Search

Few issues in international politics have dominated public debates, both in domestic and international arenas, as much as refugee movements across borders in recent years. By the end of 2017, more than 68.5 million people – one in approximately every 110 people on the planet – had been displaced from their homes, either as internally displaced persons (IDPs) or as refugees, due to violent conflict, persecution, famine, or natural disasters. This article introduces a special issue on refugees, forced migration, and conflict. It describes the evolution of the international refugee regime and identifies theoretical and methodological advances in the relevant literature. It concludes with a discussion of the individual contributions to the issue, which seek to address gaps in the literature with respect to explaining motivations for refugee departures, understanding the relationship between refugee populations and political instability in host countries, and tracking public attitudes towards hosting refugee populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This conclusion to the special issue highlights the role of scholars in advancing the public discussion about forced migration. As countries around the world are adopting increasing restrictions on the entry of refugees, academic research can help to dispel some of the myths and apprehensions regarding the risks that forced migration entails. While refugees may be linked to conflict and violence in limited circumstances, the research generally demonstrates that robust international cooperation to manage refugee settlements, provide adequate humanitarian assistance, and integrate refugees into host communities, among other policies, can help to mitigate potential risks. Directions for future research and analysis are also discussed. Forced migration scholars should endeavor to collect more individual-level data; seek to understand factors that exacerbate or reduce security risks associated with cross-border militancy; conduct research on the long-term integration of refugees; and seek to understand the causes and consequences of resettlement and repatriation policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What does the American public label as “terrorism?” How do people think about the factors motivating violence, and in turn, the policies that are favored? Using ingroup and outgroup dynamics, we argue that the terrorist label is more readily applied to Arab-Americans than Whites, and to members of militant groups. Moreover, people attribute different motives to violence committed by Arabs versus Whites, and favor different policies in response. We conducted an experiment where we randomly assigned one of six stories about a failed armed attack, each with a different combination of ethnicity and group affiliation. We find that an Arab ethnicity and Islamist group affiliation increase the likelihood of labeling an act as terrorism. Attacks by Whites and members of a White supremacist group are less likely to be labeled terrorism. Rather, Whites are more likely to be called “mass shooters.” Despite never discussing motive, Arab-American attackers are more likely to be ascribed political or religious motives, while White suspects are more likely to be seen as mentally ill. Lastly, an Arab ethnicity increases support for counterterrorism policies and decreases support for mental health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Proponents of democratization often claim that liberal institutions have a palliative effect on the level of conflict within societies. Critics, however, suggest that the instruments of democracy, especially elections, can spark political violence, particularly in weakly institutionalized settings. Using the newly available Social Conflict in Africa Database (SCAD), we examine the relationship between executive elections and social conflict in Africa for the period 1990-2009. We also assess the conditions which make elections more or less violent. We examine elections in (1) countries faced with armed conflict, (2) post-conflict settings, (3) elections in autocracies, and (4) in relatively poor countries. We also look at characteristics of elections themselves, including the margin of victory, the presence of observers, and allegations of vote fraud. Results show that while elections can sometimes spark violence, free and fair elections in genuinely democratic contexts are much less conflict prone, while illiberal elections are especially problematic. We do not find that current or recent armed conflict on a country's territory makes elections more violent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dominant discourse on the security implications of climate change has asserted that acute environmental scarcity—such as that caused by drought—causes political violence. In contrast, we argue that there are good reasons why water scarcity might have a pacifying effect on armed conflict, and that political violence should be more prevalent during periods of comparatively better agro-climatic conditions. Political violence is more prevalent when basic needs are met and when the tactical environment is more conducive to attacks—conditions that hold when water is comparatively abundant. Empirically, this paper explores the relationship between environmental scarcity and political violence in a global sample of countries, 1970–2006. We find that water abundance is positively correlated with political violence, and that this relationship is stronger in less developed, more agriculturally dependent societies. These findings are robust to several different operationalizations of our variables. We conclude with a brief discussion of the policy implications of our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many scholars, policymakers, and activists have argued that climate change will lead to resource competition, mass migration, and, ultimately, an increase in armed conflict around the world. This article takes issue with the 'deterministic' view that climate change and resultant resource scarcities will have a direct impact on political violence. Rather, the effect of climate change on armed conflict is contingent on a number of political and social variables, which, if ignored by analysts, can lead to poor predictions about when and where conflict is likely. This article then discusses ways to improve research on the climate change-conflict connection and outlines broad policy suggestions for dealing with this potential problem. Scholars must communicate their findings with the policy community in order to come up with prudent solutions to this problem, while countering unnecessary rhetoric on both sides of the debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction examines the current literature on refugees and civil conflict. Rather than treating refugees as the unfortunate victims of conflict and the by-product of war, recent literature places forced migration squarely within the study of political violence. While humanitarian issues are certainly significant, refugees are also important political actors who play an active part in conflict dynamics. Three themes are considered here: conflict as a cause of forced migration, forced migration as a cause of conflict, and policy responses to refugee flows. This contribution also outlines promising areas for future research and introduces the articles in this special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]