Research On Religion &#187; Arab Spring

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

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

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

Ann Wainscott on Morocco’s Religious Foreign Policy.

Religious Liberty and Violent Religious Extremism

tonygill — Sun, 05 Mar 2017 09:00:32 +0000

Can religious liberty serve as an antidote to religious violence extremism? This was the question posed to a panel of four scholars at a symposium sponsored by the Religious Freedom Project at the Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace, & World Affairs (Georgetown University). Thomas Farr, the current director of the Religious Freedom Institute, moderates a lively discussion that includes Daniel Philpott (Notre Dame), William Inboden (UT-Austin), Allen Hertzke (Oklahoma), and Sahar Aziz (Texas A&M). The discussion ranges widely with a focus on human rights, the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood and the possibility of democratic governance. Prof. Dan Philpott begins the conversation by noting an empirical pattern between the lack of religious liberty and violent extremism that has arisen amongst Islamic nations in recent decades, but cautions individuals against thinking this relationship is related to Islam per se. Instead, he places an emphasis on the lack of freedom and democratic governance. Prof. Inboden then turns the discussion to the issue of radicalization and terrorism, pointing out that the U.S. has not yet developed an effective policy of counter-radicalization. Thomas Farr then turns to Dr. Hertzke who argues there is a strong empirical linkage between religious repression and violence. Prof. Sahar Aziz then joins in to clarify some of the dimensions of what “terrorism” means and asserts that religious freedom is actually connected to a wide range of other freedoms. The discussion takes off from there and includes a number of interesting theoretical and empirical observations. An audience question & answer period follows the interchange of scholars. Recorded: November 15, 2016.

Religious Freedom Institute.

Video of the panel discussion on YouTube.

Thomas Farr’s bio at the Religious Freedom Institute.

Daniel Philpott’s bio at the University of Notre Dame.

William Inboden’s bio at the University of Texas, Austin.

Allen Hertzke’s bio at the University of Oklahoma.

Sahar Aziz’s bio at Texas A&M University.

RELATED PODCASTS

Is Religious Freedom Good for Growth? A Panel Discussion.

Religious Liberty & Economic Prosperity: A Panel Discussion.

Religious Freedom & Political Flourishing: A Panel Discussion.

Proselytism, Humanitarianism, & Development: A Panel Discussion.

Proselytism, Social Stability, & Development: A Panel Discussion.

Dan Philpott on Defending Religious Freedom.

Dan Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

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

Allen Hertzke on Religious Liberty.

Thomas Farr on Religion, Religious Liberty, and Foreign Policy.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, & Civil War.

John Owen on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

David Patel on Religion & Social Order in Iraq.

Eli Berman on Religious Terrorism.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma (Encore Presentation)

tonygill — Mon, 28 Nov 2016 06:35:24 +0000

As the staff at Research on Religion takes a short break to upgrade some equipment and catch up on other duties, please enjoy this “best of…” episode from our archives.

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.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democracy.

David Patel on Religion & Social Order in Iraq

tonygill — Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:00:45 +0000

Brandeis University’s Crown Center for Middle East Studies.

“ISIS in Iraq: What We Get Wrong and Why 2015 is Not 2007 Redux,” by David Patel.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

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

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

Ann Wainscott on Morocco’s Religious Foreign Policy.

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.

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.

Karen Elliott House’s personal website.

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia

tonygill — Sun, 20 Jul 2014 08:00:03 +0000

What is it like to be a Western female reporter with an assignment reporting on the Middle East? And what unique observations can a 32 year journalistic history in the area bring to our understanding of one of the region’s major powers, Saudi Arabia. Karen Elliott House, former publisher of the Wall Street Journal and senior vice president of Dow Jones & Company, discusses her career as a diplomatic reporter and her latest book On Saudi Arabia. Like several of the conversations we have on Research on Religion, this interview examines the life history of the guest as it helps us further understand the perspective they bring to the table. (Note: About two minutes of audio were cut from the beginning of the interview because of distortion. This edited portion contained some idle chat about dogs and a brief story about Ms. House’s Pulitzer Prize, wherein she mentioned that another editor told her that when all is said and done, Pulitzer will be mentioned in her obituary. Tony wished Karen a long and healthy life.)

We begin with Ms. House’s career as a journalist and she details how she was able to go from the small town of Matador, Texas to the hallowed halls of the Wall Street Journal, particularly at a time when the newspaper business was still male dominated. Karen talks about her strict religious upbringing in a Church of Christ denomination and how this gave her an advantage when she eventually came to report on Saudi Arabia. This background becomes helpful when she eventually lived with a very conservative Muslim family while in Saudi Arabia. We then learn how she moved from the University of Texas to the Dallas Morning News and then, taking advantage of every opportunity presented to her, was assigned to the diplomatic desk of the Wall Street Journal in 1977 and covered the Camp David Peace Accords as one of her early assignments. We ask whether or not Karen had a sense of the fundamental change that was about to rock the region with the Iranian Revolution, which spurs and interesting discussion on the predictive power of experts and the collapse of communism.

Tony probes what it was like to be a journalist covering the Middle East at this time, wondering if Karen ever felt endangered while in the region and whether being female in a male-dominated culture had any drawbacks. Interestingly, Karen said there was really only one time in Damascus that she felt nervous and that her biggest concern is traffic in Saudi Arabia. At this point, she brings up the unique advantage being a female had in reporting. Given the religious culture of the country, it would be difficult for a male to ever talk with women one-on-one, let alone at all. However, Karen was granted admission to this world and she relates several conversations she had with women in the region, most notably the females at a home where she recently stayed. We move then to a discussion about the veiling of women and what appears, to Western eyes, to be a form of gender oppression. This is where Karen’s own religious upbringing came in handy and she presents an interesting and enlightening take on various cultural practices that seem at odds to European values and norms. She relays some interesting stories to highlight these points.

We then turn to a more academic discussion of Saudi Arabia, focusing on a number of lesser-known aspects of the country. Contrary to the notion that the kingdom is swimming in oil wealth, there is a significant strata of the country that remains remarkably impoverished. Unemployment among Saudis remains high even as they import labor from abroad. The citizenry is also remarkably young with 60% of the population under the age of twenty, which portends some serious challenges for an aging leadership. Via websites that are cropping up on the Internet, these young people are not necessarily asking for political reform in a manner that would eliminate the monarchy, but rather young citizens are asking for transparency, accountability, and equity in terms of how the kingdom’s wealth is used. We also talk about issues of social mobility in a nation where most of the major political positions are tightly held by the Saud family. With a remarkably small proportion of Saudi citizens working in the private sector, the political allocation of resources — and a culture of asking for favors — becomes the norm. Again, all these socio-economic and political observations are peppered with vivid stories only the way that a seasoned journalist can tell.

The conversation moves to a discussion of some of the changes and reforms that are taking place in the country. With high levels of Saudi unemployment, there is a push to have young Saudis trained abroad and to limit the number of foreigners who are licensed to work in the country. Karen points out a very important tension between three crucial factors that are shaping the political economy of the nation: 1) the tendency to buy social peace and acquiescence among the population; 2) the decline in oil revenues as other sources of petroleum come online; and 3) a succession crisis that will be a major challenge politically in the next ten years. The first two tensions run in direct conflict to one another, whereas the third may catalyze these issues. We talk about this in the regional context of the Arab Spring and the chaos it has unleashed, including the current turmoil in Syria and Iraq that is coming close to Saudi borders. We also discuss issues over religious leadership and an erosion of trust the population has in the clerics anointed by the regime. The interview concludes with Karen’s thoughts about the future, at least in the short run, and Tony presses her for any possibilities for optimism to reign. Karen notes that there seems to be a realization that moderation in religious attitudes and politics are being seen as quite crucial for the coming years, particularly amidst the conflict that is spreading regionally. Recorded: July 2, 2014.

RELATED LINKS

On Saudi Arabia: Its People, Past, Religions, Fault Lines, and Future, by Karen Elliott House.

“As the Middle East Burns, the Saudis Ease up at Home,” by Karen Elliott House in the Wall Street Journal.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Civil Society in Turkey.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Revolution and Green Movement.

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

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

Kevan Harris on Iran’s Islamic Revolution and Green Movement

tonygill — Sun, 22 Jun 2014 08:00:04 +0000

With Iran in the news a lot as of late, we take a look at this nation’s recent history dating back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the regime’s consolidation, and the recent Green “Revolution” or, perhaps more appropriately, “movement” with Kevan Harris, associate director of Princeton University’s Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Iran and Persian Gulf Studies.

The conversation begins with Tony asking Prof. Harris about Iran’s current influence in the Middle East region and whether the country’s Islamic revolution has cast a long shadow over contemporary events. Kevan’s answer is nuanced and surprising. Comparing the events in Iran with earlier revolutions, such as the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, he talks about how after efforts to export revolution were frustrated the regime instead sought to build “political Islam in one country” and that Iranian realpolitik is not simply about political Islam. He also highlights how there are two competing schools of thought existing within Iran’s diplomatic corps: (1) the best offense is a good defense; and (2) the best defense is a good offense. He notes how the current president, Hassan Rouhani, tends to fall in the former camp and how his policies have a great deal of continuity with the secular Pahlavi regime prior to the ’79 revolution. Our discussion throughout the entire interview is not only informed by a historical understanding of a single nation, but is a tour de force of social scientific theories of politics and social mobilization.

We then take our social science microscope to look at the causes of the 1979 revolution. Kevan retains a fairly skeptical view of structural theories of revolution and places emphasis instead on day-to-day events and how they matter in terms of social mobilization. Interestingly, Iran witnessed significantly more grassroots social mobilization than any other prior 20th century revolution (and even the French Revolution). Prof. Harris covers the prior state-building experience of Iran, and notes that 1979 was not so much a case of state breakdown (as many classic revolutions were), but was an effect of a massive social mobilization. He discusses the role of the “bazaar-mosque” alliance and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

The stabilization and consolidation of the revolutionary regime becomes our next topic. Our discussion covers the role of the military, religious legitimacy, and the need to absorb the massive mobilization of the revolutionary era. Kevan’s own research covers the importance of the state’s ability to build a rather extensive welfare system that affected all levels of Iranian society, especially the middle class. In doing so, he casts doubt upon alternative explanations for regime stabilization that rely upon religious legitimacy and/or oil. Kevan points to how both the state “pushed down” into elements of society that the shah’s regime had previously ignored, but also how different social groups “pushed up” to create a “social contract” that promised social mobility at both the individual and national level — a vision wherein people would see their own lives improve as the Iranian nation would become a more modern state on the world stage. The typical vision of an authoritarian clerisy lording over a passive population is challenged significantly by Prof. Harris.

This fascinating discussion of how the Islamic regime has managed to negotiate its power over society then informs our examination of what has been called the “Green Revolution” following the 2009 elections. Kevan points out that it is hard to call it a “revolution” given that it really has not had a transformative effect on the polity and thus would best be considered a “movement.” Tony asks about why the color green is prominent in this imagery and learns a thing or two about Islam. We also take a more personal turn as Kevan shares his own experiences of being plopped down in the middle of this popular uprising only two days after the election. A discussion of how sociologists approach fieldwork follows. We then explore why the Green movement dissipates rather quickly as compared to the 1979 mobilization. The explanation proffered by Prof. Harris relies on newer understandings of social movements and their micro-mobilizing nature. He talks of “brokered exuberance” and that the failure of the protests to persist were not solely a matter of selective state repression.

Our conversation finishes with some speculation on the future of Iran and the Middle East region as a whole. He notes the interesting irony that Iran has been the most stable of countries in the Middle East at a time when many regimes seem to be unraveling. Recorded: June 18, 2014.

“How to Reform a Theocracy: A Domestic Playbook for Iran’s Moderate President,” by Kevan Harris in Foreign Affairs.

“An Election Uprising in Iran,” by Kevan Harris.

The Cup, the Gun, and the Crescent: Social Welfare and Civil Unrest in Muslim Societies, edited by Crabtree, Parker, and Azman. (Contains a chapter by Kevan Harris.)

Neither Gods nor Emperors, by Craig Calhoun (mentioned in interview).

RELATED PODCASTS

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

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco

tonygill — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 08:00:41 +0000

The rise of political Islam over the past several decades has become a topic of great interest to scholars and policymakers recently. Numerous explanations for its rise abound, several of which have been covered on our podcast previously (see “related podcasts” below). To advance another piece of the puzzle, Ann Wainscott, a graduate student in political science at the University of Florida, joins us to discuss some of her fascinating research on this topic. She traces the emergence of a Salafi Islamist movement in Morocco, in part, to educational reforms advanced several decades ago with the ostensible purpose of dissipating growing leftist influence among students and intellectuals. Ironically, the unintended consequence of this policy was to provide a new space of resistance to political dissidents.

We begin our discussion with a rather vivid story about a knife fight occuring at the school Ann was attending in Fez several years ago. While not personally witnessing the events, her interaction with her Arabic instructor provided a deep insight into some trends in Moroccan society that she had only vaguely been aware of. This new insight allows her to think more broadly about her dissertation research that was, at first, narrowly focused on a set of recent educational reforms. We then step back to review the history of Morocco over the past half century, beginning with the independence movement shortly after World War II. Ann reviews for us a series of key events all situated in the context of the Cold War. With Morocco being considered a geopolitical significant country, both domestic and international pressure to control any growing socialist influence is consider an imperative in Moroccan policymaking circles. With King Hasan II seeing religion as a mobilizing resource to gain support amongst the population and stave off political challengers, he embarks on a series of reforms to introduce Islam more deeply into the public school curriculum. This effort emerges most strongly in the aftermath of the 1965 Casablanca riots that involved high school and college students.

Ann then explains the nature and content of these educational reforms, noting that in an authoritarian context, every aspect of society becomes political including education. While initially helping to reduce the influence of left-leaning political opponents of the regime, the Islamization of the curriculum allows political discourse to emerge in a new context. We observe how the king’s regime focused on three important arenas. First, at the institutional level, the regime determined which schools would get funding and which ones would not, obviously having an incentivizing effect on how loyal the leaders of any given school would be to the king. Second, there was a concerted effort to place Islam-friendly leaders in key positions of the educational sytem, from national administrators down to the principals of schools. Over time, this had the effect of seeping down to the teaching staff as well. Finally, there were conscious policies designed to insert Salafi Islam into all aspects of the curriculum, including math and science courses. Ann explains why Salafism was chosen. These three methods were seen as an “Islamic solution” to a growing left-wing threat at the time.

The intial effect of these reforms was to “exhaust” the resources of the left, and we see this in how the Moroccan Student Union, an entity started by leftists, comes under the control of Salafists. However, the “Islamic solution” becomes an “Islamist problem” by the late 1980s, as a number of Islamic elites become critical of the ruling regime, now under the control over Mohammed V’s son, King Hasan II. We discuss the response to this “problem” — which Ann is careful to mention is a “problem” from the vantage point of the government. Attempts are made to remove Islamic teachings from the curriculum as well as to introduce a more moderate flavor of Islam into the nation, namely Sufism, via subsidies to key individuals and institutions. With the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent bombing of several restaurants in Casablanca in 2003, the regime becomes more alarmed by the growing radicalization of Islam in society and begins to close that space even more. We finish with Ann’s thoughts on how this is all playing out with respect to the region as a whole and where Moroccan society is today. Recorded: May 29, 2013.

RELATED LINKS

No biographical information currently available for Ann Wainscott.

RELATED PODCASTS

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

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

Alessandra Gonzalez on Islamic Feminism.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma

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

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

RELATED PODCASTS

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