Peter Henne on Religion-State Relations and Counterterrorism

tonygill — Sun, 27 Aug 2017 08:00:57 +0000

What determines whether or not a foreign government cooperates with US counterterrorism efforts? Prof. Peter Henne, and assistant professor of political science at the University of Vermont, examines the variation in how different governments in Muslim nations respond to US overtures. We discuss a bit of Dr. Henne’s background as a terrorism/counterterrorism analyst, why he became interested in the topic, and then dive into the content of his new book Islamic Politics, Muslim States, and Counterterrorism Tensions (out with Cambridge University Press). He begins by reviewing the general literature in international relations that seeks to explain why nations agree to cooperate with one another. We review international self-interest (the realism school), domestic political pressures, and then turn to how religion might play into this mix via the theories of “civilization” theorists such as Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington. While each perspective adds something to our understanding about why nations would yield to pressure from the US to help in quashing terrorist groups, Peter proposes an institutional perspective that takes into account pre-existing religion-state relations within Muslim nations, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism over the past half century, and the international context. We review some of the dimensions of US counterterrorism policy and then Prof. Henne lays out his theory of why some states would be more cooperative with the US than other states. Whether a state is “open” or “closed” politically matters a great deal, as does how governments have structured their relations with Islamic organizations, including militants. The history of counterterrorism since the early 1990s is the presented and we review some of the larger trends in counterterrorism efforts, noting that Africa has been the least cooperative region with the U.S. Our attention then turns to three case studies that present different religion-state relations: Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, and Turkey. Pakistan, while relatively open politically at times, must wrangle with Islamic activism, support for such activism in the military, and the conflict in Kashmir when weighing its policy options towards the US. The UAE, by contrast, has exercised greater control over Islamic groups in civil society and although there has been funding of militant groups through charitable channels, the interest and ability to manage these groups more effectively have made the Emirates a more consistent partner with the US. Finally, we examine Turkey that has had a history of overt secularism, favored by the military leaders, but which has also seen an uptick in religious activism within civil society and amongst political parties. This has led to Turkey as having one of the most complex and nuanced positions towards US counterterrorism efforts, including the surprise decision by the government not to participate in the US invasion of Iraq in the early 21st century. We close with some speculation by Prof. Henne where US relations with Muslim nations are heading in the near future, as well as what he has learned over the course of his study of this topic. (It should be noted that while we were recording this, there was a three-alarm fire on the University of Vermont campus, but Dr. Henne — not in the building that was burning — stayed on for the interview. How cool is that?) Recorded: August 3, 2017.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma

tonygill — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:00:36 +0000

Is the Islamic notion of “the umma” — i.e., the general community of Muslims — consistent with the modern concept of the nation-state and territorial sovereignty? We discuss this issue with Prof. Matthew Derrick, an assistant professor of geography at Humboldt State University, and author of “Containing the Umma?: Islam and the Territorial Question” that recently appeared in the Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion (see link below). Reacting to scholars such as Berenard Lewis, Samuel Huntington, and other scholars associated with the “cultural turn in geography,” Prof. Derrick argues that territory remains an important defining concept in how people organize their life even among religious believers who belong to a transnational faith. Our discussion starts out with a short detour to Tatarstan where Matthew has conducted extensive fieldwork and he lays out what is unusual about that area within Russia. He also corrects Tony on his misunderstanding of tartar sauce. We then move on to a definition of “the umma,” an essential theological concept within Islam that represents the community of all believers. This raises the question of whether a transnational faith can be squared with the territorial state that dominates our world system. Matthew takes us on a tour of the issue of territorialism and how it evolved, with the Peace of Westphalia marking an important milestone in how we conceive of nation states in the modern world. Tony presses Matthew on his more ideational notion of statehood that revolves around issues of sovereignty (e.g., cuius regio eius religio) as composed to a more political economic approach to defining territory based upon the ability to tax a population. This discussion takes us askance of the religious question for awhile, but it is very important in understanding how modern scholars view the compatability or incompatability of Islam with modern territorial states. Matthew reviews the thinking of Samuel Huntington and Bernard Lewis who do not see Islam as being compatible with our modern state system and then shares his critiques of these two scholars bringing us to a discussion of how European imperialism carved borders into the Islamic world. We investigate the rise of pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism, including the attempts by thinkers such as Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani and Sayyid Qutb to craft a general Islamic identity. Examples of how these attempts have fared are examined including work by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Pashtun movement within Pakistan, the nationalism that seems apparent in the Arab Spring and how Iran has supported Armenia in its conflict with Azerbaijan. We close by revisiting the area of Tatarstan that has appeared to be able to manage well its regional territory within Russia despite its ethnic and religious pluralism. Recorded: January 25, 2013.

Research On Religion » Pakistan

Peter Henne on Religion-State Relations and Counterterrorism

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma