26 Introduction the regimes’ capacities for repression, therefore, rendered high-risk activism as low-risk (McAdam 1986) and signaled openings in activists’ opportunities for dissent (McAdam 1999[1982]; Tarrow 2005). The Arab Spring likewise disrupted the deterrent effects of conflict transmission by rallying anti-regime diaspora members around a common enemy. Anti-regime Libyans abroad experienced a relatively high degree of cohesion as rebels at home launched a zero-sum war against Gaddafi. By uniting these individuals around the slogan “the regime must go,” boundaries within diaspora groups were reconfigured (Wimmer 2013) and organizers gained the capacity to instigate mass protests. At the same time, as Table 1.3 summarizes in the column on Quotidian Disruptions, the Arab Spring’s effects on public mobilization and anti-regime solidarity did not unfold at the same pace or endure equally across national groups. While Libyans in the United States and Britain came out rapidly as regime control at home and abroad collapsed, the Syrian revolution emerged gradually. Accordingly, the pace at which activists went public abroad in both host-countries was staggered because regime agents and loyalists continued to threaten and sanction activists abroad during the revolution’s first year. The continuous threats posed by transnational repression led some activists to engage in what I call “guarded advocacy” by covering their faces during protests, posting anonymously online or not at all, and refusing invitations to speak to the media. It was only late in 2012 when most of the Syrians I interviewed made the decision to “come out,” but many knew of others who had not yet, and never would. The quotidian disruption of conflict transmission also changed over time. Syrian unity across their places of residence splintered as the revolution at home became more internally divided, competitive, and morally compromised. Likewise, once southern Yemenis split from the revolution a few months into the uprising at home, so too did most South Yemeni activists in the diaspora follow suit. The resurgence of conflict transmission from the Arab Spring itself, therefore, undermined the abilities of Syrian and Yemeni organizers to express unified claims to outsiders and led to personalized conflicts, withdrawals, and a shift away from overtly politicized activism among many participants. After explaining the initial emergence of diaspora movements for the Arab Spring, Chapter 5 then describes differences in activists’ collective interventions for rebellion and relief. As summarized in the far-right column of Table 1.3, the analysis finds that Libyan activists and their movements across the United States and Britain performed what I call a full-spectrum role in the revolutions by undertaking five major strategies for the revolution’s duration. First, they broadcasted their allies’ claims to outside audiences through the Internet, protests, and awareness-raising events in person and online. Second, they represented the cause by joining the revolution’s cadre and media teams, and by lobbying on its behalf. Third, they brokered between parties to the conflict, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009272148 Published online by Cambridge University Press