{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013778100072516316, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015228426395939087, 'mean_word_length': 5.699029126213592, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Three rationalities for making sense of internal displacement in Ukraine

The territorial disputes between Russian Federation and Ukraine over Crimea and Donbas have led to the forcible internal displacement of at least 1.6 million people. While Although the literature on forced migration and internal displacement have been framed predominantly in terms of trauma and disenfranchisement (IOM 2018; Dunn 2018), this article argues that a fuller range of Internally Displaced Person (IDP) subjectivities can be made intelligible by considering the rationalities organizing IDP survival. Based on a comparative analysis of 155 interviews with IDPs from Crimea and Donbas, the article demonstrates that forced displacement is more heterogenous than has previously been allowed. I theorize this diversity by using analytics of governmentality to examine the logics or ‘rationalities’ used to make sense of forced migration. The conceptual tools offered by studies of governmentality are ideal for this case because they overlap with themes that predominated in data collected during ethnographic fieldwork in Ukraine between 2015 and 2017: agency, responsibility, and freedom. The article contributes a framework for comparing IDP subjectivities that encompasses diversity and provides a new vocabulary for describing the strategic efforts forced migrants exert to mend their lives.