Take them or leave them? Gendered obstacles in advocacy work for the repatriation of IS-affiliates

Following the collapse of Islamic State (IS) in 2019, the fate of IS-affiliated foreign nationals detained in North-East Syria has been the subject of intense debate. While feminist scholarship has studied gendered representations of IS-affiliates, the practical implications of these constructions have yet to be explored. This article presents a qualitative feminist analysis of empirical data from practitioners, and demonstrates how gender shapes both the routes towards and the obstacles in the way of repatriation. On the one hand, gendered differentiation strategies construct women and children as vulnerable victims, creating possible avenues for their return. However, in reifying gender stereotypes, men and older boys are securitised and invisibilized, making their repatriation even more difficult. On the other hand, the recent tendency to homogenize all IS-affiliates as dangerous security risks closes down avenues for repatriation, and positions advocacy organisations in a feminized role vis-à-vis the ‘tough’ masculinized state as they argue for devalued and subordinated human rights to be respected. We conclude by arguing for the repudiation of gendered differentiation and homogenization strategies through a critical intersectional people-centred model.