UCLA

This dissertation analyzes the relationship between political violence, forced migration, and the role of exile organizations on emigrant political rights. It examines Argentina (1970-1991) and Colombia (1980-1991), the first Latin American countries to grant such rights to citizens abroad. Through a comparative analysis, this study illuminates how variations in political violence influenced emigrants' displacement, politicization, and transnational activities. A central theoretical contribution of this research lies in its sending-state-centric perspective, which highlights the importance of politicides in understanding the path-dependent interactions among political violence, international migration, and emigrant politics.

By employing a comparative framework, this dissertation extends the scholarship on emigrant enfranchisement by examining Argentina and Colombia as pioneer and yet unexplored cases of emigrant political rights. It employs insights from disparate research domains to develop a novel perspective into the evolution of political organizations, the nature of exile, the dynamics of forced migration, and the impacts of transnational political engagements. The analysis challenges conventional narratives by recognizing the varied roles of political entrepreneurs and former violence specialists in emigrant politics, thereby questioning the assumption that cultural and economic capital uniformly lead to politicization among educated emigrants.

Furthermore, this work introduces an analytical framework that conceptualizes political violence as a constitutive element of emigrant politics, advancing our understanding of the ways in which violence shapes exile experiences and influences the political engagement of emigrants in both sending and receiving countries. This violence-centric approach reveals the intricate interplay between domestic political conditions and the provision and demand for emigrant political rights, shedding light on the challenges and opportunities for political inclusion in the context of dual transitions to democracy and peace.

In sum, this dissertation not only fills a significant gap in migration studies by systematically exploring the relationship between political violence and emigrant politics but also provides critical insights into the political processes affecting emigrant rights in hybrid democratic regimes. Through its detailed comparative analysis, the study contributes to a deeper comprehension of transnational political practices and their impact on the political landscape of sending states, offering a novel perspective on the interplay of violence, migration, authoritarianism, and democratization.This dissertation analyzes the relationship between political violence, forced migration, and the role of exile organizations on emigrant political rights. It examines Argentina (1970-1991) and Colombia (1980-1991), the first Latin American countries to grant such rights to citizens abroad. Through a comparative analysis, this study illuminates how variations in political violence influenced emigrants' displacement, politicization, and transnational activities. A central theoretical contribution of this research lies in its sending-state-centric perspective, which highlights the importance of politicides in understanding the path-dependent interactions among political violence, international migration, and emigrant politics.

By employing a comparative framework, this dissertation extends the scholarship on emigrant enfranchisement by examining Argentina and Colombia as pioneer and yet unexplored cases of emigrant political rights. It employs insights from disparate research domains to develop a novel perspective into the evolution of political organizations, the nature of exile, the dynamics of forced migration, and the impacts of transnational political engagements. The analysis challenges conventional narratives by recognizing the varied roles of political entrepreneurs and former violence specialists in emigrant politics, thereby questioning the assumption that cultural and economic capital uniformly lead to politicization among educated emigrants.

Furthermore, this work introduces an analytical framework that conceptualizes political violence as a constitutive element of emigrant politics, advancing our understanding of the ways in which violence shapes exile experiences and influences the political engagement of emigrants in both sending and receiving countries. This violence-centric approach reveals the intricate interplay between domestic political conditions and the provision and demand for emigrant political rights, shedding light on the challenges and opportunities for political inclusion in the context of dual transitions to democracy and peace.

In sum, this dissertation not only fills a significant gap in migration studies by systematically exploring the relationship between political violence and emigrant politics but also provides critical insights into the political processes affecting emigrant rights in hybrid democratic regimes. Through its detailed comparative analysis, the study contributes to a deeper comprehension of transnational political practices and their impact on the political landscape of sending states, offering a novel perspective on the interplay of violence, migration, authoritarianism, and democratization.