Settling on Violence: Expansion of Israeli Outposts in the West Bank in Response to Terrorism

How does terrorism affect land control in intrastate conflicts? This article explores this question in the case of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict during the Second Intifada (2000–2005), and shows that Palestinian attacks led to an expansion of Israeli outposts in the disputed territories of the West Bank. Following suicide attacks, there is an increase in outposts in home districts of the perpetrators. The number of outposts also increases following deadly attacks against Israelis in West Bank districts where these attacks take place. These results suggest that Israeli settlers use outpost expansion as retaliation against Palestinian communities they perceive to be involved in violence, and this shifts territorial control against Palestinians

Threat perceptions, loyalties and attitudes towards peace: The effects of civilian victimization among Syrian refugees in Turkey

For refugees who have fled civil conflict, do experiences of victimization by one armed group push them to support the opposing armed groups? Or, does victimization cause refugees to revoke their support for all armed groups, whatever side they are on, and call instead for peace? This paper studies the effect of civilian victimization on threat perceptions, loyalties, and attitudes toward peace in the context of Syrian refugees in Turkey, many of whom faced regime-caused violence prior to their departure. Our research strategy leverages variation in home destruction caused by barrel bombs to examine the effect of violence on refugees’ views. We find that refugees who lose their home to barrel bombs withdraw support from armed actors and are more supportive of ending the war and finding peace. Suggestive evidence shows that while victims do not disengage from issues in Syria, they do show less optimism about an opposition victory

The Allure of Distant War Drums: Refugees, Geography, and Foreign Policy Preferences in Turkey

Previous research argues that countries often intervene in the conflicts that cause refugees to flow across their borders. Public opinion against refugees may pressure states to intervene to ‘solve the refugee problem.’ We study what shapes public support for such intervention using a survey experiment in Turkey against the backdrop of the Syrian refugee crisis. We survey over 1,200 respondents with varied exposure to refugees, and randomize information about the consequences of hosting refugees to examine its effects on support for intervention in Syria. Emphasizing the negative externalities of hosting refugees, including their connection with militants, increases support for intervention among respondents who reside far from the Turkish-Syrian border. Closer to the border, this information reduces support for intervention in Syria. These findings highlight that vulnerability to the costs of intervention (proximity to the border) shapes public support for intervening. We also find that public opinion towards intervention is correlated with partisan identity and respondents' daily exposure to refugees

Diversity without adversity? Ethnic bias towards refugees in a co-religious society

What shapes the host population’s willingness to accept refugees into social, economic, and political life in their country? We argue that refugees’ ethnicity plays a key role–both directly and indirectly–in shaping support for having refugees as neighbors and for granting them a work permit or citizenship. Fielding a conjoint experiment in Turkey (N=2,362), we find that locals discriminate against Syrian Arab and Kurdish refugees compared to Turkomans. Although a university degree, social ties with locals, and knowledge of language boost pro-refugee attitudes, ethnic bias may attenuate their effect. For example, local language knowledge increases support for Arab refugee profiles, but only when it comes to granting them a work permit, but not having them as neighbors or granting citizenship. In contrast, it increases support for profiles of Turkomans and Kurds in all the three domains. Thus, strategies such as learning the local language may not advance all refugees in all domains

The allure of distant war drums: refugees, geography, and foreign policy preferences in Turkey

Previous research argues that countries often intervene in the conflicts that cause refugees to flow across their borders. Public opinion against refugees may pressure states to intervene to ‘solve the refugee problem.’ We study what shapes public support for such intervention using a survey experiment in Turkey against the backdrop of the Syrian refugee crisis. We survey over 1,200 respondents with varied exposure to refugees, and randomize information about the consequences of hosting refugees to examine its effects on support for intervention in Syria. Emphasizing the negative externalities of hosting refugees, including their connection with militants, increases support for intervention among respondents who reside far from the Turkish-Syrian border. Closer to the border, this information reduces support for intervention in Syria. These findings highlight that vulnerability to the costs of intervention (proximity to the border) shapes public support for intervening. We also find that public opinion towards intervention is correlated with partisan identity and respondents’ daily exposure to refugees