Who speaks in the name of the diaspora?
New article explores Somali diaspora mobilisation
Who speaks in the name of diaspora – and what does it imply? Taking departure in Somali transnational engagement, Nauja Kleist analyses these questions in the article ‘In the Name of Diaspora: Between Struggles for Recognition and Political Aspirations in the new issue of Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.
Based on fieldwork in Copenhagen, Somaliland and London, Kleist presents two main arguments. Firstly, that 'the Somali diaspora' is constituted between marginalisation and the invocations of a transnationally committed community, dedicated to the development of the homeland. Secondly, that the proliferation of diaspora claims can be understood as part of a broader societal development where migrant groups are seen as potential political actors. On the one hand, Kleist suggests this relates to the so-called ¨'recognition turn' where potential political legitimacy relates to social struggles driven by experiences of misrecognition, making 'diasporas' possible political actors - as minorities.
On the other hand, it is a global tendency in policy circles to refer to 'diasporas' as either dangerous or constructive agents of change in their erstwhile homelands, implying a focus on transnational resources and agency. Kleist argues that together these tendencies form favourable conditions of possibility for diaspora identification, drawing on two repertoires of rights and political action which can be used in different instances of political mobilisation.
The article (Vol. 34, No. 7, pp. 1127-1143) is part of a special issue of Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies about Diaporic Issues: 'The Dilemmas and Conflicts of Transnational Engagement'.
Based on fieldwork in Copenhagen, Somaliland and London, Kleist presents two main arguments. Firstly, that 'the Somali diaspora' is constituted between marginalisation and the invocations of a transnationally committed community, dedicated to the development of the homeland. Secondly, that the proliferation of diaspora claims can be understood as part of a broader societal development where migrant groups are seen as potential political actors. On the one hand, Kleist suggests this relates to the so-called ¨'recognition turn' where potential political legitimacy relates to social struggles driven by experiences of misrecognition, making 'diasporas' possible political actors - as minorities.
On the other hand, it is a global tendency in policy circles to refer to 'diasporas' as either dangerous or constructive agents of change in their erstwhile homelands, implying a focus on transnational resources and agency. Kleist argues that together these tendencies form favourable conditions of possibility for diaspora identification, drawing on two repertoires of rights and political action which can be used in different instances of political mobilisation.
The article (Vol. 34, No. 7, pp. 1127-1143) is part of a special issue of Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies about Diaporic Issues: 'The Dilemmas and Conflicts of Transnational Engagement'.
DIIS Experts
Photo/illustration by Lynggaardhansenfoto.dk