Countries that are either at war or living on the edge are increasingly the focus of rising diaspora concern these days. The manifestation of a heightened involvement with the homeland often comes through vigils and demonstrations, particularly in the big western cities.
While immigrants and exiles are usually very engaged and vocal, it is not always clear that their mobilisation can have impact. The images of ancient flags and massed gatherings garner attention. Yet, to confuse that with momentum for change is an easy mistake to make.
The communities involved are responding to a powerful impulse to rally around their loyalties to the country they have left behind. These actions, in turn, drive a particular narrative in the media, but aren’t necessarily making an impact on the turmoil back home.
From the vantage point of central London, it often seems that there is an informal rotation of the protests that target places like Westminster Square or Whitehall. Patterns of settlement show that communities cluster in different parts of the capital or in other big cities. Regular protests are seen from the Bangladeshi, Sudanese, Ethiopian and Yemeni communities as those countries face internal division and conflict.
It can seem impolite to pose the question of what difference these gatherings make. That is because the people involved are not only highly motivated but many, if not most, are plainly just interested in change and the difference they can make by speaking with one voice.
According to the UK’s Office for National Statistics, the 2021 census showed that about six million people, or 10 per cent of the country’s population, held a foreign passport. The figures also show that London is highly diverse, with two in five of its residents not born in the UK. It should be no surprise, therefore, that large numbers are intimately connected to the various crisis-hit regions of the world.
Pictures went around the world over the past week of Iranian diaspora crowds in London, Paris and elsewhere as demonstrations took off in Iran against the establishment. The higher profile of the son of the last Shah, as events unfold in Tehran, has been driven by his very active role in the exile community. But there are also limits to how far this translates into influence on the ground.
Such demonstrations can follow through to the political arena as MPs seek to give voice to their constituents’ concerns. At times, high-level ministers will talk about how the communities in their own part of the world are upset by developments back home.
In the 2024 general election, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer – an opposition figure at the time – had to speak to a Bangladeshi news channel after he made some comments about forced returns of migrants there. Late last year, the Labour MP Abtisam Mohamed tweeted about the Somali community in her Sheffield district, calling on her party to acknowledge “the facts on the ground” established by the long autonomy of Somaliland.
The breakaway region of Somalia had just been recognised by Israel, and there is renewed focus on how Mogadishu shores up its own territorial integrity.
Here was a high-profile, new-generation Muslim MP setting out what her constituents wanted. After all, Sheffield is a historic centre for the UK’s Yemeni community, and there has been significant engagement in the city with the developments in Aden over recent weeks.
This is not just a European phenomenon. In the US, there were celebrations within the Venezuelan community celebrating the capture of Nicolas Maduro in Caracas.
Diasporas undoubtedly make an enormous difference, but driving change in their home countries is often not guaranteed. This is because the destiny of a country usually resides with the people still living there and who will be most affected by how it is governed in the future.
One of the most consequential exiled opposition movements over the past three decades was the Iraqi returnees from abroad who moved into positions of power after Saddam Hussein was overthrown by a US-led invasion in 2003. Many of those who formed and led the emerging power blocs had spent years in London. Their transfer back to Baghdad shapes how the country is governed to this day.
Having a backstory or a foothold in the UK was a prism that they were viewed through but not a reliable guide to how they governed or the orientation of the governments they led.
In the US, there is much speculation over the role Secretary of State Marco Rubio played in the operation to remove Mr Maduro from Caracas. As the son of Cuban exiles, Mr Rubio has often spoken about how the establishment in Havana was propping up the Venezuelan leader. The news that 32 Cuban bodyguards had been killed in the operation reinforces the sense that Mr Rubio will look to push beyond the immediate goals in Caracas. “If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned,” he said on Saturday.
Unfinished business is a powerful motivator. It gets people out on the streets and can push high-level policymakers into designing interventions that would not otherwise get across the line.
But the images of demonstrations and celebrations only tell a fraction of any story. What really matters, even in the case of military interventions, is how events play out in the countries undergoing the tumultuous changes.
