethnic/national lines. The Diasporic communities in immigrant countries, including Sweden, could in terms of peace and democracy building, communicate and cooperate with each other. It could be helpful to Bosnians in immigrant countries, communicating and cooperating with Serbs or Croats and vice versa in their present day surroundings.

    18

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    19/50

    To conclude with the question posed by the hosts of this seminar: Why certain elements of the diaspora opt for radical solutions to homeland conflicts while others take a peacebuilding approach? I would rather maintain that peace prospects in Bosnia and Herzegovina are not endangered anymore by peace spoilers neither in diaspora nor at home, provided that withdrawal of the international supervision from the area would be in a way coordinated with the process integration of the country in the EU in a not so distant future. One part of the diaspora is indeed opposed to peace building, particularly to lessening social distances between Serbs, Croats and Bosnians. Why is it this case and why do other elements of the diaspora prefer peace building and normalization? These are fundamental issues from the analytical point of view. Many factors might contribute to the one or the other orientation, such as the educational level, the experience with living in the second Yugoslavia, personal worldviews, attitudes toward the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina, financial resources and strategies, plans, including penchant for entrepreneurship and risks etc. Whatever this orientation might be, one can bet on the whole that time is not working for radicals, unless the ideas and policies of multiculturalism and tolerance would somehow be defeated or compromised in Europe as such, or EU would substantially postpone or, moreover, cancel its enlargement plans as far as Bosnia and Herzegovina is concerning. In such a case, however, much more or something much bigger than Bosnia and Herzegovina would be at stake.

    Roland Kosti , Uppsala University, Sweden Bosnian and Herzegovinian diaspora

    Mr. Kosti started his presentation by emphasizing the importance of findings on the local level since the discussion this far has been theoretical and macro level oriented. The presentation aimed to address the peace generating diaspora and the way in which they can succeed in peace building within local environments. Diasporas are primarily seen as conflict generating rather than peace generating actors. The conflict generating aspects of diaspora have been fairly researched and Mr. Kosti s ambition was therefore to focus on the peace generating role of diasporas.

    The definition of diaspora encompasses communities spread across boarders with a shared sense of identities. Kosti stressed the necessity to distinguish between formally organized diasporas and dispersed diasporas. Formally organized diasporas consist of officially organized networks that tend to promote certain agenda while claiming the representational role. Dispersed diasporas on the other hand is an informal network and a constellation of individual community members that are related to each other on a more informal basis. The majority of researched has focused on formal diasporas, which tend to be more conflict generating due to their agenda towards the homeland. However, we know very little about the dispersed diasporas and their relationships with the homeland. The dispersed diasporas require more thematic and extensive research of different cases.

    With an attempt to answer the question whether there are any examples of positive influence, Mr. Kostic presented his findings from two towns in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Kozarac and Vares. Kozarac is a small community in western Bosnia within the Bosnian enclave, which was surrounded by ethnically dominated Serb area before the war. The population before the war consisted of 90% Bosnjaks and 10% Serbs. Vares is also a small

    19

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    20/50

    community that was before the war most easterly Croat enclave in BIH and surrounded by Serb and Bosnjak territory. The populations before the war consisted of 53% Croats, 17% Bosnjaks, 15% Yugoslavs and 10% Serbs. Both towns were situated in the key communication areas and which, during the war time, greatly impacted on their destiny. During the war 19921995, when the violence escalated, the political leadership in Kozarac proclaimed their loyalty to the Bosnian government in Sarajevo and the leadership in Vares proclaimed their loyalty to the Croat Communit Herceg Bosna. The local war dynamics resulted in expulsion of Bosnjak majority from Kozarac and Croat majority from Vares, due to fears of Bosnjak retaliation after the massacre of Stupni Do. The case studies reflect two different conflicts and two different perspectives on what happened during the war, depending on what side one was on.

    Today, Kozarac is situated in Republika Srpska and Vares is within the borders of Zenica Doboj canton of the Bosnian federation. Before 19981999 no returns took place in Kozarac and Vares, mainly because the local ethnic elites tried to obstruct any returns. They feared that the new elites might get elected and thereby replace them if the demographic balanced change back to the pre war situation. The previous population was expelled, new politicians were elected based on the majority vote of new residents and all wanted to maintain the position of power by trying to stop all returns. Economically what was left of the social state was dismantled by the international reforms in the economy and there was no support for the return of the population apart from some contribution by international NGOs that pushed for return.

    The situation significantly changed after 1999, especially in Kozarac, where diaspora from Germany started investing in Kozarac. The group of Bosnjak entrepreneurs decided to support the area by investing in it. The diaspora investments created businesses that started employing local Serb population and when Serbs from the nearby area came to create riots against the return of the Bosnjaks, the local Kozarac Serbs decide to defend them. The defense was not primarily motivated by deep friendships between local Serbs and returning Bosnjaks. It was rather an issue of common interest because if the Bosnjaks leave then the jobs leave as well. The Bosnian diaspora from Germany created a sense of symbiosis, a sense of common interest within two communities when they decided to invest in Kozarac. The investment and the return further initiated building trust between the local groups and diasporas played an important role in the process by means of multifaceted contribution. Diaspora contributed in the process from an economic perspective as well as political by lobbying and gaining greater control of local life. Diasporas contribution aided in creating a sense of normality and interaction that was not solely focused on ethnic interactions. As a result authorities in Republika Srpska opened schools that dealt with Bosnian curriculum and taught both Serbian and Bosnian language. Kozarac is an extremely successful example of what diaspora can achieve as peace builders while Vares offers similar circumstances and different outcome.

    In Vares the situation was similar to the situation in Kozarac. The goal after the war was to resettle Bosnjak refugees from Srebrenica in Vares in order to create a Bosnian dominated area. The town remained closed to all Croat and Serb returnees until 1999, on the order of the former president Alija Izetbegovic, who prohibited all returns. When Croats from Croatia eventually wanted to return to Vares there was no international support for such endeavor

    20

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    21/50

    and no employment available. The Croats who returned to Vares could not sustain their returns since all jobs on the state level were given to Bosnjaks who held 95% of all employment on the state level. Members of Croat diaspora in Austria started investing by opening shops and restaurants which eventually employed both local Croat and Bosnjak population. The situation was similar to the situation in Kozarac, however, as the business started developing the local elite did not approve of the development and when new projects were initiated by Croat diaspora from Austria they were stopped by the local elite. As a result in the last four years the development has gone backwards. The shops and business are closing down due to the lack of support for the initiative.

    One of the reasons why the initiative in Vares failed was due to the fact that diaspora failed to lobby the local elites. The other explanation has to do with the fact that Kozarac is nowadays situated in Republika Srpska, where there are only two levels of authority, municipal and entity level. Vares on the other hand is situated in the Bosnian federation that has three levels; the municipal level, the canton level and the federation level. When lobbying, one has to lobby at all four/three levels and that requires resources, which become impossible in the long run if one wants to run a business. The situation becomes unbearable since one needs resources to lobby on all levels of authority and within all political parties on those levels. The diaspora initiative in Vares could not sustain itself on the political level and it became too confusing, too costly and too time consuming. An interesting fact in both cases was that there was no or very little international support involved in the process and these diasporas did not take part in the international development programs.

    Mr. Kostic further elaborated about the transfer of attitudes and the role of diasporas in that particular process. During his research in Vares, he had encountered what we choose to title as the summer return phenomenon, which indicates the return of diaspora every year between May and September. The members of diaspora across the globe converge in their former hometown and almost reestablished the former social structures. Croats, Bosnjaks and Serbs meet to mingle and party all summer long. When interviewing local Croats who have returned, they expressed that they only live from May to September and the rest of the year is a blur, more like a gray area. The same phenomenon can be found in Kozarac and a number of towns in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The phenomenon was also found among Bosnian diaspora in Sweden, when Melita Cukur conducted research in Bosnia about transnational funding of Sweden. The Bosnia diaspora expressed that they save their money all year long in order to return during the summer. They also stated that they live between May and September. When interviewing a woman from Srebrenica who had resettled in Vares, she expressed that she felt like a stranger during that period, since many people who came to Vares felt comfortable, however, she did not know any of them and did not feel at home in the town during their stay.

    During the summer phenomenon, the transfer of attitudes and ideas that cross ethnic boundaries takes place. Nevertheless, the limitation imposed by the given political framework, as defined by the international community and local parties from 1996, remains. There is an outburst of positive attitudes when people meet and the diasporas money is spent, but once they leave, the political frustration and grievances between Croats and Bosnjaks remain in Vares as well as between Serbs and Bosnjaks in Kozarac.

    21

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    22/50

    Mr. Kostic referred to Kenneth Bushs earlier presentation about the limited affect. Diasporas are able to contribute to peace building; however, their contribution is highly limited. Dispersed diasporas are effective at touching the local level but they have very little influence on the state level, on which the organized diasporas might be more effective. The empirical examples from Kostics preliminary findings illustrated one case of failure and one of success. The diasporas were able to provide job opportunities that cross ethnic boundaries and merge interest of locals and diaspora entrepreneurs. Local governing structures are critical to determining access of entrepreneurs and ability to lobby.

    In the concluding remarks Mr. Kostic stressed that more attention should be given to dispersed diasporas and their activities and attitudes. The researcher should look at all levels both state and local, and all arenas; economic, social and political, where the interaction takes place. Kozarac and Vares case studies illustrate that the changes on the economic level leads to changes on the social level. One development leads to another and they are intertwined. The political framework often defines the context and the affect.

    There is also an apparent need to focus on peace generating diasporas that invest in the region. If one invests in the region it is also in ones interest to create a stable environment for further economic growth. Mr. Kostic further stressed the necessity to focus on the international community since it is now that the international community has started to acknowledge and sometimes include diasporas in the process. However, their approach to diaspora is highly instrumental, and diasporas are not regarded as equal partners. Both Bosnian government and development agencies should embrace the possibilities that diasporas can provide in terms of post conflict development and peace building.

    Session II Discussion The questions that were raised during the second session discussion focused on hybridity and fluid identity. The instrumental nature of relationships between the international community and diasporas was also discussed as well as structural capacity of diasporas. The presenters seemed to agree that diasporas are not perceived as equal partners but rather as junior partners.

    When Ms. Turner brought up an example of a woman from Srebrenica and her reaction to the summer phenomenon, Mr. Kostic responded that diasporas can in the process create tensions by changing the social network.

    Mr. Bush raised questions about the proportion of displacement and returns. He added that there is a contradictory impact on the global and local level. Mr. Kostic responded by pointing out that there was a difference in perception of the returnees among the old Bosnjakas from Vares and Bosnjaks who had resettled from Srebrenica in 1996. While the displaced Bosnjaks from Srebrenica view the return of diaspora as disturbing and problematic the old local Bosnjaks from Vares are happy to see their old diaspora neighbors return.

    Mr. Magnusson raised a question about how the international community is going to establish peace if treating diasporas as junior partners in the process. He added that Kozarac

    22

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    23/50

    is a good example which has received a significant amount of media attention and that the director of SIDA in Bosnia claimed that they have financed a lot in Kozarac. The attitude of the international community is a crucial matter. He additionally asked the question if there was any formal association behind the diaspora initiative in Kozarac? The issue of organizational capacity was raised in different occasions.

    Mr. Kostic responded that social identity has a lot to do with the host countries definition and perception of diaspora as well as attitudes towards the diaspora. The war on terrorism has affected the definition of Bosnians in the host country and affected the identity formation among young Balkan diaspora. There are differences in definition between the first and the second generations while both parents influence and the influence of the home state play a role in the process. The politics and the policy of the host country are equally important and one example is the Serbs perception of a Swedish standpoint when Serbia was bombed in 1999. Mr. Katunaric added that the younger generations identity is becoming more and more parochial, especially young Muslims. The new generations in Europe tend to be more pro nationalist and more fundamentalist whereas the third generation is completely assimilated in the American society. There is a necessity for an intercommunity dialogue and the problem cannot be solved by securitization, it should rather be built from the bottom up.

    Ms. Camilla Orjuela commented that Kostics case studies illustrated that researchers need to be on the ground in order to bring out the complexity. She posed the question on how one could relate the findings from case studies to the larger project goals where there is an ambition to systematically understand, on the general level, why some diasporas are conflict generating and others peace building? How can the findings from the case studies be used to generalize? Mr. Kostic responded that the researchers should focus on comparing different cases and meet up the different range. The process will not be easy but it is possible.

    23

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    24/50

    Session III Chair: Mandy Turner

    Feargal Cochrane, Lancaster University, UK The Potential of diaspora Communities in Peace Building: The Irish Case

    Mr. Cochrane opened the presentation with the introduction of the main themes. He recognized the diaspora communities ability to contribute to peace as well as to conflict. Work of Paul Collier regards diasporas as agents of conflict and the size of diaspora as key variable in likelihood of conflict reemerging after ceasefire/settlement. Cochranes ambition was to argue against Colliers findings and to illustrate the vast complexity behind Colliers generalizations.

    Mr. Cochrane focused on the evolution of diaspora over time and highlighted the shift in Irish American diaspora from being a spoiler type into positive and major advocates for peaceful settlement. Additional attention was given to the time factor as one of the major factors in the evolvement. The time when diaspora leaves plays an important role. The time line is very long in the case of Irish diaspora to the USA. The time line enabled the Irish diaspora to evolve economically, socially and politically, however, they also evolved in terms of how they interpret their own home country. The evolution of Irish diaspora resulted in a sense of confidence, the pain of leaving was replaced with feelings of success and the wish to reengage and accept the peaceful compromise. The fact that diaspora communities evolved within the host community is of great significance. The Irish American diaspora has over time contributed to both conflict and peace generation. The Irish American diaspora has played a pivotal role in the political accommodation of the peace agreement Good Friday in Northern Ireland.

    Mr. Cochrane challenged the assumptions that migration population equals security risk. Some of those assumptions are motivated with the likelihood that diaspora will hold on to the myths of the past since they have suffered the pain of leaving. There is also the argument that diasporas carry an identity complex and therefore are holding on to their identity that is perceived as the holy grail. Paul Collier argued that the larger the diaspora the larger the risk of the reemergence of war in that particular country. Collier further argued that diasporas are less likely to be physically damaged by war and therefore easier for them to support the war. They tend to be much richer that the people in their country of origin and can therefore afford to finance the vengeance without having to suffer the consequences of war. Collier regards diasporas as the key variable in the conflict proneness.

    Mr. Cochrane argued against Colliers view of diaspora as a variable and stressed that there is a spectrum of diaspora heterogeneity that Colliers fails to address. Diaspora communities are incredibly complex communities. There are tensions within those communities and they evolve over time, depending on political events that take place in the homeland and their experience of economic, political and social evolution in the hostland. Diasporas contain a vast array of opinions, beliefs, knowledge ability as well as complete ignorance of the place

    where they

    come

    from.

    24

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    25/50

    There are approximately 43 Million Americans who supposedly classify themselves as being Irish American, which is 19% of the total population. The majority of them are only Irish on S:t Patricks Day and very few are active and in tune with what is happening in their land of origin. There are approximately 2 000 3 000 people who have engaged actively. If policy makers were interested in discussing the peace building process with them, they would soon find out that they have different opinions and views as well as they would find a variety of tensions within one single diaspora group. Paul Collier seems to think that diaspora is diaspora, is a diaspora and treats them as a variable in the analysis. Diasporas cannot be put in the same category since they evolve and are in its core heterogeneous actors with a multitude of agendas.

    Mr. Cochrane continued the presentation with the emphasis on the aspect of power. His argument stated that Irish Americans used soft power effectively when they did not have that much hard power. Irish Northern Aid (NORAID) took a stance against the UK government and required that the USA should accept their agenda, which was impossible for US government to accept because it would embarrass the UK government. The NORAID example illustrates an example of Colliers argument. NORAID proclaimed a liberation arm struggle and took a militant confrontation stance. They provided money for weapons and supported the tactics and goals of the PIRA. However, there is more to Irish American diaspora than NORAID.

    At the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s another form of Irish diaspora emerged on the scene. The corporate people such as Bill Flynn, the former CEO of Mutual America and Chuck Finney joined Americans for a new Irish agenda and started to engage in the peace process. The Irish diaspora had at that time evolved from blue color working class to middle class corporate well networked communities. The Irish diaspora became a well connected diaspora with a huge amount of capital that was donated and without making headlines. Millions of dollars were given anonymously to support the peace building process in Northern Ireland. These contributions did not make headlines; however, those remittances were much more significant than all the fundraising and work done by NORAID and other militant groups in the USA.

    Bill Flynn and Chuck Finney lobbied Bill Clinton to get involved with the process as a presidential candidate. They offered Clinton an accessible and easy policy option and connected to him with major actors such as Jerry Adams. On the question is how can all this be applied to the larger picture, Mr. Cochrane explained that if diasporas want to reach policy makers, they need to give them low risk options that can evolve into much more coherent and visible initiatives. American for a New Irish Agenda (ANIA) used their soft power effectively and managed to positively contribute to the peace building process in Northern Ireland. The evolution of Irish America resulted in ANIA changing the US administrations perception of Northern Ireland as a political issue.

    The evolution of Irish diaspora from militant NORAID to corporate ANIA was of great significance. There are different groups of diaspora activists and diaspora is a complicated phenomenon. The Irish American diaspora had the time to evolve socially and economically while diaspora has an opportunity to get education about the peace building process. The

    25

  • 8/3/2019 Diaspora Conf

    26/50

    Irish diaspora did not create the peace process in Northern Ireland and they did not change the opinion of the American diaspora. They were responsible for the facilitation of the dialogue between important actors at the right period of time.

    In his concluding remarks Mr. Cochrane presented scenarios for progress. The policy makers need to regard diaspora as highly complex and important actors. Complexity is one of the major issues and it is pointless to put NORAID and Bill Finney into the same category of actors. In some cases diaspora groups might be included in the peace process in a more integrated manner. Soft Power of diasporas could be cultivated for peace process more assiduously and diasporas could try to find ways to engage with the policy makers. It is important to cultivate the diaspora by creating the opportunities for those with credibility to sell a political accommodation within diaspora groups, which may increase the support. It is additionally important to harvest the Soft Power of diaspora by connecting diaspora groups to evolving political opinion in the homeland and helping counter balance groups with rejectionist agenda. Internal civil society groups might lobby external diaspora groups in support of the process, through existing social networks and financial assistance. Diaspora groups need to be actively mainstreamed into peace building efforts rather than courted by specific groups from time to time. Policy actors could incorporate diaspora opinions from the outset building them into the pre negotiation and formal talks process. This would help educate diaspora opinion, give them responsibility for building the peace constituency, and implicate them in agreed outcomes. Irish American diasp


Recommended