Research On Religion » Turkey

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.

Islamic Politics, Muslim States, and Counterterrorism Tensions, by Peter Henne.

RELATED PODCASTS

Podcasts on the topic of Islam and Politics.

David Smith on Religion, International Relations, and Foreign Policy.

Lawrence Rubin on Islam and Ideational Balancing.

William Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Thomas Farr on Religion, Religious Liberty, and US Diplomacy.

Jeremy Menchik on Islam, Tolerance, Democracy, and Indonesia.

Denis Dragovic on Religion and State-Building.

Robert George on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (and banjo music).

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics & Religious Civil Society in Turkey (Encore Presentation)

tonygill — Wed, 07 Dec 2016 23:49:39 +0000

Program Note: We are still on break due to a heavy travel schedule and other professional obligations. We do have some new episodes on the way, so stay tuned and tell your friends and family to check us out!

In a region that appears to be in great flux, Turkey stands out as one of the more stable societies in the region. Nonetheless, significant changes have taken place recently in a country that straddles both Europe and the Islamic Middle East. Prof. Ani Sarkissian, an associate professor of political science at Michigan State University and core faculty member of the Muslim Studies Program and the Center for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies at MSU, returns to our show to discuss these interesting changes and put them in historical context.

We begin our discussion by travelling back in time to the days of the Ottoman Empire, and its rule over a multi-ethnic conglomeration. Prof. Sarkissian begins with some of the reforms that the Ottoman caliphate attempted to undertake in the 19th century and then details the collapse of the empire and the rise of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in 1923. Turkey’s post-Ottoman regime shared many traits in common with other modernizing countries at the time, including a desire to push secularism as official state policy. Ani lays out a number of the reforms pursued by the Kemalist regime as they set the stage for how the state and civil society will interact over the course of the 20th century.

Following the death of Kemal Atatürk in 1938, we follow the course of Turkey’s autocratic political history including a series of military coups and efforts of civil society to organize. Dr. Sarkissian notes that several political parties in opposition to military rule began to form in the 1950s, provoking the 1960 coup. This is followed once again by stirrings amongst the population in the 1960s with the creation of several Islamist parties, led by Necmettin Erbakan. These parties were outlawed, yet they began to set an imprint on Turkey’s civil society. We discuss how a “religious reawakening” was occurring throughout the region at this time and how political regimes that previously rested their legitimacy on secular nationalism began to adopt religious overtones to their rule. This was also true of Turkey, wherein the regime attempted to forge a Turkish-Islamist synthesis beginning in the 1970s.

A similar dance between the autocratic rule of the military and civil society occurred throughout the next two decades, eventually leading to a number of laws that liberalized the rules under which civic associations could form and operate. This was not a full-scale liberalization, though, and the 1997 “Postmodern Coup” placed important limits on the nature of non-governmental organizations and political parties. The most important of these rules for our purposes in this interview was the prohibition on groups that had overtly religious or ethnic identities. This occurs at a time when the former Islamist movement and Welfare Party spearheaded by Erbakan splits into two movements, one being a traditional Islamist group (Felicity Party) and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) that took a less Islamist overtone, yet was still associated with civic groups that were interested in religious issues.

Ani documents her research on how civil society has had to operate under these restrictions. The reforms that were meant to open up Turkey’s civil society ironically result in many independent religious groups being captured by the AKP party. Prof. Sarkissian notes that this is not how civil society is supposed to act as a check upon governmental authority in a flourishing democracy. We discuss the rise of the Gülen movement and its break with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government. We also cover the recent protests that have erupted in the country, why they have fizzled out, and what Erdoğan’s recent decision (as of July 1 when this podcast was recorded) to run for president means for Turkish democracy.

We finish our conversation with some speculation about Turkey’s role in the Middle East, with particular attention to the recent assertion of Kurdish autonomy in Iraq and ongoing conflict in Syria. While attempts by Prime Minister Erdoğan to assert his leadership in the Muslim world has not been all that successful, Turkey still remains a key player. Ani ends with some optimistic notes about Turkish civil society and the future. Recorded: July 1, 2014.

The Variety of Religious Repression: Why Governments Restrict Religion, by Ani Sarkissian.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Religion in the Post-Soviet World.

Religious Freedom and Social Flourishing: A Panel Discussion.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and Green Movement.

Alessandra Gonzalez on Islamic Feminism.

Dan Philpott on Religious Resurgence & Democratization.

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Eileen Kane on the Russian Hajj

tonygill — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 09:00:51 +0000

During the latter half of the 19th century, when industrialization led to the expansion of railroads and the increase in efficient steamships, travel to Mecca for the hajj became much more affordable for the sizable Muslim population living in Russian territory. Prof. Eileen Kane — an associate professor of history at Connecticut College — discusses the attempts by tsarist and Soviet Russia to manage this pilgrimage for both geopolitical and economic advantage, and how Russian Muslims responded to these efforts. While this is a little known aspect of Russian history, it has important ramifications for how migrations of religious individuals are viewed in our contemporary world.

We begin with Prof. Kane discussing how she came upon such a relatively esoteric topic. She notes that she was in college during the breakup of the Soviet Union and this opened up a door to historians who had previously focused on the Slavic history of Russia to realize that there were substantial ethnic and religious minorities (often of sizable proportion) living within the borders of the USSR. This then became fertile ground for historians seeking to discover new things about old countries, and Eileen reminds us that although we think Slavs are in Russia and Muslims are in the Middle East, there are actually a very large number of Muslims outside the Arab world, including in former Russian territories. Of the 15 nation-states that resulted from the break up of the USSR, six of them have majority Muslim populations.

We then take a journey back to the middle of the 19th century and Prof. Kane explains why she chose to bookend her study from roughly 1840 to 1930. It was during this era that industrialization was making it more cost effective to travel via railroad and steamship, thus making the hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca that all Muslims are asked to perform once in their life) a reality for religious individuals living in “far away” lands. Her study concludes in 1930 when the Great Global Depression (followed soon by World War II) created significant hardships in travel. She briefly reviews what the hajj is and how efforts to convert and pacify Muslims during the middle part of the 1800s met with resistance and wasn’t all that effective of a strategy for tsarist Russia. We also note the importance that European imperial expansion played during this time period, as the Middle East was becoming an area ripe for foreign influence given the decay of the Ottoman Empire. Russians certainly wanted to play an important role in the politics of this region given its strategic significance.

The next portion of our discussion examines how the tsarist regime attempted to control the seasonal migration of Muslims to the Holy Land. Prof. Kane lists several things that the Russians tried to do to facilitate travel including subsidizing train and ship transit, issuing special passports, and opening consulates in Jeddah and other areas to help travelers who were experiencing difficulties. It was reasoned that if this pilgrimage was going to be made, the Russians should have some say in directing it given that there was also a fear that travelers abroad would bring back diseases and radical ideas to Russia. Eileen details the presence of “disinfection facilities” on the journey home in an attempt by Russians to weed out cholera and other diseases. Prof. Kane notes that there was a great deal of “trial and error” learning in how to manage the pilgrimage routes based upon the experience of local officials in various villages along the way.

Prof. Kane then explains the two primary motivations for the Russians to manage the hajj routes. First, since Russia had lost a lot of revenue as people moved to North America in the late 1800s, there was a strong incentive to use these pilgrims as a source of tsarist revenue, albeit it was much less than was hoped. Second, with Europe expanding in the Middle East as the Ottoman Empire began to falter, the Russians also wanted to stake their presence in the region and facilitating migration routes was one way they believed they could do this. We also discuss how Muslims reacted to the overtures of the Orthodox Russians. While some in the elite saw it as a benevolent action on the part of the tsar, many intellectuals and non-elite Muslims viewed it as manipulative and often had problems with some of the tactics used such as the “disinfection facilities” there were sometimes staffed by women, an affront to some Muslim men. Our conversation also includes a section on the Soviet strategy, which was relatively similar to what the previous tsars did with the exception being that the Bolsheviks were atheists and thought religion would inevitably fade away. With the disruptions caused by the 1905 and 1917 Revolutions and the global depression causing problems in travel, concern over managing the hajj faded in policy importance. We close with some of Eileen’s thoughts on what surprised her during the course of her research, and how what happened in the past can inform our policy towards immigrants today. Recorded: January 22, 2106.

Russian Hajj: Empire and the Pilgrimage to Mecca, by Eileen Kane.

RELATED PODCASTS

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

Catherine Wanner on Religion in Russia.

Bradley Murg on Russian Orthodoxy after the Soviet Union.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy

tonygill — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:00:34 +0000

Can Islamic nations craft functioning democracies? While a cursory glance at the Arab Middle East would suggest the difficulty with such a task, Dr. Paul Kubicek, professor of political science at Oakland University, discusses his comparative research that shows a number of tentative successes with democracy in the Muslim world. We discuss Turkey and a number of other countries that receive little attention in the popular media such as Senegal, Mali, Tunisia, and Bangladesh. While many of these countries have experienced democracy in the past decade or so, and some of them (e.g., Bangladesh) still face significant challenges, Prof. Kubicek’s research shows that Islam and democracy are not necessarily incompatible.

As per usual, Tony asks Paul about his background with particular attention to how someone who studied post-communist nations in eastern Europe would end up taking a job in Istanbul at Koc University, especially since he had never visited that nation prior to his job interview and did not know Turkish. We chat a bit about his time there and his reflections on being a “stranger in a strange land.” It was his three year stint as a professor at Koc that created the seeds of interest that eventually became the basis of his book Political Islam and Democracy in the Muslim World.

We then take care of a few definitional issues talking about what democracy is and where nations in the Muslim world — stretching from Morocco to Malaysia — fit in comparative perspective. Paul notes that on empirical scores of democracy (mainly from the Polity data set), Muslim countries score significantly lower (i.e., less democratic) than the non-Muslim world. He reviews a number of reasons other scholars have advanced for this “democratic deficit,” including theories about poverty’s relationship to democracy, the “resource curse,” and some political culture factors, as well as hypotheses linking Islam’s incompatibility with democratic governance. We then talk a bit about the variation within Islam — not a monolithic religion by any means — and briefly explore the topic of political Islam.

The last half of our interview surveys a number of countries that have had some success with democratization. We start with Turkey, the country that was Paul’s home for three years. He reviews the history of that nation and notes how religion was removed from political consideration during and following Kemal Ataturk’s rule. Paul then talks about the democratization process and how it has opened up to individuals who want a more public space to express their religion and the rise of the Justice & Development Party (AKP). While there has been a few steps backwards in terms of free speech and other civil liberties, Paul does not attribute this to Islam per se, but rather just the natural desire of governments to want more power. We also discuss the pull that Europe has had on the political landscape of Turkey, and Paul notes that while Europe did exert some influence towards democratization in the 1990s, this influence has faded in the past decade.

We then move on to a number of lesser-known countries, starting with Senegal — a west African nation that has shown considerable success with democratic governance. Again, Paul reviews the history of this country (a former French colony) and explains how the “national brand” of Islam, which is Sufi-based, assisted (or at least did not inhibit) the process of democratization. Paul points out that a great deal of toleration for other religions exists in this country and a number of the first presidents were, in fact, non-Muslims. We then travel a bit to the northeast to look at Mali. Of all the countries examined in his book, Mali would appear to be the least conducive to democracy given its low GDP per capita and high rates of illiteracy. Nonetheless, beginning in 1992, the country moved in a democratic direction with competitive elections. A brief military coup in 2012 prompted by separatist unrest in the north was short-lived as the generals handed back power to civilians. Bangladesh is then offered up as a case where things have not progressed as well and Paul explains how “creeping Islamization” from Pakistan has caused backtracking on a variety of civil liberties.

We finish off the interview with some discussion of the Arab Spring, a movement starting back in 2011 that offered hope for political liberalization in North Africa and the Middle East, but which has not been as successful in that area as was hoped. Paul points out that Tunisia, the point of origin for the Arab Spring, is doing well with respect to democratic liberalization but other countries have floundered, including Egypt. Paul offers up some final thoughts on the political future of the region. Recorded: July 2, 2015.

Political Islam and Democracy in the Muslim World, by Paul Kubicek.

From Solidarity to Infirmity: Organized Labor in Post-Communist States, by Paul Kubicek.

Unbroken Ties: The State, Interest Associations, and Corporatism in Post-Soviet Ukraine, by Paul Kubicek.

The European Union and Democratization, edited by Paul Kubicek.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and the Green Movement.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Alessandra González on Islamic Feminism.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons

tonygill — Sun, 11 Jan 2015 09:00:22 +0000

Can 16th century rebellions in Scotland, France, and the Netherlands be useful in helping us understand the international politics of ISIS, the Arab Spring, and other popular movements surrounding the rise of political Islam? What about how the US reacted to various socialists during the Cold War? Prof. John Owen IV, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, explores these unique historical comparisons and more as a means of understanding how the United States and Europe engage the ideological phenomenon known broadly as Islamism. This intriguing interview is sure to be an eye-opener!

Despite discussing a book entitled Confronting Political Islam (see link below), we begin with an examination of three Calvinist rebellions in 16th century Europe involving Scotland, France, and the Netherlands. Prof. Owen points out that the title of his book is “Six Lessons from the West’s Past” and notes how these old conflicts had several things in common that are important for understanding contemporary challenges in the world. These three revolts all involved ideologically-committed partisans that had transnational alliances and provoked foreign interventions into the domestic landscape of where these battles were fought, much like the situations we see today in the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia.

Tony quickly takes to challenging Dr. Owen on such an odd comparison, which might be likened to comparing apples and oranges. This leads to a discussion on the important role of understanding the past and how history may not repeat itself, but often rhymes (with John citing Mark Twain’s quote to this effect). We also spend a short segment on discussing the important role of ideas in motivating human behavior and international intrigue. Tony admits he is highly partial to “interest-based” explanations and downplays the role that ideology plays in fostering human action, often seeing ideologies as ex post facto justifications for behavior. John counters with some excellent examples where ideas motivated important change even against the interest of the individuals promoting that change, including Martin Luther. Tony yields this point but notes how some individuals, such as Henry IV who accepted Catholicism so he could conquer Paris, have very malleable belief systems. John agrees and we both note that there is a spectrum of individuals from those who hold fast to their ideologies and act vociferously upon them to others who willingly jettison their convictions at moment’s notice (and everything in between).

Following this theoretical and methodological discussion, we turn attention to the comparison between political Islam and various ideological conflicts in the West’s past, including the aforementioned Calvinist rebellions as well as the struggle between democratic capitalism and communism. John spells out what he means by Islamism and denotes why he focused his book largely on the Middle East and North Africa, where the heart of a new contemporary ideological battle between Islamism and secularism is taking place. He provides a nice history of this ideological tension dating back to the 19th century, covering the push towards secular modernization that occurred first with Mutafa Kemal Ataturk in Turkey and then the more religiously-based pushback following the failure of many of these secular regimes.

The remaining part of the interview is devoted to several of Prof. Owen’s six lessons from history. While we do not cover all six, we do spend significant time on four of them. First, John reminds us not to sell Islamism short in that ideologies that seem “out of place and time” often have significant staying power and are very salient to individuals who hold them. While those in the West may see Islamism as a throwback to a “medieval time,” partisans of this political theology see themselves as moving history forward. He likens this to the battle for liberal democracy in the face of monarchism during the 18th and1th centuries. Second, John points out that ideological struggles frequently involve foreign intervention so that the interveners can gain foreign allies in international struggles and so that those same intervening governments can quell domestic threats. Here we see comparisons between the civil war in Syria with England’s action of the Calvinist rebellions in the 1560s.

Third, Prof. Owen notes that ideologies are not monolithic and foreign policy should not be made on that basis. He introduces a new word into Tony’s vocabulary — polylithic. Here, the historical lesson of the West comes from the Cold War era when Harry Truman pursued a policy that differentiated between various flavors of socialism in Europe and communism, finding allies amongst some of the more anti-Soviet variants. He cautions policymakers from seeing Islamism as a single monolithic entity and notes how cooperation with Iran may be worthwhile in some instances. Finally, John urges us to watch the exemplar cases of Turkey and Iran to see how various ideologies play out over time as there is always a disconnect between promoting an ideology and having to “pick up the garbage” (i.e., rule on a daily basis). John pulls from his studies of The Netherlands in the 17th and 18th centuries to show how religious conflict was finally moderated and how the lessons of Dutch toleration were adopted by others including Britain and the US.

Prof. Owen finishes the discussion with his musings about what he learned throughout the process of researching and writing his book, including some reflections on his own biases going into the study. Recorded: December 29, 2014.

Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture.

Confronting Political Islam: Six Lessons from the West’s Past, by John Owen.

The Clash of Ideas in World Politics: Transnational Networks, States, and Regime Change, by John Owen.

Liberal Peace, Liberal War: American Politics and International Security, by John Owen.

Philip Jenkins on Religion & World War I.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and Green Movement.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

William Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Jared Rubin on Christian and Islamic Economic History.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, and Civil War.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey

tonygill — Sun, 13 Jul 2014 08:00:37 +0000

In a region that appears to be in great flux, Turkey stands out as one of the more stable societies in the region. Nonetheless, significant changes have taken place recently in a country that straddles both Europe and the Islamic Middle East. Prof. Ani Sarkissian, assistant professor of political science at Michigan State University and core faculty member of the Muslim Studies Program and the Center for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies at MSU, returns to our show to discuss these interesting changes and put them in historical context.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Ani Sarkissian’s bio at The Michigan State University’s Department of Political Science.

Prof. Sarkissian’s project on Charismatic Catholicism at USC’s Pentecostal and Charismatic Research Initiative.

The Religious Freedom Project.

“Why Strict Religion-State Separation Is Neither Real nor Ideal,” a blog post at Cornerstone by Ani Sarkissian.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Religion in the Post-Soviet World.

Religious Freedom and Social Flourishing: A Panel Discussion.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and Green Movement.

Alessandra Gonzalez on Islamic Feminism.

Dan Philpott on Religious Resurgence & Democratization.

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Carolyn Warner on Religion & Generosity

tonygill — Sun, 09 Jun 2013 08:00:07 +0000

What motivates religious individuals to give, either of their time or money? And do such motivations vary across faith traditions? We look at the issue of generosity among religious communities with Carolyn Warner, professor of political science at Arizona State University, who reviews the findings of several studies she is conducting with co-researchers Adam Cohen, Ramazon Kilinc, and Christopher Hale. What makes this multi-faceted project so interesting is that, unlike previous studies that tend to focus only on Christian denominations in the U.S., Prof. Warner’s team compares Catholics and Muslims in four cities in Europe — Dublin (Ireland), Paris (France), Milan (Italy), and Istanbul (Turkey). In each city they survey and conduct some interesting experiments on both Catholic parishes and Muslim organizations. In other words, not only are the researchers examining Catholics in Ireland, but they make sure to study Muslims in that same city. Likewise, they find a Catholic population in Istanbul to compare as well.

We start with a discussion on the difference between charity and generosity, a difference that Carolyn and her co-authors find to be very important. Whereas the former term (charity) indicates a relationship that is vertical — between a “superior” handing down something to an “inferior” — the term generosity tends to be more horizontal in its meaning. Carolyn then talks about the general sociological issues involved in studying generosity, noting that individual and community giving represent a collective action problem and the acts of generosity can be viewed as either public goods or club goods depending on the target population of the generous acts. In general, club goods are directed towards members within the religious community (e.g., Catholics helping fellow Catholics in the parish), whereas the public good aspect of generosity refers to giving beyond the boundaries of one’s spiritual community (e.g., Muslims aiding non-Muslims).

We note that religion has always been attributed with generous giving and we review some of the general reasons why scholars believe religion has a positive effect. Carolyn mentions various aspects that have been explored in the past, including the role that community plays, the institutional setting, ritualistic behavior, heightened sensitivity to the plight of others that religious ideas impart, and theological exhortations to give. Given the inter-disciplinary composition of Carolyn’s research team, Tony asks how difficult it was for a social psychologist (Adam Cohen) and a political economist (Carolyn) to talk with one another and come to a mutual understanding of what might be at play in the act of generosity. Following this Carolyn explains the rationale for choosing the various research sites and the groups studied, including why the Gülen movement was chosen as the specific Muslim group to examine. This portion of the conversation encompasses the (supposedly) relevant differences in organizational structure and theology between Catholics and Muslims.

We then turn to the results of this study, focusing first on the findings from the semi-structured interviews. Carolyn notes how Catholics tended to frame their generosity in terms of “love of Jesus” and “love of others,” often pulling from Matthew 25:40, whereas Muslims tended to emphasize duty to God, noting that Allah had given individuals gifts and it was thus important to use those gifts to help others. We also discuss the differences in ritualistic giving behavior and how that motivates generosity within these two groups. Despite these differences, the research team discovered that both groups emphasize the “sense of community” as a motivational prompt for helping others. This sense of community is not only the desire to help others, but as with any other social organization, the desire to be with others. She also addresses whether or not these charitable activities were oriented towards in-group giving (i.e., club goods) or out-group (i.e., public good). This discussion is more nuanced than one might think with an interesting observation about Catholics in Istanbul and their socio-legal standing.

We finish with a discussion of the experiment that Carolyn’s team carried out. She describes the methodology and findings of the experiment. In addition to quirky problems that always arise when conducting social scientific research, the research team was surprised to find out that the Muslim participants did give their fee for participating in an experiment to a specific group, but not a group that they had initially anticipated. And if you are listening closely during this part of the interview you can hear Rocky J. Barkington, the official canine mascot of Research on Religion, providing some insightful commentary in the background. Carolyn then shares her broad-based conclusions regarding what the research team has found to date, including some thoughts on whether or not religious charity might substitute for government provision of social welfare. Recorded: May 29,2013.

RELATED LINKS

Carolyn Warner’s bio at Arizona State University.

Description of Warner’s generosity project at The Science of Generosity Initiative at the University of Notre Dame.

The Best System Money Can Buy: Corruption in the European Union, by Carolyn Warner.

Confessions of an Interest Group: The Catholic Church and Political Parties in Europe, by Carolyn Warner.

RELATED PODCASTS

Michael McBride on Religious Free-Riding and the Mormon Church.

Dan Hungerman on Religious Charity and Crowding Out.

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.

“Containing the Umma? Islam and the Territorial Question,” by Matthew Derrick in the Interndisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion (free with registation).

RELATED PODCASTS

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

William Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, and Civil War.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democracy.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, and Civil War

tonygill — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 08:00:38 +0000

A week before the 10th anniversay of the September 11th terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Prof. Monica Duffy Toft of Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government joins us to discuss what we have learned about religiously-motivated violence over the past decade. This podcast represents our second discussion on the book God’s Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics (co-authored with Daniel Philpott and Timothy Shah), the first being focused on the role of religion in promoting democracy. Our attention here turns to why religious groups and individuals would be prompted to violence. The discussion is far-ranging, looking not only at Islamic terrorism, but includes an examination of the Irish Republican Army in Northern Ireland, Hindu nationalism in India, and the influence of Buddhism on the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. Prof. Toft provides definition of terrorism and “informal violence,” the latter which encompasses such “spontaneous” events as ethn0-religious riots. She argues that looking at, and including, informal violence in the analysis of terrorism is crucial for understanding the phenomenon of religiously-motivated violence. Prof. Toft lays out her explanation for the increasing salience of religious violence, focusing both on institutional factors such as how states regulate religious organizations and the importance of political theologies. The confluence of these institutional and ideological factors helps explain why religious terrorism and civil war has increased since the 1970s. Our conversation also considers the recent rampage of Anders Behring Breivik in Norway. We also discuss the role of religion in civil wars such as Sudan, Yugoslavia and other parts of the world. Prof. Toft finishes the interview with her thoughts on whether religious violence is likely to subside in the future. Recorded: August 29, 2011.

RELATED LINKS

Monica Duffy Toft’s website at Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government.

Initiative on Religion in International Affairs at the Belfer Center (Harvard University).

God’s Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics, by Monica Duffy Toft, Daniel Philpott, and Timothy Samuel Shah.

Securing the Peace: The Durable Settlement of Civil Wars, by Monica Duffy Toft.

The Geography of Ethnic Conflict: Identity, Interests, and Territory, by Monica Duffy Toft.

RELATED PODCASTS

Dan Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Eli Berman on Religious Terrorism.

Ron Hassner on Sacred Spaces and Conflict.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence & Democratization

tonygill — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:00:21 +0000

Over the past four decades, there have been two global trends that have caught the attention of social scientists — the public resurgence of global religiosity and the increasing movement towards democratic governance. Daniel Philpott — associate professor of political science at Notre Dame and fellow at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies — discusses both of these trends and his latest book, God’s Century (co-authored with Monica Duffy Toft and Timothy Samuel Shah). We begin the interview with a historical survey of how church-state relations have changed over the past two or three millenia, a broad sweep of history indeed, but one that is crucial to understanding why religion has made such a strong comeback in recent decades. Prof. Philpott shows how early in human history religious and secular authority split apart and how both types of leadership existed in a situation of mutual dependence — secular leaders required the legitimating endorsement of religious leaders, whereas religious leaders relied upon the material support of secular rulers. During the early modern period (c. 1450-1750) this mutual balance began to tip in favor of secular rulers who exercised greater control over religious groups in a paternalistic manner. Interestingly, this was a global trend. Beginning in the late 1700s, particularly with the French Revolution, we witness a global trend where religion is subjugated (and sometimes decimated) by secular rulers, particular in communist and socialist nations. Ironically, this subjugation gave religious organizations a greater degree of independence from secular government in some parts of the world that allowed new political theologies to develop and the institutional ability to organize against secular rulers. We discuss the formation, nature and influence of these political theologies, from the ideas promoted at Vatican Council II to Hindu and Buddhist nationalism to Islamic fundamentalism. In some areas such as Latin America, Indonesia, and parts of Asia these new political theologies and resurgent religious organizations helped to promote democracy, whereas in other parts of the world (e.g., the Middle East) it has led to less sanguine outcomes. Our discussion also touches upon the role of ideas in motivating human events, and we finish the discussion with some thoughts on the 2011 “Arab Spring” and whether or not that this will result in more democratic nations. This is the first part of a discussion of the book God’s Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics. We will be focusing on the issue of religious violence with one of the other authors of the book in an upcoming episode. Stay tuned. Recorded: July 7, 2011.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Daniel Philpott’s website at the University of Notre Dame.

Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at Notre Dame.

God’s Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics, by Monica Duffy Toft, Daniel Philpott, and Timoth Samuel Shah.

Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations, by Daniel Philpott.

Just and Unjust Peace: An Ethic of Political Reconciliation, by Daniel Philpott (forthcoming).

RELATED PODCASTS

Philip Jenkins on Global Christianity.

Ruth Melkonian on Latin American Protestants.

James Felak on John Paul II and Communism.

Catherine Wanner on Religion in Russia.

Karrie Koesel on Religion & Politics in China.

Karrie Koesel on House Churches in China.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Thomas Farr on Religion, Religious Liberty & US Diplomacy.