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.

Is Religious Freedom Good for Growth? A Panel Discussion

tonygill — Sun, 05 Feb 2017 09:00:40 +0000

Can religious freedom promote economic growth in the long- and/or short-term? This was the general question posed to a number of scholars on November 15, 2016 at a symposium entitled “Religious Freedom and the Common Good” hosted by the Religious Freedom Project at the Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs (Georgetown University). Wow! That’s a mouthful! Brian Grim (Religious Freedom & Business Foundation) moderates a conversation with Ilan Alon (University of Agder), Timur Kuran (Duke University), Rachel McCleary (Harvard University and Hoover Institution), and your own lovable host Anthony Gill (University of Washington). The discussion that develops is broad-ranging, covering countries as far-flung as Guatemala and China, and eras from the Ottoman Empire to contemporary Russia. Anthony Gill asserts that religious liberty is good for long-term economic growth, citing an example from the Netherlands in the 17th century, but also cautions that efforts to impose religious freedom from the top-down can cause conflict in the short-run, and that a strong culture of tolerance is needed for religious freedom and economic freedom to work conjointly. Timur Kuran shares these views noting that many skilled entrepreneurs leave places such as Pakistan in the search for more spiritually free environments and this harms their growth potential (while benefiting those countries where migrants move t0). At various points throughout the conversation he uses examples from the Ottoman Empire and contemporary Turkey to show how laws on religious behavior and towards religious minorities can have important economic impacts. Rachel McCleary offers a competing view noting an important difference between “believing” and “belonging.” Whereas certain religious beliefs may be conducive to economic growth, she notes that religious institutions either have no or a negative effect on economic growth and reducing political corruption. She cites her extensive research in Guatemala to support this claim. Ilan Alon sees both positive and negative effects on economic growth created by religious freedom and brings his experience in China and Norway to bear on this topic. Brian Grim peppers the discussion with a number of his own observations how particular companies such as the Kellogg Corporation have promoted religious freedom at various points in time. It is also noted that the Quakers were great at making chocolate and founded Cadbury. Near the end of the panel discussion, Anthony Gill makes a controversial point that bourbon is better than scotch as the participants field a number of questions from audience members. Recorded: November 15, 2016.

RELATED LINKS

Video presentation of the panel at the Religious Freedom Project (Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace, & World Affairs).

Religious Freedom and the Common Good Symposium webpage.

Coming soon: Religious Freedom Institute. (The same project, but now in institutional form!)

Brian Grim’s bio at the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation.

Ilan Alon’s bio at the University of Agder.

Timur Kuran’s bio at Duke University.

Rachel McCleary’s bio at the Hoover Institution.

Anthony Gill’s bio at the University of Washington.

Explanation of bourbon vs scotch and definitive proof of which one is better.

RELATED PODCASTS

Religious Liberty & Economic Prosperity: A Panel Discussion.

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

Religious Freedom & Political Flourishing: A Panel Discussion.

Proselytism, Humanitarianism, and Development: A Panel Discussion.

Brian Grim on Religious Freedom & Business.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law and Economic Development.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

Rebecca Shah on Religion and the Enterprising Poor in India.

Allen Hertzke on Religious Liberty.

Carrie Miles on Religion, Gender, and Missionaries.

Timothy Shah on the Case for Religious Liberty.

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.

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.

Monica Toft on Religion, Terrorism, and Civil War.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democracy.

Clark Lombardi on Sharia Law

tonygill — Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:00:08 +0000

What is sharia law? How can sharia law be accommodated into formal constitutions? These questions and more are the topic of discussion with Prof. Clark Lombardi, the Law Foundation Professor of Law at the University of Washington. Prof. Lombardi explains what sharia law is and how it compares with Western variants such as common law and canon law. We dig into the historical development of sharia law and how, given the decentralized nature of Islam, that there were numerous interpretations. Dealing with this diversity meant relying upon a number of scholar-jurists (fuqaha), who had organized themselves into guild-like organizations and schools, and having respect for different opinions when agreement could not be reached. We examine how the rise of a more bureaucratized state affected the use of sharia in society, covering some of the developments in the Ottoman Empire and then the changes occurring in the post-Ottoman and post-colonial era. With secular states coming to the rise in the post-WWII period, and then faltering in the 1970s, we begin to see the rise of more Islamist influence in government and a demand for “sharia guarantee clauses” (SGCs) written into formal constitutions, wherein secular rulers are obligated to follow the guidance of sharia. More than merely a “bill of rights,” these SGCs were implemented to ensure government officials did not make law that would force Muslims to sin, and also served as a check to get these same rulers to act on behalf of the welfare of the community. We discuss how such SGCs have been implemented in a number of countries. Clark lays out three general methods: 1) political constitutionalism wherein the passage of sharia law falls largely in the hands of executives and parliaments; 2) legal constitutionalism giving courts the ability to review the adherence of legislative and executive actions to sharia law; and 3) hybrid systems that combine a bit of both. Clark illustrates these systems by referring to various countries with special concentration in the recent Egyptian constitution. We finish off with some of Prof. Lombardi’s ruminations on events in Turkey and how his study of sharia has affected his understanding of the legal system in the United States. Recorded: August 11, 2016.

Clark Lombardi’s Social Science Research Network (SSRN) page.

State Law as Islamic Law in Modern Egypt, by Clark Lombardi.

Religion and Human Security, edited by James Wellman and Clark Lombardi.

Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Law, by Clark Lombardi.

RELATED PODCASTS

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law and Economic Development.

Paul Kubicek on Islam, Political Islam, and Democracy.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Ani Sarkissian on Politics and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Alessandra Gonzalez on Islamic Feminism.

Ann Wainscott on the Politics of Islam in Morocco.

Nathan Brown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

Jared Rubin on Religion and Credit Risk in the Ottoman Empire.

Karen Elliott House on Journalism and Saudi Arabia.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

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.

Ron Hassner on Religion in the Military

tonygill — Sun, 11 Oct 2015 08:00:01 +0000

From issues as diverse as pacifism to rituals that require special garments that interfere with uniforms, militaries around the world often find themselves trying to accommodate the various religious beliefs and practices of their soldiers. How such issues are manage has largely gone unstudied by academics. However, Dr. Ron Hassner — associate professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley — has taken up the task to research this topic by assembling a group of scholars for an edited volume entitled Religion in the Military Worldwide. We discuss the specific findings presented in this work and Prof. Hassner’s general thoughts on the management of religion in the armed forces.

Our discussion begins, though, with a summary of Prof. Hassner’s previous work on “sacred space,” a topic that we have visited before on the podcast. In this line of research, Ron has argued that territory that is deemed sacred to religious adherents faces a problem of being “indivisible,” unlike land or loot, and makes many conflicts very intractable. Ron argues that the failure to understand the importance of “sacred space” has led to numerous diplomatic misunderstandings and policy errors, but he also presents ways to mitigate conflict, which includes involving clergy into policy discussions. We also raise the issue of the “sacred” Big Game between Stanford and Cal, and the iconographic ax that is awarded to the winner, and Ron presents us with a little known, but perhaps very revealing, correlative fact about that ongoing rivalry that involves him.

We revisited this earlier line of Ron’s research agenda because it provided him with a segue into his current interest in understanding how religion functions within militaries and how different countries manage potential conflicts between religious belief and ritual, and the necessary dictates of preparing for, and conducting, combat. And it was not just his previous research that prompted such an interest; Ron’s own experience of having to prepare plates and kitchen utensils for kosher meals led him to think about this topic. He also recounts second-hand stories wherein a Hindu soldier was reported to have risked his life on the battlefield to tend to a cow that was harmed by artillery fire. These and a few other stories helped to pique Ron’s interest into investigating whether or not there are any interesting empirical regularities around the world as to the management of religion in the military. Finding virtually no pre-existing literature on the topic, he decided to assemble a group of scholars who had some connection to the topic and he discusses how this came together in the edited volume noted above.

We then dive into the topic of religious demographics in the military, which one might think would be a relatively straightforward task for empirical research. However, many militaries, including the United States, do not keep and/or share religious demographics. Ron explains how some scholars have tried to get around this lack of data with unique collection strategies, including counting beards, the number and denomination of chaplains, and yarmulkes. Issues of mandatory conscription versus an all-volunteer force can have an interesting impact on the religious demographics. Ron further asked his scholars to probe the issue of the denominational composition of smaller units within the military. This leads to an interesting discussion on socialization and how even members of a platoon who do not initially share the religious beliefs and practices of the majority of the group will often conform to those preferences over time as an act of cohesion. Ron shares a few interesting stories to this effect.

We then talk about the manner in which military commanders have to accommodate very specific religious practices that might conflict with standard operating procedures with a large bureaucracy. Tony brings up the issue of Sikhs and protective helmets, given that the Sikh practice of long hair and turbans make it difficult to outfit soldiers with this basic piece of safety gear. Prof. Hassner then brings up the fascinating case of Japan, a nation that many people consider to be amongst the most secular in the world. Ron notes that although religion is significantly downplayed in the Japanese defense forces, a very large number of soldiers (including officers) will not drive vehicles or board ships that have not been blessed by Shinto clergy in a purification ritual to rid the object of evil spirits.

Our next topic is to look into the U.S. case and how religion is managed therein. Here Ron talks about how he had two different scholars with differing viewpoints — Martin Cook and Pauletta Otis — regarding the presence in the U.S. armed forces. The former shows a great deal of concern over the excesses of religious symbolism in military music and symbols/badges used on the battlefield. He sees these excesses as conflicting with general military goals of trying to win hearts and minds of populations in foreign lands, particularly in recent military campaigns in the Middle East. Otis, on the other hand, notes that while excesses do exist, there are procedures for addressing these problems and the system works fairly well, which leads her the con. We also chat a bit about how religious belief and practice play out in daily operations, including combat. This is the main topic of Ron’s next book but he gives us a flavor for some of his findings, as well as what some of the authors in his edited volume had to say. It is hear where we look both at the Iranian military and India’s armed forces. We discuss how there was an interesting selection bias in the Iranian military during the Iran-Iraq War that led many devout Muslims to join special units that engaged in suicide attacks out of a firm belief in martyrdom. We explore India’s experience in trying to integrate people of very different faith traditions that are often in conflict with one another into the same units. Interestingly, Ron notes that rather than creating religiously homogenous units that might be prone to mutiny if ordered to fight against co-religionists, combining individuals of different faiths actually helps to build unit cohesion as all the soldiers know they are dependent upon one another for survival on the battlefield irrespective of spiritual preferences.

We finish our interview with some of Ron’s reflections on what he has learned throughout the years of studying this topic. One of his main takeaways was that there really are no pat solutions to dealing with the issue of religion in the armed forces, but rather leaders are often learning and adjusting to changing circumstances. Recorded: October 7, 2015.

Religion in the Military Worldwide, edited by Ron Hassner.

War on Sacred Ground, by Ron Hassner.

RELATED PODCASTS

Ron Hassner on Sacred Space and Holy Conflict.

Philip Jenkins on Religion and World War I.

Robert Kinnune on Military Chaplains.

Sean Scott on Religious Rhetoric in the US Civil War.

James Felak on Pope Pius XII, the Wartime Pontiff.

Murat Iyigun on Monotheism, Conflict, Europe, the Ottomans, and the Blues

tonygill — Sun, 26 Jul 2015 08:00:56 +0000

Are monotheisms better at establishing sociopolitical stability than civilizations with polytheistic religions? And to what extent do monotheistic civilizations influence the socio-economic development of one another? In particular, did the Ottoman Empire change the course of European history via its military advances into southeast Europe at a key moment in time? Prof. Murat Iyigun, the Stanford Calderwood Endowed Chair in Economics at the University of Colorado, answers these questions and discusses other interesting historical findings that he published in his new book, War, Peace, & Prosperity in the Name of God. And if that isn’t enough, Murat — an accomplished blues guitarist — treats us to an original “arabesque blues” tune at the end of our interview. Up your knowledge of history with our discussion, and then get down and funky with Prof. Iyigun’s musical stylings!

Our conversation begins, as usual, with a bit of background about our guest. Prof. Iyigun explains what cliometrics — one of his academic specialties — is and also how he became interested in the study of religion and economics. He notes that the events of September 11, combined with new advances in institutional economics, prompted him to look into the role that informal cultural institutions play in history. He also gives credit to his mentor — Herschel Grossman — at Brown University for inspiring him to look beyond the typical empirical fare of economics.

We then jump into Murat’s new book and he lays out the three central questions that he seeks to answer: 1) Why and how did monotheism spread so rapidly and become swiftly intertwined with political authority?; 2) What has been the role of religion and ideology in conflict historically?; and 3) What were the lasting sociopolitical and economic effects of religiously-motivated conflicts? As for the first question, we walk through Murat’s empirical study showing that, ceteris paribus, monotheistic civilizations tend to last longer than polytheistic ones and generally have greater territorial reach (a proxy for governing effectiveness). Tony probes some of the methodological difficulties in measuring these phenomenon and Murat provides convincing answers as to why his study does show a significant effect for monotheism. He then reviews some of the reasons why monotheisms might be better for obtaining sociopolitical stability, including the ability of ecclesiastics to provide credibility to rulers and lower the discount rate of individuals thus allowing for longer-term policies.

Turning to one particular monotheistic civilization — the Ottoman Caliphate — Dr. Iyigun provides some background information about how the Ottomans were able to rise to power and conquer a vast territory, extending across North Africa, into the Arabian peninsula, and eastward towards central Asia. He discusses the “Gaza ideology,” which promotes the basis for an offensive military strategy allowing for conquest, which then becomes its own engine of growth, allowing for a further extension of rule. The height of Ottoman rule from the mid-15th to the 17th centuries also has an important impact on Europe. With the Ottomans pushing into the Balkans and close to the gates of Vienna, Europeans had to reduce their own territorial infighting in order to address this external existential threat. Murat notes that while the Roman Church’s monopoly had come under challenge prior to the Protestant Reformation (e.g., the Hussites and Lollards), the definitive Protestant break fostered by Martin Luther was catalyzed by the Ottoman threat. While acknowledging the role of the printing press and other explanations for Protestant success, Prof. Iyigun argues that military advances by the Ottomans forced Europeans to temper their own intra-faith hostilities and conflict, which in turn gave Christian dissenters a chance to take hold and expand on the continent. His empirical work on the frequency and duration of intra-European conflict compared against Ottoman advances, along with qualitative evidence in the documents of Prince Ferdinand and others, shows this hypothesis to be rather convincing.

We move next to a set of miscellaneous (albeit important) questions about how this may have impacted the different economic development trajectories of the two regions — Europe and the Middle East. Tony asks whether the threat of Europe, particularly in the form of The Crusades, might have played a similar galvanizing role in Ottoman economic development. Interestingly, it does not and Murat explains what happens when the dominant power in the region faces such threats. He notes three phases — denial that a threat exists, a conservative revival to “restore historic greatness” leading to a reliance on old institutions not suited for a new reality, and then finally emulation of the institutions of the rising power. We also talk about another interesting facet of his book — the role of harem politics. While most of his book is macro-historical, he does devote time to looking into the micro-foundations of military decisions in the Ottoman Caliphate and develops a fascinating thesis. Here he argues that the nature of dynastic succession relied upon births that were from captured concubines and slave women, often from Christian lands (sometimes as far away as France). He tests whether the heritage of the mothers of various sultans played a role in determining where military campaigns would take place. Interestingly, valide sultans (queen mothers) who came from Christian regions (although who also converted to Islam), had an influence in tamping down military incursions into Europe. While only a side chapter in Murat’s book, this may be one of the most interesting and surprising findings of his study (at least to Tony, who notes that “Moms matter” in history).

Prof. Iyigun finishes off with some broad lessons he learned from his decade-long study of this topic. He notes that institutional, particularly informal (cultural) institutional, context is very important for structuring political and economic histories. He also notes that while economic competition in a globalizing world is often viewed positively, cultural/ideological competition should be viewed the same way. Finally, he learned that in a globalizing world, religion may become a more important focal point for bringing people together than nationalisms, a thesis advanced earlier by Samuel Huntington but which Murat intends to explore further in a more rigorous fashion. And last, but not least, Murat talks about his love of the blues and how he came to play in the band Barrel of Blues, and then treats us to his own composition — Muqarnas. Enjoy! Recorded: July 8, 2015.

War, Peace, & Prosperity in the Name of God: The Ottoman Role in Europe’s Socioeconomic Evolution, by Murat Iyigun.

Barrel of Blues (great tunes can be found here).

RELATED PODCASTS

Jared Rubin on Christian and Islamic Economic History.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Law & Economic Development.

Timur Kuran on Islamic Economics.

John Owen IV on Confronting Political Islam, Historical Lessons.

Matthew Derrick on the Geography of the Umma.

Mark Koyama on the Economics of Jewish Expulsions.

Rodney Stark on the Crusades.

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.