Cited by 261Diaspora, migration, transnational identityPolitical Conflict and GovernanceMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts

Transnational Repression, Diaspora Mobilization, and the Case of The Arab Spring

Moss, Dana M.·2016·Social Problems

Abstract

Do authoritarian states deter dissent in the diaspora? Using data on Libyan and Syrian activism in the United States and Great Britain, this study demonstrates that they do through violence, exile, threats, surveillance, and by harming dissidents’ relatives at home. The analysis finds that the transnational repression of these diasporas deterred public anti-regime mobilization before the Arab Spring. I then identify the mechanisms by which Libyans and Syrians overcame these effects during the 2011 revolutions. Activists “came out” when (1) violence at home changed their relatives’ circumstances and upset repression’s relational effects; (2) the sacrifices of vanguard activists expanded their objects of obligation, leading them to embrace cost sharing; and (3) the regimes were perceived as incapable of making good on their threats. However, differences in the regimes’ perceived capacities to repress in 2011 produced significant variation in the pace of diaspora emergence over time and guarded advocacy. The study advances understanding of transnationalism by demonstrating how states exercise coercive power across borders and the conditions under which diasporas mobilize to publicly and collectively challenge home-country regimes. ¿Los estados autoritarios evitan el disentimiento en la diáspora? Utilizando datos sobre el activismo de Libia y Siria en el Gran Reino Unido y EE.UU., este estudio demuestra que lo hacen a través de la violencia, el exilio, amenazas, vigilancia y daña…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/socpro/spw019

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Diasporic activism can be detrimental to authoritarian regime survival and stability.

    “As demonstrated during the Arab Spring, diasporic activism can be detrimental to authoritarian regime survival and stability (Beaugrand and Geisser 2016; Moss 2016).”
  • Moss (2016) presents a typology of strategies of transnational repression that states use to intimidate and deter opposition groups in the diaspora, including lethal retribution, threats, surveillance, exile, withdrawing scholarships or financial assistance, and proxy punishment.

    “Moss (2016: 485) presents a typology of strategies of transnational repression that states use to intimidate and deter opposition groups in the diaspora.These include lethal retribution (actual or attempted assassinations); threats (verbal or written warnings); surveillance (gathering and sending information to central authorities); exile (banishment from the country/polity); withdrawing”

    From Non‐state authoritarianism and diaspora politics (2020) · cites this paper as Moss 2016: 485

  • State repressive power can extend into the spaces of other states and take the form of 'transnational' or 'extraterritorial' repression, acting as a 'long-distance' deterrent to political organizing and posing a threat to populations living abroad.

    “Rather, state repressive power can extend into the spaces of other states and take the form of 'transnational' or 'extraterritorial' repression, acting as a 'long-distance' deterrent to political organizing and posing a threat to populations living abroad (Cooley and Heathershaw 2017: 187-219;Lewis 2015;Moss 2016).”

    From Non‐state authoritarianism and diaspora politics (2020) · cites this paper as Moss 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moss, D. M.
Corresponding author
Moss, Dana M.
Venue
Social Problems
Published
2016-09-19
Volume
63
Issue
4
Pages
480-498
ISSN
  • 0037-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-8533
OpenAlex
W2522229706
Cited by
261
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
33.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Problems (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Diaspora, migration, transnational identity
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Middle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Keywords
transnational repression, diaspora mobilization, Arab Spring, Syrian diaspora, authoritarian repression, surveillance, exile, family harm, cost sharing, transnationalism, United States, United Kingdom, 2011 revolutions, Syria, transnational activism, collective action

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review