National identity and international institutions: Refugee policies in post-Communist Europe: A comparative study of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, the Czech Republic, Poland, 1990--2001

Similar post-Communist states exhibit varying receptivity to refugees. This dissertation seeks to explain this variation. Since refugee policy theories applied to western states are of limited relevance in transition countries, I develop a new theory of post-Communist refugee politics. The theory proposes that the politics of national identity and strategies of international institutions are the key sources of post-Communist refugee policies. It is tested against two pairs of cases: Russia and Ukraine, and Poland and the Czech Republic.; I divide post-Communist states into the categories of "contested" and "uncontested" on the basis of the varying importance of nation-building. Contested nation-states (Russia and Ukraine) face a refugee problem while they undergo nation building. The national question becomes the main "guide" to refugee policy, and receptivity to refugees depends on the manner in which it is contested. If major political forces "imagine" the nation similarly, refugees who meet the "consensus" definition of the kin are accepted more readily than others. If proposed definitions of the nation are dissimilar, no refugees receive preferential treatment. In the uncontested states (the Czech Republic and Poland), refugee policy making elites are constrained by neither legislative, institutional, or partisan factors as they are in western states, nor by the politics of national identity as they are in contested post-Communist states. When elites are highly autonomous, refugee policy becomes a function of key elites' preferences. Unconstrained liberal elites will make more liberal policy.; My theory integrates domestic and international factors. I argue that international refugee-assisting organizations (IOs), especially the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), are the second key source of post-Communist refugee politics. Whereas western national refugee policies developed largely without an impact from IOs, post-Communist refugee regimes are formed "in the shadow" of the UNHCR. I argue that IOs' ability to promote liberalization depends on the match between their strategies and the domestic politics of refugee policy. In contested states IOs can liberalize policy towards the "non-kin" refugees only when they assisted the "kin" refugees; in the uncontested states IOs can liberalize policies through legislative lobbying. Detailed comparative case studies support both parts of the theoretical argument.