The Influence of Pre-Migration Factors and Post-Migration Climate of the Receiving Community on the Psychological Distress of Latino Immigrants

Over forty million foreign-born residents currently live in the United States. Latinos make up the largest population of immigrants living in the U.S. Previous research suggests that Latino immigrants often experience pre-migration stressors, such as traumatic experiences, political upheaval, and unplanned migration. These stressors may have a negative impact on immigrants’ post-migration mental health. Research also suggests that the post-migration climate of the receiving community may inform the connection between pre-migration experiences and post-migration mental health. The current study examined the relationship between Latino immigrants’ reasons for migration, migration planning, and pre-migration experience of political and/or interpersonal violence, and post-migration symptoms of psychological distress. In addition to examining the effect of these pre-migration factors, the current study also examined the community “climate” experienced by Latino immigrants post-migration by assessing the influence of three post-migration factors: 1) community support and engagement, 2) discrimination, and 3) employment. The study was a secondary analysis of data collected for the National Latino and Asian American Study, which focused on the mental health and service utilization of Latinos and Asian Americans. Participants included 1,629 Latino immigrants from across the United States. Results indicated that pre-migration experience of political and/or interpersonal trauma, post-migration experience of discrimination, and female sex were positively associated with psychological distress. Post-migration employment was negatively associated with psychological distress. In addition, discrimination modified the association between unplanned migration and psychological distress; the relationship between unplanned migration and psychological distress decreased for participants who reported more discrimination. Furthermore, employment modified the association between political and/or interpersonal trauma and psychological distress; the connection between trauma and psychological distress increased among those who reported having less employment. Recommendations for further research were presented. Policy and clinical practice implications were discussed, particularly given the current climate of high anti-immigrant sentiment and hostility in the U.S.

Credible Commitments and Post-Conflict Refugee Return: A Statistical and Network Analysis

I examine determinants of refugee return after conflicts. I argue that institutional constraints placed on the executive provide a credible commitment that signals to refugees that the conditions required for durable return will be created. This results in increased return flows for refugees. Further, when credible commitments are stronger in the country of origin than in the country of asylum, the level of return increases. Finally, I find that specific commitments made to refugees in the peace agreement do not lead to increased return because they are not credible without institutional constraints. Using data on returnees that has only recently been made available, along with network analysis and an original coding of the provisions in refugee agreements, statistical results are found to support this theory. An examination of cases in Djibouti, Sierra Leone, and Liberia provides additional support for this argument.

KNOWING THE ENEMY: NAZI FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE IN WAR, HOLOCAUST, AND POSTWAR

“Knowing the Enemy: Nazi Foreign Intelligence in War, Holocaust and Postwar,” reveals the importance of ideologically-driven foreign intelligence reporting in the wartime radicalization of the Nazi dictatorship, and the continued prominence of Nazi discourses in postwar reports from German intelligence officers working with the U.S. Army and West German Federal Intelligence Service after 1945. For this project, I conducted extensive archival research in Germany and the United States, particularly in overlooked and files pertaining to the wartime activities of the Reichssicherheitshauptamt, Abwehr, Fremde Heere Ost, Auswärtiges Amt, and German General Staff, and the recently declassified intelligence files pertaining to the postwar activities of the Gehlen Organization, Bundesnachrichtendienst, and Foreign Military Studies Program. Applying the technique of close textual analysis to the underutilized intelligence reports themselves, I discovered that wartime German intelligence officials in military, civil service, and Party institutions all lent the appearance of professional objectivity to the racist and conspiratorial foreign policy beliefs held in the highest echelons of the Nazi dictatorship. The German foreign intelligence services’ often erroneous reporting on Great Britain, the Soviet Union, the United States, and international Jewry simultaneously figured in the radicalization of the regime’s military and anti-Jewish policies and served to confirm the ideological preconceptions of Hitler and his most loyal followers. After 1945, many of these same figures found employment with the Cold War West, using their “expertise” in Soviet affairs to advise the West German Government, U.S. Military, and CIA on Russian military and political matters. I chart considerable continuities in personnel and ideas from the wartime intelligence organizations into postwar West German and American intelligence institutions, as later reporting on the Soviet Union continued to reproduce the flawed wartime tropes of innate Russian military and racial inferiority.