The Repatriation & Reintegration Dilemma: How states manage the return of foreign terrorist fighters & their families.

Q2 Social Sciences
Journal for Deradicalization Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-24
Haroro J Ingram, Julie Coleman, Austin C Doctor, Devorah Margolin
{"title":"The Repatriation & Reintegration Dilemma: How states manage the return of foreign terrorist fighters & their families.","authors":"Haroro J Ingram, Julie Coleman, Austin C Doctor, Devorah Margolin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study analyzes the interplay of factors which drive states' approaches to the repatriation and reintegration of Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) and their family members. The literature is dominated by descriptive studies of state policies that tend to explain states' failure to repatriate and reintegrate citizens as the result of deference to governments' national security decisions. Our study builds on these foundations to offer the scholarly and policy fields both a framework to explain why governments adopt distinct policy postures, and a means to enable these same actors to engage in more systematic analysis and development of repatriation and reintegration policy. This study argues that a balance of four considerations are crucial for explaining state behavior in this policy context: (i.) the scope of the issue, including the number of citizens considered FTFs or affiliated persons, geographic proximity, and access to the conflict, (ii.) existing legal basis for repatriation and reintegration, (iii.) instrumentalization for institution building, and (iv.) programming strategy for repatriation and reintegration. As a pilot study, this paper applies the framework to assess cases of the United States, the Netherlands, Kosovo, and Iraq. As FTF management issues are not a relic of the recent past but a persistent policy concern that warrants more nuanced and forward-looking attention, this study also considers the continued application of the framework to explore the different ways in which states may balance these four considerations in policy design and practice in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":36560,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Deradicalization","volume":"Summer 2022 31","pages":"119-163"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10698679/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Deradicalization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study analyzes the interplay of factors which drive states' approaches to the repatriation and reintegration of Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) and their family members. The literature is dominated by descriptive studies of state policies that tend to explain states' failure to repatriate and reintegrate citizens as the result of deference to governments' national security decisions. Our study builds on these foundations to offer the scholarly and policy fields both a framework to explain why governments adopt distinct policy postures, and a means to enable these same actors to engage in more systematic analysis and development of repatriation and reintegration policy. This study argues that a balance of four considerations are crucial for explaining state behavior in this policy context: (i.) the scope of the issue, including the number of citizens considered FTFs or affiliated persons, geographic proximity, and access to the conflict, (ii.) existing legal basis for repatriation and reintegration, (iii.) instrumentalization for institution building, and (iv.) programming strategy for repatriation and reintegration. As a pilot study, this paper applies the framework to assess cases of the United States, the Netherlands, Kosovo, and Iraq. As FTF management issues are not a relic of the recent past but a persistent policy concern that warrants more nuanced and forward-looking attention, this study also considers the continued application of the framework to explore the different ways in which states may balance these four considerations in policy design and practice in the future.

遣返和重返社会的困境:国家如何管理外国恐怖主义战斗人员及其家人的返回。
本研究分析了促使各国采取遣返外国恐怖主义战斗人员(FTFs)及其家庭成员并使其重返社会的各种因素之间的相互作用。文献主要是对国家政策的描述性研究,倾向于将国家未能遣返公民并使其重返社会解释为服从政府的国家安全决定的结果。我们的研究在这些基础上为学术界和政策领域提供了一个框架,用以解释各国政府为何采取不同的政策立场,同时也提供了一种方法,使这些参与者能够对遣返和重返社会政策进行更系统的分析和制定。本研究认为,平衡以下四个方面的考虑对于解释这种政策背景下的国家行为至关重要:(i.) 问题的范围,包括被视为 FTFs 或附属人员的公民人数、地理位置的邻近性和冲突的可及性,(ii.) 遣返和重返社会的现有法律依据,(iii.) 机构建设的工具化,以及 (iv.) 遣返和重返社会的规划战略。作为一项试点研究,本文将该框架应用于评估美国、荷兰、科索沃和伊拉克的案例。由于联邦信托基金的管理问题并不是近期的遗留问题,而是一个长期存在的政策问题,需要更加细致和前瞻性的关注,因此本研究还考虑继续应用该框架,探索各国在未来的政策设计和实践中平衡这四个考虑因素的不同方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal for Deradicalization
Journal for Deradicalization Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信