Intervention: Extraterritorial authoritarian power

Sponsoring student mobility for developmentandauthoritarian stability: Kazakhstan’s Bolashak programme

“…That opportunities come in exchange of gratitude and loyalty to the regime seems to be confirmed by the treatment of returnees who appear to be problematic (Dalmasso et al, 2017;Koch, 2015). The latter are accused of refusing job opportunities because they feel superior thanks to their foreign education and do not want to debase themselves to work for low salaries and humble conditions.…”

“…This reduces the shock of finding themselves in a new country but is also likely to reduce the range of their local experiences, maintaining them in a Kazakh-speaking, and patriotic bubble (Dalmasso et al, 2017). It is possible that the authorities decided to improve this support system through the establishment of an umbrella organization.…”

“…The regime is establishing this relationship as a form of rhetorical co-optation: on the one hand, the regime generously provides young people with an excellent education and, consequently, with better opportunities for employment; the young people, in exchange, offer their loyalty (Dalmasso et al, 2017). There is some truth in the picture of Bolashakers as better off in the job market.…”

Networks do not float freely: (Dis)entangling the politics of Tamil diaspora inclusion in development governance

“…These practices are, on the whole, designed to encourage transnationalism, rather than suppress it. In contrast, building on ground‐breaking work by Laurie Brand (2006), which precedes the turn to ‘diaspora engagement policies’, a growing group of scholars has begun to study the extraterritorial practices of authoritarian states (Dalmasso et al., 2017; Glasius, 2018; Tsourapas, 2015, 2018, 2020). Authoritarian states, these scholars argue, show us that there exists a darker side to diaspora engagement, one that is perhaps less enshrined in formal policies and institutions and that is driven by state's security concerns.…”

The Repertoire of Extraterritorial Repression: Diasporas and Home States

“…On the other hand, the study of authoritarianism, with more domestic and comparative approaches, overlooks how authoritarian states exert power beyond borders. This "extraterritorial gap" leaves the transnational space of authoritarian governance undertheorised (Dalmasso et al, 2018). A small, but emerging scholarship, is now focusing on repressive tactics devised by contemporary non-democracies to control their diasporas (Cooley & Heathershaw, 2017;Michaelson, 2018), interventions that seek to control transnational space (Tsourapas, 2019), de-territorialised security practices (Moss, 2016;Adamson, 2018), the exportation of domestic conflicts abroad (Østergaard-Nielsen, 2003;Baser, 2015;Öztürk & Sözeri, 2018) and new means of diaspora engagement (Mencutek & Baser, 2018).…”