Deconstructing the meanings of and motivations for return: an Afghan case study

Abstract

Return migration after conflict is the result of a complex decision-making process. However, our understanding of this complexity is blurred by changing politicized understandings of return. In this paper, we compare the autobiographical narratives of return of 'early' and 'late' (post-mid-1990s) arrivals of Afghans who met with changing reception regimes in Europe and returned to Kabul under a wide range of circumstances. We first develop a framework that attempts to understand migration from an actor-based rather than a bureaucratic perspective. We then deconstruct how Afghan migrants made sense of their own return migration, and analyse the ambivalences and seeming contradictions we find in them. The findings show that there are no clear-cut boundaries between voluntary and involuntary return decisions: almost no decision to return was entirely free, as there were legal constraints, family pressure, economic needs or socio-cultural difficulties at the basis of this decision. Almost no return decision was entirely forced, either, as most people did have the choice not to return, however harsh the alternative to returning would have been. At the same time, the analysis shows a strong empirical watershed between the post-return experiences of returnees who continue to have the capacity to be transnationally mobile and the experiences of those who do not. Concluding, we propose to centralize agency over mobility, facilitated by legal status and other factors, in the analysis of return. Concluding, the findings challenge the current policy-oriented binary categories. Alternatively, we propose to centralize the level of agency in decisions of transnational mobility as a more relevant factor in the analysis of return.

Return to Afghanistan: Migration as Reinforcement of Socio‐Economic Stratification

“…In total, 35 returnees, notably returning from the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, and Scandinavia, participated in the study. All returnees with the permanent legal possibility to stay in the country of destination were considered as voluntary, whereas all returnees without such possibility are marked as involuntary (Van Houte et al ., forthcoming). In addition, the level of agency was significantly different for migrants who were returned with the use of force (Schuster & Majidi, ).…”

“…Although an actor's choices are to some extent determined by structure, actors also have a certain degree of agency over their choices, which can in turn redefine structures (Kloosterman et al ., ; Kloosterman, ). Agency can be seen as an actor's effort to match desires and capacities, whilst being shaped by and shaping the structural context, defined as the forces that are external to and impacting on people (Portes & Sensenbrenner, ; Van Houte et al ., forthcoming).…”

“…Rather, it offers an approach to look at migrants' self‐perceived agency to match their capacities and desires in relation with the structural context. Structural forces, desires, and capacities of returnees can play a role on each of the dimensions of embeddedness (Van Houte et al ., forthcoming). Multidimensional embeddedness has the potential to compare pre‐migration with post‐return circumstances as well as migrants with non‐migrants.…”

“…Research shows that mobility is an essential capacity and desire in the lives of return migrants, leading to strong empirical differences in the post‐return experiences of those who are transnationally mobile after return and those who are not (Van Houte et al ., forthcoming). Continued transnational mobility allows migrants to take advantage of geographical differences (Carling, ), whilst it gives a crucial sense of security in instable or (post‐)conflict countries, knowing that they would be able to re‐emigrate if needed (Castles and Miller, 2009).…”

“…This article explores this new avenue of the hierarchisation of mobility. Drawing on an in‐depth case study that focuses on the life histories of 35 Afghan returnees from European countries, we compared voluntary returnees, who had the permanent legal possibility to stay in the country of destination and involuntary returnees, who returned without such possibility (Van Houte et al ., forthcoming). Afghanistan's protracted history of conflict and migration of the last 35 years is a relevant case to study a diversity of migration experiences that have developed over time (Jazayery, ; Stigter, ).…”