{"title":"U.S. mobilization of its domestic diaspora: Strategic leveraging of an un[der]tapped foreign policy resource","authors":"Roberto J. Flores","doi":"10.1111/polp.12591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>The historic diaspora diplomacy literature has generally characterized politically active diaspora as foreign agents leveraged by their ancestral homeland to shape the foreign policy of their host nation. As such, diaspora groups have generally been assessed as net negatives on the foreign policy of their host nations, or as working against the common good of the host nation. This work seeks to challenge this narrow conceptualization and demonstrate that, when considered within a broader historical timeline, granted agency, and contextualized within a networked society, emergent mechanisms for state mobilization of diaspora groups to achieve foreign policy objectives become apparent. This work is focused exclusively on political diaspora groups within the United States and investigates select case studies to demonstrate the evolving nature of U.S.–diaspora relations and the opportunities presented as a result. The work concludes with several policy recommendations, derived from lessons learned within the case studies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Related Articles</h3>\n \n <p>Bayes, Jane H., and Laura Gonzalez. 2011. “Globalization, Transnationalism, and Intersecting Geographies of Power: The Case of the Consejo Consultivo del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (CC-IME): A Study in Progress.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 39(1): 11–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2010.00281.x.</p>\n \n <p>Huijgh, Ellen. 2017. “Indonesia's ‘Intermestic’ Public Diplomacy: Features and Future.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 45(5): 762–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12221.</p>\n \n <p>Singh, Amit, and Amit Sarwal. 2017. “Paraspara, Encounters, and Confluences: India's Soft Power Objective in the Indo-Pacific Region.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 45(5): 733–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12222.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51679,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Policy","volume":"52 2","pages":"288-305"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12591","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The historic diaspora diplomacy literature has generally characterized politically active diaspora as foreign agents leveraged by their ancestral homeland to shape the foreign policy of their host nation. As such, diaspora groups have generally been assessed as net negatives on the foreign policy of their host nations, or as working against the common good of the host nation. This work seeks to challenge this narrow conceptualization and demonstrate that, when considered within a broader historical timeline, granted agency, and contextualized within a networked society, emergent mechanisms for state mobilization of diaspora groups to achieve foreign policy objectives become apparent. This work is focused exclusively on political diaspora groups within the United States and investigates select case studies to demonstrate the evolving nature of U.S.–diaspora relations and the opportunities presented as a result. The work concludes with several policy recommendations, derived from lessons learned within the case studies.
Related Articles
Bayes, Jane H., and Laura Gonzalez. 2011. “Globalization, Transnationalism, and Intersecting Geographies of Power: The Case of the Consejo Consultivo del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (CC-IME): A Study in Progress.” Politics & Policy 39(1): 11–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2010.00281.x.
Huijgh, Ellen. 2017. “Indonesia's ‘Intermestic’ Public Diplomacy: Features and Future.” Politics & Policy 45(5): 762–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12221.
Singh, Amit, and Amit Sarwal. 2017. “Paraspara, Encounters, and Confluences: India's Soft Power Objective in the Indo-Pacific Region.” Politics & Policy 45(5): 733–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12222.
历史上的侨民外交文献通常将政治上活跃的侨民描述为外国代理人,他们的祖籍国利用他们来影响东道国的外交政策。因此,侨民群体通常被认为是东道国外交政策的净负面因素,或与东道国的共同利益背道而驰。这项研究试图挑战这种狭隘的概念,并证明如果从更广阔的历史时间轴来考虑,赋予侨民代理权,并将其置于网络化社会的背景下,国家动员侨民群体以实现外交政策目标的新兴机制就会变得显而易见。本著作专门关注美国国内的政治侨民群体,并通过精选的案例研究来展示美国与侨民关系不断演变的性质以及由此带来的机遇。最后,根据案例研究中的经验教训提出了若干政策建议。2011."Globalization, Transnationalism, and Intersecting Geographies of Power: The Case of the Consejo Consultivo del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (CC-IME):进行中的研究"。Politics & Policy 39(1):11–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2010.00281.x.Huijgh, Ellen.2017.印度尼西亚的 "国内 "公共外交:特点与未来"。Politics & Policy 45(5):https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12221.Singh, Amit, and Amit Sarwal.2017."Paraspara, Encounters, and Confluences:印度在印度洋-太平洋地区的软实力目标》。Politics & Policy 45(5):733–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12222.