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 northeast 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 toward 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 securitized and invisibilized, making their repatriation even more difficult. On the other hand, the recent tendency to homogenize all IS affiliates as dangerous security risks closing down avenues for repatriation, and positions advocacy organizations in a feminized role vis-à-vis the “tough” masculinist 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-centered model.