Digital Diaspora: Definition, Evaluation and Policy Recommendations

Onur Unutulmaz | Director of Digital Diaspora Study Group

©YeniDiplomasi.com | July 2012

2

Contents Executive Summary.............................................................................................. 2

Introduction............................................................................................................ 5

Background: Contemporary Diasporas and the

Growing Interest in Diaspora Resources

..................................................................................................................................... 6

i. The Concept of Diaspora and Diasporic Communities.......................... 6

ii. The Race to Engage Diasporas...................................................................... 7

Definition: Digital Diaspora............................................................................... 8

Evaluation: Positive and Negative Implications of Digital Diasporas...9

i. Implications for Diasporic Communities.................................................... 10

ii. Implications for Sending Countries............................................................. 11

iii. Implications for Receiving Countries........................................................ 13

Conclusion: Prospects and Policy Recommendations ............................. 16

Bibliography............................................................................................................ 18

3

Digital Diaspora: Definition, Evaluation and

Policy Recommendations

Executive Summary

• Diasporas have emerged as significant international players with precious economic, political

and social resources. Today, the race is almost universal for countries around the globe to reach

out to and mobilise various diasporic communities in the service of political objectives

concerning economic development, integration of minorities or effective lobbying for national

interests.

• Digital diaspora is a recently emerging concept that refers to the diasporic communities that

utilize the extensive range of possibilities provided by the advanced Information Technologies to

(i) mobilize around a common diasporic identity and form communities; (ii) express that identity

publicly and negotiate the terms of it; (iii) provide solidary and material benefits to its members;

and (iv) engage in political, economic, socio-cultural activities transnationally.

• The Internet, providing interactive features and anonymity, is particularly appealing for the

geographically dispersed and sometimes traumatized communities to communicate, organize

and mobilize transnationally and globally. The extensive use of IT resources and the Internet

provide digital diasporas with several material benefits; identity and solidary benefits; and

integration benefits that would shield them from social exclusion.

• The formation of digital diasporas also create several implications for the sending countries.

They constitute low-cost, continuous channels of communication between the diasporic

communities and their home countries which could be utilized at times of need to mobilize

diaspora resources in the service of national interests. These include diplomatic advantages in

bilateral relations as the diaspora communities could function as significant lobbying and

pressure groups. The benefits also include political leverage particularly at election times and

when diaspora communities constitute a potentially significant voting bloc.

• The implications of digital diasporas for the receiving countries are no less significant. Most

importantly, digital diasporas constitute easily accessible migrant and minority communities the

integration of whom is a vital political concern. If the receiving countries come to terms with the

realities of irreversible cultural diversity, the advanced IT resources and the multiplicity/hybridity

of identities; they could engage digital diasporas to ensure effective integration. Receiving

countries could also engage digital diasporas to prevent various fundamentalist and terrorist

4

organisations that use the Internet to do their propaganda and to recruit members from

marginalized segments of the society.

• Among all these potential benefits of the formation digital diasporas, as mentioned above, they

could also pose a risk to national sovereignty and security. The Internet is still one of the places

where interactions are most difficult to control and regulate. While this creates numerous

advantages for the traumatized diaspora members to get involved and have their voices heard, it

could and does easily get exploited. This report suggests, however, that this risk needs to be

tackled with a pro-active attitude from the states and should not overshadow the stated

benefits of digital diasporas.

• Overall, digital diasporas will continue to form and become increasingly more significant political

actors in the international arena. While this prospect is almost certain, what this would imply for

different countries and international/transnational organizations will depend on how quickly and

effectively they would position themselves vis a vis digital diasporas. The first essential step to

take is to acknowledge and embrace the fact that diaspora communities have multiple and

hybrid identities, and they are engaged in a transnational mode of living. Once this step is taken,

the rest depends on the logistics of how to more effectively mobilize their resources and engage

them.

5

I. Introduction

This recently emerging concept, digital diaspora, refers to the new and technologically enhanced

ways in which internationally dispersed communities could (re)construct, maintain and manifest a

‘diasporic identity’ and engage in significant transnational relations in the contemporary

globalized world. The concept does not yet enjoy a similar level of popularity as the concept of

diaspora in international relations or political discourses; nor has it been subject to a sufficient

level of academic interest and inquiry. However, as this report shall attempt to manifest, a

heightened level of interest should be directed towards the concept of digital diaspora as part of a

transforming scenery of international relations and diplomacy in today’s digital age.

The interest in the concept of digital diaspora derives mostly from a growing interest in the

diasporas and in the ways in which Information Technologies (IT) have been transforming

International Relations. Far from the times when the concept of diaspora was considered to refer

to a necessarily traumatized and marginalized community; in today’s world everyone is in a race to

engage the diasporic communities to benefit from their economic, political and socio-cultural

resources. Therefore, before showing how the current advanced technologies in communication

make these efforts simultaneously easier and yet more complicated thereby invoking the concept

of digital diaspora, I shall start with defining some essential concepts related to diasporas as a

background. Then, the concept of digital diaspora will be defined. Later, the potential of this

concept shall be evaluated from the perspectives of the sending countries, receiving countries and

diasporas. The report shall close with a discussion of the policy implications of the concept

concerning the potential and prospects of digital diasporas.

6

II. Background: Contemporary Diasporas and the Growing

Interest in Diaspora Resources

i. The Concept of Diaspora and Diasporic Communities

The concept of diaspora emerged originally in reference to specific dispersed communities, i.e. the

Jewish and Armenian communities, and their particular experience with dispersion and migration

(Cohen 1997). However, today, the concept is used much more liberally and generally in reference

to a great number of communities. These ‘modern diasporas’ are “ethnic minority groups of

migrant origin residing and acting in host countries but maintaining strong sentimental and

material links with their countries of origin- their homelands” (Sheffer 1986, 3).

Although different people have different definitions, a review of the literature seems to suggest

that contemporary diasporas are communities that possess (Brinkerhoff 2009, 31; Cohen 1997,

515; Vertovec 1997):

• a diasporic consciousness and associated identity hybridity;

• a collective memory and myth about homeland;

• a commitment to keeping the homeland alive;

• the presence of the issue of return, though not necessarily a commitment to do so.

Among others, two very important implications should be kept in mind:

• Diaspora is a subjective community that is based on conscious ownership of a common identity.

Therefore, no individual can be assumed to be a member of any diasporic community only by

virtue of their ethnic identity. They need to consider themselves to be part of that community.

Thus, only when this diasporic consciousness is strong and mobilisation around this diasporic

identity is achieved could a diasporic community be influential.

• A diasporic identity is always and necessarily a hybrid identity. It is a unique and customized

blend of the cultural identities of the homeland and the host context. Moreover, the literature

on diasporas demonstrates that it should not necessarily be a ‘zero-sum conflict’ (Brinkerhoff

2009, 32). To the contrary, the contributions of the diasporic communities are greatest when

they are allowed to obtain and express their hybrid identities securely and freely. This realization

is evident in the increasing international trend where the emigration countries ask their

diasporic communities abroad to ‘integrate’ in their host countries and to obtain citizenship;

7

while the immigration countries increasingly quit assimilationist discourses and turn to

integration policies accepting the immigrant and minority communities’ diasporic identities.

ii. The Race to Engage Diasporas

Today, there is a remarkable race to engage diasporic communities for a range of political and

economic objectives. On the one hand, the emigration countries are trying to mobilize diaspora

resources in the service of home country’s economic and political development. Already by the

year 1999, Meyer and Brown (1999) have identified forty-one formal knowledge networks linking

thirty countries to their skilled nationals abroad. In addition, many emigration countries have

established “Diaspora Ministries” to support their nationals abroad and to keep strong relations

with them. Some of these cases are very extreme. For instance, the government of the Philippines

has established a consultation office in the US to give legal advice to Philippino asylum-seekers to

get refugee status. In other words, the government is helping individuals who are claiming to have

escaped the country to make their case! (Vertovec 2009, 8-9) Such is the extent of emigration

countries’ acknowledgement of the importance of diasporic communities. Turkey has not been

any different in this manner. In addition to a growing number of programs and projects organized

by institutions like TUBITAK (Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey) and various

ministries aimed at diaspora Turks, a new Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities

has been established in 2010.

The immigration countries, on the other hand, increasingly acknowledging both the reality and

irreversibility of ethnic and cultural diversity in their societies, try to facilitate cultural integration

of diasporic communities while ensuring them that assimilation is no longer a political objective.

As a result, some countries such as Germany and France are stepping back from assimilationist

policies while more multiculturalist countries such as the Netherlands and the UK are asking for

cohesion around a sense of belonging and common values (Unutulmaz 2012). The negotiated

compromise seems to be cultural integration- a term loose enough to incorporate the existence

of hybrid diasporic identities while also asking for conformity with the rules and general culture of

the host context. The sending countries, in fact, like this idea of better integrated diasporas who

would have more political capital and higher socio-economic status.

In the next section, I shall try to show how the emergence of digital diasporas fits into this picture

of ever growing political salience of engaging diasporas. First, let me define the concept.

8

III. Definition: Digital Diaspora and the Internet for Diasporic

Communities

In the strictest sense, digital diasporas can be defined as virtual communities who exist only in the

cyber space and act through internet. However, this is only one part of the actual phenomenon. In

fact, digital diasporas should be defined as diasporic communities that make use of the extensive

range of possibilities provided by the advanced Information Technologies to (i) mobilize around a

common diasporic identity and form communities; (ii) express that identity publicly and negotiate

the terms of it; (iii) provide solidary and material benefits to its members; and (iv) engage in

political, economic, socio-cultural activities transnationally. As a tool for communication and

community building, the Internet is perfectly equipped with opportunities and possibilities for

connecting diasporic communities who are geographically scattered. In fact, one of the very few

major studies on diasporas’ use of media technologies suggests that diasporic communities not

only use, but also adopt cutting edge technologies (Karim 2003). IT allow dispersed communities

to produce and maintain new diasporic identities with stronger ties within and among diaspora

communities and with the homeland (Panagakos 2003).

The Internet offers a host of probabilities for new connections and forming a range of

communities. Three significant types of virtual communities are defined in the literature: i) virtual

communities that are congruent with physical communities; ii) virtual communities that overlap

with physical communities (but are not congruent with them); and iii) virtual communities that are

thoroughly distinct from physical communities (Brinkerhoff 2009, 44; Foster 1996). The first kind

of communities may include grassroots organisations or similar non-profit ones that provide

services in the physical world while maintaining modes of interaction in cyberspace such as

discussion forums for community building purposes. The second type of virtual communities,

which overlap with physical communities but are not congruent with them, may include those that

connect dispersed communities and utilize the Internet to discuss and plan for purposive

engagement in the physical world that they would later execute either in the homeland or in one

or more host contexts. The completely virtual type of diasporas are organisations that are co-

created by members and exist only online. Although “more multiplex relationships” could be

formed through the use e-mail addresses and individual members‘ connections ‘offline’, these

connections are out of the cyber-communities (Wellman and Gulia 1999).

9

Besides these types of virtual communities, the more traditional types of organizations that exist

primarily in the physical world who make growing use of the Internet need to be considered in

relation to digital diasporas. The overlay of virtual communities may potentially strengthen the

physical communities. Indeed, research has shown that virtual interaction intensify support and

relationships in physical communities (Hampton and Wellman 2002). It is, thus, not surprising to

see that even the smallest community organization today seeks to form a virtual presence either

in the form of a web page or as a group or community membership in one of the popular social

media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter, or Myspace. The impact of such social media outlets in

the organisation and mobilisation of communities in the physical world was most vividly witnessed

in many recent events worldwide, including the so-called Arab Spring and the London Riots of

2011.

Internet does not only make it easier and faster for members of diasporic communities to

communicate by enabling the creation of cyber-communities that connect dispersed populations

and provide solidarity among members (Brinkerhoff 2009, 14). It also transforms the nature of

such communication. For one thing, the intra-community organization and communication via

Internet as a communication tool facilitates the expression of liberal values such as individualism

and freedom of speech, through anonymity and access to opportunity (Brinkerhoff 2009, 46).

Although there might be a formal hierarchical structure in the virtual communities as well, they

tend to be much more loose usually allowing members to engage in forum discussions and cyber

activities anonymously and giving voice to a lot of individuals who may lack it in the physical

world. Moreover, the Internet functions as a mobilizing tool, by facilitating the formation of a

shared identity necessary for collective action; by serving as an organizational/networking

resource for assembling and communicating among individuals and groups; and by facilitating

‘issue framing‘ and confidence building (Brinkerhoff 2009, 47). Individuals and groups within a

diaspora, could use the Internet to frame various issues in specific ways as to call for action and to

give a sense of efficacy to the other members of the digital diaspora by suggesting various options

for action. At a much faster pace compared to the physical world, digital diasporas could rally

around specific issues by spreading the word in many different online outlets and what may have

started as a marginal idea could quickly snowball into a motion followed and supported by masses

of people.

10

IV. Positive and Negative Implications of Digital Diasporas

The limited literature on digital diasporas has mostly focused on the matters from the perspective

of diasporic host countries or societies. In the following, I shall try to evaluate the implications and

potentials of digital diasporas from the viewpoints of sending countries, receiving countries and

diaspora members themselves.

i. Implications for the Diaspora Members:

It has certainly become much easier in terms of logistics and much more effective in its nature for

dispersed communities to sustain a common diasporic identity and stay in touch with their co-

ethnics around the globe in today’s digital age. Digital diasporas, let them be purely virtual

communities that exist only in the cyber-space or physical communities that maintains a cyber

existence alongside; communicate, organize and mobilize through the Internet. There are several

significant advantages that digital diasporas enjoy in today’s globalized world. In what follows,

some of these most significant implications of advanced IT resources in engaging contemporary

diasporas will be summarized from the perspective of the members and leaders of these

diasporas:

Material Benefits: One of the most significant ways in which digital opportunities enrich

diasporas’ lives is through the material benefits that using Internet offers. Among others, these

include news and information on the homeland, its culture, history and religious practices- which

might become particularly important for the subsequent generations of the diaspora. These

information on the homeland may also include information on how to do business with the

homeland, opportunities for the expatriate communities, and even dating and matchmaking

services. Material benefits also include news and information on the host context, commercial

opportunities, legal and bureaucratic processes, and events for socialization. Very importantly, IT

provide significant levels of social capital to digital diasporas who use the contacts and personal

relationships they establish in the cyber-space to improve their lives in the physical world.

Identity/Solidary Benefits: The above material benefits, though very important in the lives

of diasporas, are not specific to those communities. However, for migrant communities the

identity and solidary benefits that cyber-communities provide are extremely prevalent. This is

because these communities actively fight to produce, maintain and reproduce a diasporic identity

and require comfort and identity support as they cope with sometimes traumatic experience of

dispersion. The digital diaspora members “articulate their loneliness”, deal with their trauma and

11

adapt to their changed realities while sustaining their homeland identity through their interactions

(Hozic 2001). Studies have shown that digital diasporas' use of Internet gives them a platform

through which they experiment and express hybrid identities (Sapienza 2001). In other words, the

Internet constitutes a legitimate and prolific social space for digital diasporas where it is OK not to

chose one or the other identity but be who they want to be revealing “varying degrees of

juxtaposition and mixing of local and global” as opposed to cultural polarization or marginalization

(Sapienza 2001, 435). Of course, the Internet plays a pivotal role in today’s world for some

diasporas who try to sustain their traditional national identities (Saunders 2004). One of the ways

in which the Internet enables these identity benefits is through its interactive components which

provide an efficient and accessible way of storytelling and discussion. It is through these tools that

digital diasporas share, reproduce, and transform diasporic identities and get socialized and

mobilized around them getting away from the feeling of loneliness.

Integration/ Anti-Exclusion Benefits: Having to leave one’s country is usually a costly

process, materially and emotionally. The settlement and living processes in its aftermath might be

particularly difficult experiences. The migration literature suggests that social capital in the form of

networks, cultural capital in the form of familiarity with the host culture, and human capital in the

form of skills and qualifications are extremely valuable assets in this process that help an

individual immigrant to integrate. On all these accounts, as mentioned above, IT offer a host of

opportunities and advantages. Digital diasporas use IT to acquire or increase their social, cultural

and human capital through various material and solidary benefits of the digital age. This, in turn,

helps them alleviate the sense of loneliness, exclusion and marginalisation; and, makes it easier

for them to acquire a sense of belonging at the local and transnational levels. The analysis of the

implications of digital diasporas on integration will be elaborated on below in further detail from

the viewpoint of the host country governments.

ii. Implications for Sending Countries:

As I have outlined above, there is an increasing trend for all emigration countries to reach out to

their diasporas and mobilize their resources in the service of the country’s development. Digital

diasporas are much easier to reach and mobilize in this regard as long as the sending countries can

exploit the host of new opportunities the digital age has to offer. The following is a brief overview

of the implications of the emergence of digital diasporas for the sending countries.

12

Mobilisation/Organisation of Diasporas for Home Country Benefit: The most significant

implication of digital diasporas for the sending countries is surely the ease with which the sending

country governments and institutions can call upon their diasporas on a global scale, mobilize

their resources and benefit from them. The economic and financial transfers from the diaspora to

a sending country are much easier and cheaper with the advancements in internet banking and

online investment opportunities. For example, while the humanitarian financial assistance

following natural disasters used to be in the monopoly of states and big institutions, today

countries that suffer from a natural disaster use internet not only to inform their diasporas about

the extent of the disaster and ask for their assistance; but also to give them several options

ranging from online bank transfers or credit card donations to transfers through intermediary

companies such as PayPal. The recent case of Van Earthquake in Turkey in 2011 displayed how

digital diaspora groups, big or small, were organized over the internet using mail groups, Facebook

messages or Twits, to raise donations from the Turkish diaspora all around the world.

Even apart from such drastic cases of crises or emergencies, digital diasporas are much more

easily accessible emigrant communities that contain significant resources. An increasing number

of programs and schemes are designed in many developing countries to enable highly-skilled

members of their respective diasporas to contribute in the economic development of the

countries without requiring them to move physically or to move permanently. These mostly

involve transfers of technical knowledge and consultancy over the internet, use of international

networks established by the members of diaspora, teaching from afar, ‘telecommuting’ and so on.

I have already indicated above how most developing countries have been establishing significant

institutional frameworks to engage their highly-skilled diasporas worldwide.

Diplomatic Advantages and Political Leverage: Today’s world is not only marked by

technological advancements. It is also marked by an unparalleled level of diversity and

multicultural cohabitation in many parts of the world. The latter half of the 20th Century, which is

called the ‘age of migration‘ (Castles and Miller 1993), created national political communities

which involve very significant numbers of citizens of migrant or minority origin. Among many

others, these developments bring about political implications in the contemporary international

relations. The significance of the Jewish diaspora in the US and their influence on US foreign policy

has long been known. Today we see the emergence of similar diasporic pressure groups and

lobbies in many parts of the Western World with a great pace. There are over 4 million Turkish

immigrants in Germany, with almost 1,5 million having acquired German citizenship and more and

13

more passing the age of voting. The Latin American community in the US where the Mexicans

constitute a majority has been consistently increasing their visibility and influence. It should also

be noted that the relative significance and influence of a diasporic community on a country’s

foreign policy does not merely rely on its size. It is rather determined by a set of historical, social,

economic and political factors. This is evident in the case of the aforementioned Jewish case in the

US and the case of Armenian diaspora in France.

Digital diasporas, then, create implications for the sending countries not only to exert political

influence on other countries where its diasporas are residing, but also to maximize and shape that

political influence. Sending countries could urge their diasporas to acquire citizenship of their host

countries (if possible without giving up their former citizenships), encourage them to be involved

in the socio-economic and political life more, and ask them to be instrumental in forging

significant relationships between the two countries through the Internet. In addition, they could

help their diasporas all along providing assistance and counseling using e-consulate web pages or

posting on digital diaspora forums. This potential would be amplified at election times when the

potential votes of diasporas will be sought after by the host country politicians. Through the

possibilities of the Internet and accessibility of digital diasporas, sending country governments

could more easily follow the political atmosphere in the receiving countries and could mobilize

their diasporas more effectively. Digital diasporas offer a less problematic way of interaction

between the sending state and the diaspora members many of whom might have less than a

positive view of the state due to their previous experiences as long as the state could embrace the

new social and political reality and allow the digital diasporas to maintain their hybrid identities.

iii. Implications for Receiving Countries:

To repeat, the level of ethnic and cultural diversity within all Western countries have reached an

unprecedented level at the beginning of the new millennium. Around 10% of the national

populations in most developed countries are now constituted by foreign nationals, while another

10% are naturalized or further generation immigrants (Unutulmaz 2012). Furthermore, the

growing identity concerns and rise of ‘identity politics’ in the wake of ‘clash of civilizations’

discussions following the 9/11 attacks have led to the securitisation of immigration discourses. In

all these, social and cultural integration has emerged as a burning topic both in the political and

public discourses. Digital diasporas; who hold hybrid identities that are informed and affected

simultaneously by the home and host identities, who are responsive to local and transnational

contexts, and who would be easily engaged in various discussions and negotiations, bring about

14

several significant implications for the receiving countries as well. In the following, I have briefly

summarized two most important of these implications.

Integration of Immigrants into Society: Many of the scenes from the suburbs of Paris a few

years ago, and elsewhere in Europe since, when immigrant youth clashed with police were

repeated in London in the summer of 2011. According to the ‘Riots Communities and Victims

Panel’s interim report, the number one lesson drawn from the London Riots of 2011 was the

necessity of social integration for minorities and vitality of giving them ‘a stake in the society’

(Panel 2011). I have already pointed out above that digital diasporas are enjoying the benefits of

IT in increasing their social, cultural and human capital, which in turn help them integrate into the

host society and alleviate feeling of social exclusion. The benefits of digital diasporas for more

effective integration from the receiving country’s perspective are not limited to that, though. For

one thing, it is easier for local and national governments in the host countries to interact with

organized communities instead of unorganized masses of individual immigrants. They can more

easily reach out to their target demographic groups, disseminate information about the relevant

integration policies and programmes, encourage diaspora members to be engaged in such

programmes and so on.

In addition to this more or less logistical benefits of digital diasporas for receiving country

integration measures, the much more essential and crucial benefit of digital diasporas is the

reviewed space created for the production, maintenance and expression of hybrid identities. This

benefit is, therefore, conditional on receiving country’s attitudes. In as long as the receiving

country could create a context that is conducive for such hybrid diasporic identities that

essentially carries elements from both sending and receiving backgrounds; digital diasporas will

serve greatly in support of the formation, dissemination and expression of that identity which in

turn is instrumental in giving the diasporic communities a ‘significant steak in the society’ and in

fostering a very real, non-artificial sense of belonging. This may seem paradoxical given the fact

that most digital diasporas appear to uphold identity discourses which are essentially all about the

home identity. However, a closer examination on several case studies will reveal the fact that

existence of a secure diasporic identity is not an impediment in front of immigrant integration; to

the contrary, it will serve as the basis on which a comfortable hybrid identity necessarily endorsing

the diasporic context could be built (Brinkerhoff 2009). Therefore, successful integration through

digital diasporas requires an awareness of the implications of the digital age and existence of

15

these diasporas, on the one hand; and on the other, an acceptance for the formation and

expression of such hybrid diasporic identities on the part of the receiving countries.

State Sovereignty and Security: The last couple of decades have witnessed the

securitisation of migration discourses wherein issues of migration and migrants have acquired a

security connotation in the wider international context of transformation of traditional security

conceptions (Buonfino 2004). In this context, the Internet has often been blamed as a necessarily

uncontrollable realm within which terrorist organisations ensure organisation, communication and

recruitment of new members without states being able to effectively intervene in these processes.

This idea of IT constituting a big challenge to a state’s sovereignty and capacity to govern was

found to be very widespread in Wilson’s (1998) literature review on the topic. It has been shown

to be true that terrorist organisations did and do make use of the Internet and other IT resources

in planning and undertaking many of their activities, including the 9/11 attacks (Weimann 2006).

However, there is significant reason to believe that digital diasporas could actually enhance

receiving states' sovereignty and effectiveness to govern, on the one hand; and their security, on

the other, in many ways. Brinkerhoff (2009, 10) lists a few:

[diaspora] can act as an additional watchdog on homeland governments. Using IT, diasporas can facilitate communication channels in support of accountability and responsiveness to human rights concerns, enhancing governance legitimacy. By contributing to the provision of public goods and technical assistance/capacity building of government agencies, diasporas support governance effectiveness. Additionally, they may potentially prevent the participation of fellow diasporans in continuing or instigating renewed violence in the homeland.

In summary, while the ever changing and developing IT possibilities represent a significant

potential threat to state sovereignty and security; they also have plenty of potential to enhance

the capabilities of states’ to deal with the new security threats in the digital age. One such area

where effective use of IT could help enhancing security is engaging digital diasporas. Receiving

countries could exploit the benefits of internet in reaching to, educating and integrating various

diasporas in counterbalancing any potential call from radical terrorist organizations for

recruitment and support. As long as these technologies are out there and they provide a number

of untraceable and uncontrollable ways of contacting individuals, it is only wise for the states to

use them very effectively and create a healthy communication with every segment of their

societies instead of sitting back while extremist organisations use them for their own purposes.

16

Conclusion: Prospects and Policy Recommendations

This report is a brief overview of the recently growing importance and implications of the digital

diasporas. Although the literature on the subject is fairly limited, and written mostly from the

perspective of the receiving countries, there is no doubt that the concept of digital diasporas will

be used much more often in the recent future. The various implications reviewed here also

suggest that, if engaged effectively, digital diasporas have the potential to become very significant

transnational actors in the international relations and diplomacy. Therefore, I would like to close

this discussion with the following points and suggestions.

Digital diasporas are already significant communities which are extremely cheap, easy and

effective to organise and mobilise. The advanced Information Technologies, which contribute the

process of globalization in all aspects of life, have a special bearing for the diaspora groups who

are dispersed geographically, maintain a simultaneous interest in two or more contexts, and wish

to reproduce their (hybrid) identities in the diaspora over many generations. In such a context of

inevitable diversity, diasporas and digital diasporas will definitely grow in significance as

international and transnational political actors. Sending countries who wish to mobilise diaspora

resources in the service of home country development; receiving countries who wish to effectively

manage the cultural and ethnic diversity within the host country through successful integration;

and any international, supranational, transnational organizations who wish to mobilise a great

mass of people with a migration background for their particular agendas; all need to acknowledge

the fact that diasporas and digital diasporas will be one of the significant actors in the

international arena. As stated previously, the Internet is not only a channel for accessing

diasporas, it functions as a mobilizing tool, by facilitating the formation of a shared identity

necessary for collective action; by serving as an organizational/networking resource for

assembling and communicating among individuals and groups; and by facilitating ‘issue framing‘

and confidence building (Brinkerhoff 2009, 47).

There is an increasing trend of accepting ethnic and cultural diversity instead of homogeneity as

the norm in many parts of the world (Vertovec 2007). In such a context, one homogenous,

ethnically defined national identity is harder than ever to promote. Although ‘post-nationalism’

might still be a long way to go and the nation states remain as THE sovereign actors in

international relations; multiple, hybrid and transnational identities could not be ignored. The wise

choice for all countries would be to come to terms with this reality and embrace the multiplicity of

identities in the population as a richness. This does not, by any means, imply that a national

17

identity should not be promoted or sought after. It rather implies that the terms of such a national

identity should be formulated in a delicate way as to be unifying and civic in nature, and not

exclusionary and ethnic. This is particularly crucial for the digital diasporas whose identities are

necessarily hybrid and whose mode of conduct is necessarily transnational in one way or another.

As long as the governments of sending and receiving countries could embrace the hybrid and

transnational nature of digital diaspora identities; it will be much easier for them to engage these

communities effectively. As I mentioned above, the contributions of the diasporic communities

are greatest when they are allowed to obtain and express their hybrid identities securely and

freely; and when they are not forced to make a choice between two exclusive identities. If,

therefore, the governments insist on such outdated understandings of exclusionary, essentialised,

‘one true identity’ which forces immigrants and minorities to chose one of the two national

identities, they will necessarily alienate the diasporas. It should be stressed here again that one of

the biggest advantages of IT for digital diasporas is the low-level barrier or entry and the

anonymity that allow for a huge flexibility for individuals to manifest their identities.

This more philosophical change in nation states’ understanding of diaspora identities is a MUST.

Only after that we can talk about more practical steps to be taken. We are already witnessing a

great level of effort on the part of governments to catch up with technological advancements in IT

and utilize the potential of Internet as much as possible. This efforts should definitely be extended

vis a vis diasporas. Although the physical movements and contacts of diaspora members may be

more difficult and costly, the Internet provides an endless array of opportunities to form and

maintain contact between the home country and diaspora communities globally. These channels

for continuous communication should not be seen in immediately instrumental terms. They are

rather channels for mobilizing the diaspora communities when they are needed.

18

Bibliography

Brinkerhoff, Jennifer M. (2009), Digital Diasporas: Identity and Transnational Engagement

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

Buonfino, Alessandra (2004), 'Between unity and plurality: the politicization and securitization of

the discourse of immigration in Europe', New Political Science, 26 (1), 23 - 49.

Castles, Stephen and Miller, Mark J. (1993), The Age of Migration: International Population

Movements in the Modern World (Palgrave Macmillan).

Cohen, Robert (1997), Global Diasporas: An Introduction (London: UCL Press).

Foster, Derek (1996), 'Community and Identity in the Electronic Village', in David Porter (ed.),

Internet Culture (New York: Routledge).

Hampton, Keith N. and Wellman, Barry (2002), 'The Not so Global Village of Netville', in Barry

Wellman and Caroline Haythornthwaite (eds.), The Internet and Everyday Life (Oxford:

Blackwell).

Hozic, Aida (2001), 'Hello. My Name is … : Articulating Loneliness in a Digital Diaspora', Afterimage,

21, 1-9.

Karim, Karim H. (ed.), (2003), The Media of Diaspora (London: Routledge).

Meyer, Jean-Baptiste and Brown, Mercy (1999), 'Scientific Diasporas: A New Approach to Brain

Drain', UNESCO-MOST Discussion Paper, (41). <www.unesco.org/most/meyer.htm>.

Panagakos, Anastasia N. (2003), 'Downloading New Identities: Ethnicity, Technology, and Media in

the Global Greek Village', Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 10 (2), 201-19.

Panel (2011), '5 Days in August: An Interim Report on the 2011 English Riots', (London: Riots

Communities and Victims Panel).

Sapienza, Filipp (2001), 'Nurturing Translocal Communication: Russian Immigrants on the World

Wide Web"', Technical Communication, 48 (4), 435-48.

Saunders, Richard A. (2004), 'Nationality: Cyber-Russian', Russia in Global Affairs, (4).

Sheffer, Gabriel (1986), 'A New Field of Study: Modern Diasporas in International Politics', in

Gabriel Sheffer (ed.), Modern Diasporas in International Politics (London: Croom Helm).

Unutulmaz, K. Onur (2012), 'Gündemdeki Kavram: Göçmen Uyumu- Avrupa’daki Gelişimi ve

Britanya Örneği', in Asli Sirin and Suna Gulfer Ihlamur (eds.), Uluslararası Göçü Yeniden

Düşünmek: Yeni Yaklaşım ve Yönelimler (Istanbul: Iletisim Yayinlari).

Vertovec, Steven (1997), 'Three Meanings of 'Diaspora', Exemplified among South Asian Religions',

Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies, 6 (3), 277-99.

19

--- (2007), 'New Complexities of Cohesion in Britain: Super-Diversity, Transnationalism and Civil-

Integration', (London: Commission on Integration and Cohesion), 1-40.

--- (2009), Transnationalism (London: Routledge).

Weimann, Gabriel (2006), 'Terror on the Internet: The New Arena, The New Challenges',

(Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace).

Wellman, Barry and Gulia, Milena (1999), 'Virtual Communities as Communities: Net Surfers Don't

Ride Alone', in Marc A. Smith and Peter Kollock (eds.), Communities in Cyberspace (London:

Routledge).

Wilson III, EJ (1998), 'Globalization, Information Technology and Conflict in the Second and Third

Worlds: A Critical Review of the Literature', Project on World Security (New York:

Rockefeller Brothers Foundation).