How do pre-existing patterns of labor migration influence the relationship between natural disasters and intrastate conflicts? Natural disasters disrupt communities and everyday government activities. While governments can respond with post-disaster aid and reconstruction, even temporary disruption and displacement can spark social conflict and dissatisfaction. We argue that existing migration patterns can improve community resilience and recovery and make conflict less likely because disaster victims can rely on other sources for support. Labor migrants often maintain connections to communities of origin and send remittances to relatives who remain at home. These remittances can be a major source of income and can be a particularly important part of resilience when there are severe economic or climate shocks. Natural disasters are location specific; they are unlikely to affect the whole diaspora network at the same time. We expect that existing migration stocks and flows, established remittance systems, and diaspora ties mitigate adverse effects of displacement by reducing post-disaster grievances and lowering the likelihood of new conflicts arising after natural disasters. We test our theory in a global cross-sectional time series dataset by compiling information about natural disasters, labor migration, remittances, and intrastate conflict. We also use case vignettes from East Asia to illustrate the causal mechanisms in our theory. We find that disasters are less likely to lead to conflict in countries with strong diaspora networks and regular remittance flows. Our findings demonstrate the importance of migration patterns and policies for disaster response and recovery and for violent conflict.