Homeland status and the direction of diaspora politicization: Koreans and Okinawans in wartime Hawai‘i

Why do similarly situated immigrant groups direct host-state-facing mobilisation toward categorical exit rather than loyalty-oriented incorporation during crises? This article argues that homeland geopolitical status structures the relative viability of political frames, alliances, and incorporation strategies. It develops a typology distinguishing oppositional separation from incorporative loyalty and applies it to Koreans and Okinawans in wartime Hawai‘i. Although both communities shared plantation origins, racial positioning, and exposure to martial law, colonial Korea stood opposed to Japan whereas Okinawa was formally incorporated as a Japanese prefecture. Korean organisations directed reclassification, boundary work, and wartime cooperation toward exit from the Japanese enemy category; Okinawan organisations directed their publicly observable mobilisation primarily toward loyalty and recognition within the broader Japanese American classification, even as Uchinanchu differentiation and some autonomy preferences persisted. Both groups employed overlapping repertoires of Americanization, reclassification, civic service, and military participation; the difference lay in their categorical targets and institutional direction under coercive conditions. Process tracing identifies suggestive postwar organisational and political continuities without attributing them solely to wartime strategy. The analysis explains why a shared crisis can generate heterogeneous directions of diaspora politicisation.