Research
Articles
2019. Home, Again: Refugee Return and Post-Conflict Violence in Burundi. International Security 44, 110–145.
Book Project
Homeward Bound: Refugee Return and Local Conflict After Civil War
Violence wrought by civil war forces millions of people to flee their homes. While scholars have demonstrated how out-migration can spread, prolong, and exacerbate conflict, little is known about what happens when these people return home. Yet, conflict between returning and non-migrant populations is a nearly ubiquitous issue for post-conflict societies from Bosnia to Iraq, South Sudan, and beyond. Why does return-migration—usually a sign of increased peace and stability— so often lead to conflict? This dissertation advances a novel theory of return migration and conflict. I argue that return migration creates new social divisions based on whether and where individuals were displaced during war. These divisions become new sources of conflict in countries-of-origin when local institutions - like land codes, citizenship regimes, or language laws - provide differential outcomes to individuals based on their geographic location during the hostilities. Using ethnographic evidence gathered in Burundi and Tanzania from 2014 to 2016, I show how return migration after Burundi’s civil war created violent rivalries between returning and non-migrant populations. Consequently, when Burundi faced a national-level political crisis in 2015, prior experiences of return shaped both the character and timing of out-migration from Burundi. By illuminating the role of reverse population movements in shaping future conflict, the study provides a needed extension to theories of political violence and demonstrates why breaking the cycle of return and repeat migration is essential to conflict prevention.
Ongoing Projects
Non-Refoulement and the Hollowing Out of International Asylum Protections (co-authored)
Non-Refoulement, the prohibition against sending refugees back to territories in which their life or liberty is in danger is considered one of the strongest norms in international human rights law. At the same time, many states successfully avoid their non-refoulement obligations, either by deterring refugees from crossing their borders or re-categorizing asylum-seekers as migrants to enable deportation. How is it that non-refoulement can be one of the strongest norms in the international legal system while so frequently flouted? We argue that current behavior reflects a hollowing out of asylum norms, made possible by the privileging of non-refoulement over other obligations enshrined in the international refugee protection regime, such as the obligation to uphold freedom of movement, non-discrimination, and access to courts. Using data on instances of deterrence and refoulement since 1990, we extend existing explanations of the transformation of the refugee regime by demonstrating how, counter-intuitively, the strength of non-refoulment undermines broader refugee protection goals. The findings contribute to broader understandings of international refugee politics and compliance with international human rights law.
Qualitative Field Research Ethics & Training (co-authored)
There is a strong interest in political science to produce knowledge on the causes and consequences of violent conflict. However, there has not been a simultaneous uptick in academic training on how to ethically and effectively conduct fieldwork in these environments. We are currently conducting a survey to explore patterns of field research and training practices across top-ranked political science departments for comparative politics and international relations in the United States. Through establishing a more scientific understanding of fieldwork training norms, we will trace the ethical implications for researchers’ personal safety, the safety of those they are working with, and the substantive impact on the knowledge produced.
Refugee Return as Public Relations for Human Rights Violating Regimes
In this article, I use the case of displacement between Burundi and Tanzania to explore the sub-national variation in which host-countries force some refugee populations to return, while allowing others to remain. Existing explanations focus on evolving state interests in hosting refugees (Milner 2009; Hamlin 2012), and host-country elites’ incentives to continue hosting refugee populations (Betts 2013). I argue that, in addition to host-state interests, this variation also reflects (1) elite interests in the refugee sending state and (2) the nature of refugee status determination in the global south (primarily via prima facie determination).
Migration & Citizenship Regimes in South Sudan (working paper)
How does forced migration affect claims to citizenship after civil war? I argue that de facto citizenship status in areas affected by conflict is determined, in part, by where individuals lived during wartime. Using the case of South Sudan, I argue that different regimes of citizenship, republican and liberal, were present simultaneously in the eight years of relative stability after the Second Sudanese Civil War. I develop a typology delineating these concurrent citizenship regimes and outlining the hierarchy of power within in each. I then illustrate the construction of the different citizenship classes through an examination of the experiences of returning refugees and internally displaced persons from Khartoum, Sudan to Juba, South Sudan between 2010 and 2013.
Other Research Publications
Youth in Post-Conflict Reconstruction: Agents of Change (Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press, 2010).
“Dowry and Division: Youth and State-Building in South Sudan,” with Marc Sommers. U.S. Institute of Peace Special Report, 295: November 2011.
2019. Home, Again: Refugee Return and Post-Conflict Violence in Burundi. International Security 44, 110–145.
Book Project
Homeward Bound: Refugee Return and Local Conflict After Civil War
Violence wrought by civil war forces millions of people to flee their homes. While scholars have demonstrated how out-migration can spread, prolong, and exacerbate conflict, little is known about what happens when these people return home. Yet, conflict between returning and non-migrant populations is a nearly ubiquitous issue for post-conflict societies from Bosnia to Iraq, South Sudan, and beyond. Why does return-migration—usually a sign of increased peace and stability— so often lead to conflict? This dissertation advances a novel theory of return migration and conflict. I argue that return migration creates new social divisions based on whether and where individuals were displaced during war. These divisions become new sources of conflict in countries-of-origin when local institutions - like land codes, citizenship regimes, or language laws - provide differential outcomes to individuals based on their geographic location during the hostilities. Using ethnographic evidence gathered in Burundi and Tanzania from 2014 to 2016, I show how return migration after Burundi’s civil war created violent rivalries between returning and non-migrant populations. Consequently, when Burundi faced a national-level political crisis in 2015, prior experiences of return shaped both the character and timing of out-migration from Burundi. By illuminating the role of reverse population movements in shaping future conflict, the study provides a needed extension to theories of political violence and demonstrates why breaking the cycle of return and repeat migration is essential to conflict prevention.
Ongoing Projects
Non-Refoulement and the Hollowing Out of International Asylum Protections (co-authored)
Non-Refoulement, the prohibition against sending refugees back to territories in which their life or liberty is in danger is considered one of the strongest norms in international human rights law. At the same time, many states successfully avoid their non-refoulement obligations, either by deterring refugees from crossing their borders or re-categorizing asylum-seekers as migrants to enable deportation. How is it that non-refoulement can be one of the strongest norms in the international legal system while so frequently flouted? We argue that current behavior reflects a hollowing out of asylum norms, made possible by the privileging of non-refoulement over other obligations enshrined in the international refugee protection regime, such as the obligation to uphold freedom of movement, non-discrimination, and access to courts. Using data on instances of deterrence and refoulement since 1990, we extend existing explanations of the transformation of the refugee regime by demonstrating how, counter-intuitively, the strength of non-refoulment undermines broader refugee protection goals. The findings contribute to broader understandings of international refugee politics and compliance with international human rights law.
Qualitative Field Research Ethics & Training (co-authored)
There is a strong interest in political science to produce knowledge on the causes and consequences of violent conflict. However, there has not been a simultaneous uptick in academic training on how to ethically and effectively conduct fieldwork in these environments. We are currently conducting a survey to explore patterns of field research and training practices across top-ranked political science departments for comparative politics and international relations in the United States. Through establishing a more scientific understanding of fieldwork training norms, we will trace the ethical implications for researchers’ personal safety, the safety of those they are working with, and the substantive impact on the knowledge produced.
Refugee Return as Public Relations for Human Rights Violating Regimes
In this article, I use the case of displacement between Burundi and Tanzania to explore the sub-national variation in which host-countries force some refugee populations to return, while allowing others to remain. Existing explanations focus on evolving state interests in hosting refugees (Milner 2009; Hamlin 2012), and host-country elites’ incentives to continue hosting refugee populations (Betts 2013). I argue that, in addition to host-state interests, this variation also reflects (1) elite interests in the refugee sending state and (2) the nature of refugee status determination in the global south (primarily via prima facie determination).
Migration & Citizenship Regimes in South Sudan (working paper)
How does forced migration affect claims to citizenship after civil war? I argue that de facto citizenship status in areas affected by conflict is determined, in part, by where individuals lived during wartime. Using the case of South Sudan, I argue that different regimes of citizenship, republican and liberal, were present simultaneously in the eight years of relative stability after the Second Sudanese Civil War. I develop a typology delineating these concurrent citizenship regimes and outlining the hierarchy of power within in each. I then illustrate the construction of the different citizenship classes through an examination of the experiences of returning refugees and internally displaced persons from Khartoum, Sudan to Juba, South Sudan between 2010 and 2013.
Other Research Publications
Youth in Post-Conflict Reconstruction: Agents of Change (Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press, 2010).
“Dowry and Division: Youth and State-Building in South Sudan,” with Marc Sommers. U.S. Institute of Peace Special Report, 295: November 2011.