Foreign or Domestic Affairs? Unpacking Mechanisms Behind Colombia and Peru's Policies on Venezuelan Displacement

IF 2.4 1区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
Nieves Fernández-Rodríguez
{"title":"Foreign or Domestic Affairs? Unpacking Mechanisms Behind Colombia and Peru's Policies on Venezuelan Displacement","authors":"Nieves Fernández-Rodríguez","doi":"10.1177/01979183251365919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While forced displacement policies are shaped by both international and domestic considerations, little is known about how states navigate conflicting pressures when adopting liberal or restrictive approaches. This article addresses this gap by examining the divergent responses of the two largest recipients of Venezuelan displaced people: Peru under Martín Vizcarra (2018–2020) and Colombia under Iván Duque (2018–2022). Although both Peru and Colombia are middle-income countries with significant emigration and share growing public resentment toward migrants and strained relations with Nicolás Maduro's regime, they pursued opposite policies. In 2019, Peru imposed a visa requirement for Venezuelan migrants, restricting access, whereas in 2021 Colombia created the Temporary Protection Status, allowing for regularization and a path to residency. Using 65 interviews with policymakers and experts, over 200 statements by public officials, and secondary literature, this study identifies the mechanisms behind these contradictory policies. It argues that whether forced displacement is perceived by executive actors as a foreign or domestic issue shapes the nature of policy in countries that would otherwise be expected to respond similarly. These perceptions are ultimately explained by executives’ need for self-preservation and self-legitimation within strategic political contexts. Four key factors—importance given to Venezuela, international reputation, executive strength, and, to a lesser extent, bureaucratic frameworks—determine whether foreign or domestic logics prevail. By showing how Latin American responses integrate both logics rather than fitting neatly into Global North/South binaries, this study challenges dominant dichotomies in migration scholarship.","PeriodicalId":48229,"journal":{"name":"International Migration Review","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Migration Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183251365919","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While forced displacement policies are shaped by both international and domestic considerations, little is known about how states navigate conflicting pressures when adopting liberal or restrictive approaches. This article addresses this gap by examining the divergent responses of the two largest recipients of Venezuelan displaced people: Peru under Martín Vizcarra (2018–2020) and Colombia under Iván Duque (2018–2022). Although both Peru and Colombia are middle-income countries with significant emigration and share growing public resentment toward migrants and strained relations with Nicolás Maduro's regime, they pursued opposite policies. In 2019, Peru imposed a visa requirement for Venezuelan migrants, restricting access, whereas in 2021 Colombia created the Temporary Protection Status, allowing for regularization and a path to residency. Using 65 interviews with policymakers and experts, over 200 statements by public officials, and secondary literature, this study identifies the mechanisms behind these contradictory policies. It argues that whether forced displacement is perceived by executive actors as a foreign or domestic issue shapes the nature of policy in countries that would otherwise be expected to respond similarly. These perceptions are ultimately explained by executives’ need for self-preservation and self-legitimation within strategic political contexts. Four key factors—importance given to Venezuela, international reputation, executive strength, and, to a lesser extent, bureaucratic frameworks—determine whether foreign or domestic logics prevail. By showing how Latin American responses integrate both logics rather than fitting neatly into Global North/South binaries, this study challenges dominant dichotomies in migration scholarship.
外交还是内政?哥伦比亚和秘鲁对委内瑞拉流离失所者政策背后的机制
虽然强迫流离失所政策受到国际和国内因素的影响,但人们对各国在采取自由或限制措施时如何应对相互冲突的压力知之甚少。本文通过研究委内瑞拉流离失所者的两个最大接受国的不同反应来解决这一差距:Martín Vizcarra(2018-2020)下的秘鲁和Iván Duque(2018-2022)下的哥伦比亚。尽管秘鲁和哥伦比亚都是拥有大量移民的中等收入国家,公众对移民的不满情绪也越来越大,与Nicolás马杜罗政权的关系也很紧张,但两国奉行相反的政策。2019年,秘鲁对委内瑞拉移民实施了签证要求,限制了他们的进入,而2021年,哥伦比亚设立了临时保护地位,允许移民正规化并获得居留权。通过对政策制定者和专家的65次访谈、200多份政府官员的声明以及二手文献,本研究确定了这些相互矛盾的政策背后的机制。报告认为,行政行为者是否将被迫流离失所视为外国问题或国内问题,将影响到原本预计会作出类似反应的国家的政策性质。这些看法最终可以解释为高管们在战略政治背景下对自我保护和自我合法化的需要。四个关键因素——给予委内瑞拉的重要性、国际声誉、执行力,以及(在较小程度上)官僚框架——决定了是国外还是国内的逻辑占上风。通过展示拉丁美洲的反应如何整合这两种逻辑,而不是整齐地适应全球南北二元性,本研究挑战了移民研究中占主导地位的二分法。
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
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
7.90%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: International Migration Review is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed journal created to encourage and facilitate the study of all aspects of sociodemographic, historical, economic, political, legislative and international migration. It is internationally regarded as the principal journal in the field facilitating study of international migration, ethnic group relations, and refugee movements. Through an interdisciplinary approach and from an international perspective, IMR provides the single most comprehensive forum devoted exclusively to the analysis and review of international population movements.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信