Homeland Interests in Hostland Politics: Politicized Ethnic Identity among Middle Eastern Heritage Groups in the United States*

Diaspora ethnic communities differ in their readiness for mobilization on behalf of homeland interests. Using three ethnonational groups in the United States, each of which has ties to the Middle East, this paper develops and tests a multilevel model of politicized ethnic identity. The empirical analysis confirms that individuals differ in their readiness for mobilization based on the strength of ties to the ethnic community and, net of such differences, each group varies based on the contexts of exit and reception at the time of immigration. *Acknowledgements: I thank Bryan Williams for assistance with this project and the Zogby Organization for providing the data under generous terms. The Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard and the Centennial Center of the American Political Science Association provided a congenial home while I was working on the project. Various individuals who attended talks at Georgetown, Harvard, and the University of Maryland, as well as colleagues in Gainesville, offered provocative and useful comments. I appreciate the cooperation of Vince Parillo and Gary David who sent me unpublished papers that helped me frame my own argument. None of the individuals or institutions should be held guilty by association and are cheerfully absolved of responsibility for me. In an age when diasporas are increasingly recognized as influential actors in transnational politics (see, e.g., Davis and Moore 1997), why do some ethnonational communities cohere tightly around homeland political interests while others do not? Despite its importance, the question has been subject to very little analysis. This paper begins to fill the gap by comparing the level of politicized ethnic identity displayed by three ethnonational groups in the United States: Arab-American Christians, Arab-American Muslims and American Jews. While all three ethnic communities have a putative stake in American Middle East policy, the study explores differences within and across the three groups in the disposition to make homeland concerns central to their own political agenda. Through survey analysis, it assesses the readiness of the groups to mobilize politically in the United States on behalf of homeland needs and interests. In addressing an under-explored question about diaspora political involvement, we focus on mass political behavior rather than interest group politics. Most theories about diaspora influence on American policy are rooted in assumptions about the elite nature of the foreign policy process. From this perspective, diaspora group effectiveness is largely determined by access to key elites who dominate the policy-making apparatus. Consequently, the research emphasizes the role of organization, information and other tangible resources that matter in the world of “insider” politics (Shain and Barth 2003, 461-2; Smith 2000, ch. 3). While that focus is certainly appropriate and necessary to understand short-term policy changes, the influence of any diaspora, like interest groups generally (Kollman 1998), also rests in large part on a supportive constituency available for mobilization. This study thus brings into the discussion of diaspora influence the heretofore overlooked contribution of micro-level diaspora political consciousness. The paper begins with a discussion of the nature and sources of politicized ethnic identity, the disposition of ethnic communities to factor homeland needs into political