“Discussing external migration issues is impossible without discussing internal migration issues.” — Jack Goldstone
While there has been much discussion surrounding international migration over the past few years, there has been less discussion on a related topic — internal migration. In particular, the relationship between internal migration and group conflict. Internal migration refers to people moving from one region to another, while remaining within their state borders. Group conflict can occur between numerous different types of groups — ethnic, religious, class, but is always underscored by an us against them mentality. Therefore, when internal migration introduces new groups into a region; it has the potential to cause conflict. Conversely, group conflict may cause internal migration as people flee a region to avoid conflict.
This correlation between internal migration and group conflict does not imply causation. It does not follow that where there is internal migration, there will be group conflict; nor does group conflict necessarily precede migration. Regardless of which comes first, the relationship between the two makes conflict resolution difficult, because it exacerbates and confuses the underlying issues of a conflict, making it exceedingly difficult to resolve.
Comparing Apples & Oranges: Immigrants, refugees, and internal migration
Unlike immigrants or refugees, internal migrants have not crossed borders, or changed citizenry; they have a right to live in their country. This does not preclude the existence of primordial resentment, though, as ethnic enclaves are often present in multinational countries and ethno nationalist politics may be present.[1] Where strong local identities prevail, internal migrants can be akin to foreigners in their own country, as is the case of the Madhesis in Nepal who, while admitting that some internal migration occurred, “take offence to being called outsiders and see themselves as people who have always lived in the region.”[2] However, since internal migration is usually the result of economic issues, war, or natural disaster, the migrants are motivated by what they feel is an existential threat. Although sometimes, internal migration can be the product of a government agenda, as was the case in Indonesia in twentieth century when populations were moved from the main islands of Java and Bali to the outer islands under the presumption of development.[3] Increasing the difficulty of integration is the likelihood that many internal migrants often keep ties with their original communities, meaning that they may not fully integrate within the community, even if welcomed.
In addition to the primordial implications of internal migration, there are constructivist challenges as well. When groups feel they are not being properly cared for or represented by the state’s institutions it may result in conflict. Writing about the Karen in western Thailand, Mikael Gravers details the impact that internal migration had on the moral, social, and culture fabric of a culture. After internal migration intermingled the Thai and Karen, the Thai culture dominated. After a number of years, “schools came to the area, and a new Thai-speaking generation [of Karen] with a modernist view of the world came to see the flaws in their ancestors’ worldview and in their intimate cultural core, which many Thai consider primitive.”[4] In this case, the institutions of the state did not properly represent the Karen culture after internal migration brought them into schools with the dominant Thai culture. In addition to under representing cultures, the limited resources within a state can also lead to group conflict, the study of which was presented by Marie Besancon.[5]
If internal migration causes stress on the local institutions, or challenges their methods, it may lead to conflict. Lastly, Unrestricted migration, has the potential to turn ethnic populations into minorities in their own land, this phenomenon often results in inter-communal violence. This is illustrated by the insurgency in the Tripura state of Northeast India that started as a reaction to the unrestricted migration of Hindu Bengali population from East Bengal to the state of Tripura.[6]
Group identities: Separate but unequal?
While the reasons for internal migration vary, it seems apparent that the introduction of new people into a region, when coupled with religious and political differences or limited resources, can cause resentment and conflict. Since internal migration causes and is caused by group conflict, it has significant implication for the resolution of the conflict. Uyghurs in the Xinjiang province provide a good study for how the relationship between internal migration and group conflict impedes conflict resolution. The migration of Han Chinese into the autonomous province, which the Uyghurs see as an existential threat, has only exacerbated the conflict between Uyghurs and the government in Beijing.[7] However, not everyone believes that primordial feelings represent an impediment to conflict resolution.
As Donald L. Horowitz writes, “The persistence of group identity, no matter how deeply felt, is not synonymous with antipathy, even well established antipathy, toward particular out groups.”[8] Using examples of European and Chinese immigration, Horowitz shows that conflicts fade over time through mechanisms of social and political integration, which suggests that the primordial challenge to internal migration appears to be temporal. This points to the idea that internal migration does not prevent group conflict resolution. Another result of internal migration that certainly has a negative effect on the prevention or resolution of conflict, is when the internal migration leads to segregation. In Myanmar, after violence caused internal migration, the Rakhine Buddhist and Rohingya communities were essentially segregated, even including separate displacement camps.[9]This separation limits interaction, thereby decreasing the likelihood that either side will enter into agreements to end the conflict. In this case, separation prevents the fading of group resentments because the group’s position hardens through physical separation.
Desired End States: Conflict prevention or conflict containment
The correlation between internal migration and group conflict has a negative impact on conflict prevention and resolution. With new groups, comes new social, cultural, and political dynamics that challenge people’s idea of the state and stresses institutions and resources, which can lead to conflict. When conflict does arise, often times a group’s attitude hardens as they feel an existential threat to their culture. In other cases, groups maintain ties to other regions within the state, which causes mixed loyalties or external pressures, only serving to confuse the underlying issues that caused the conflict. Therefore, internal migration — sometimes a result of group conflict, other time the cause of group conflict — presents a significant impediment to conflict prevention or resolution. This suggests that international migration — despite its difficulties — may provide more sustainable solutions than internal migration. And if the desired end state is conflict prevention versus mere conflict containment this needs to be given serious consideration.
[1] Jeffrey Z. Muller, “The Enduring Power of Ethnic Nationalism”, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2008.
[2] “Nepal’s Troubled Tarai Region” Crisis Group Asia Report №136, July 9, 2007, 2.
[3] Colin MacAndrews, “Transmigration in Indonesia: Prospects and Problems”, 458–472.
[4] Mikael Gravers, “ Waiting for a righteous ruler: The Karen Royal Imaginary in Thailand and Burma,” Journal of Southeast Asia Studies. Vol. 43; №02 (June 2012) 355.
[5] Marie L. Besancon, “Relative Resources: Inequality in Ethnic Wars, Revolutions, and Genocides”, Journal of Peace Research, №42 (2005) 393–415.
6 Shanthie Mariet D’Souza, “Armed Conflicts and Movements for Autonomy in India’s Northeast”, 205.
[7] Gardner Bovingdon, The Uyghurs: Strangers in Their Own Land (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010).
[8] David L. Horowitz, “From The Primordialists,” In Ethnonationalism in the Contemporary World: Walker Connor and the Study of Nationalism, ed. Daniele Conversi. (Routledge: New York) 77.
[9] “Myanmar: Storm Clouds on the Horizon”, Crisis Group Asia Report №238, 12 November 2012, 5.
