Norming “Moderation” in an “Iconic Target”: Public Policy and the Regulation of Religious Anxieties in Singapore

The maintenance of a “moderate mainstream” Muslim community as a bulwark against the fraying of harmonious ethnic relations has become a key governance concern post-September 11. In light of the global concern—and often paranoia—with diasporic Islam, Islamic religious institutions and civil society have been portrayed in the popular media as hotbeds of radicalism, promoters of hatred, and recruiters for a “conflict of civilization” between the Muslim world and the modern world. Having declared itself a terrorist's “iconic target,” Singapore has taken a broad-based community approach in advancing inter-religious tolerance, including a subtle initiative to include the “Muslim civil society” in advancing the understanding and the promotion of a moderate brand of Islam in Singapore. This tacit process of regulation (top-down, intra-community and inter-community), while effective, is constrained by the unique governance context in Singapore.     

Framing terror: an experimental framing effects study of the perceived threat of terrorism

An exploratory framing effects experiment was conducted to test whether three controversial news portrayals (or frames) of the terrorist threat increase subjects' perceptions of the danger. A total of 176 subjects were exposed to one of eight different article treatments. The subjects reported higher levels of perceived threat when the danger was associated with ‘radical Islamic groups’ (as compared to homegrown terrorists) and ‘nuclear’ technology (as compared to conventional weapons). Contrary to conventional wisdom, however, this study also showed that the term ‘terrorism’ itself did not affect the perceived threat. These results provide support for a theory of framing that explains the precise ways in which a particular set of communicating texts (terrorism news frames) influence human consciousness. Further theoretical details, as well as the social and political implications of this study, are discussed.     

Coming to Believe “Truths” About Islamist Radicalization in Europe

This article addresses four assumptions behind many of the current theoretical and policy approaches to individual processes of Islamist radicalization in Europe: the association with terrorism and extremism; determinism; the extraordinary nature of radicals; and the reification of the grievance and collective identity discourse. It argues for an intentional and developmental, rather than structural and socio-economic feature-focused, approach to the explanation of the radicalization process, with the consideration of framing and socio-psychological mechanisms having an impact on individual decision-making processes, and for an overall, broader conceptual understanding of radicalism.     

Blasphemy and terrorism in the Muslim world

This article examines the effect of blasphemy laws on Islamist terrorism in Muslim-majority countries. Although passed with the ostensibly noble purpose of defending religion, I argue that blasphemy laws encourage terrorism by creating a culture of vigilantism in which terrorists, claiming to be the defenders of Islam, attack those they believe are guilty of heresy. This study empirically tests this proposition, along with alternative hypotheses, using a time-series, cross-national negative binomial analysis of 51 Muslim-majority states from 1991–2013. It finds that states that enforce blasphemy laws are indeed statistically more likely to experience Islamist terrorist attacks than countries where such laws do not exist. The statistical analysis is supplemented with a brief case study of blasphemy laws and terrorism in Pakistan. The conclusion situates the findings in the context of policy.     

Representations of terrorism and the making of counterterrorism policy

Reflexive approaches not only maintain that representations of danger are socially constructed but also that they relate with political behaviour. Representations of terrorism, for instance, are argued to constitute that danger in distinct ways and thus to make certain counterterror policies possible. This article challenges this popular association of reflexive security studies with constitutive effects. It argues that constitutive argumentation advances an insufficiently tangible argument of effect, and that this conceptual weakness derives from both a problematic foundational social theory and a premature rejection of causation. Drawing on the social theory of Margaret Archer and Roy Bhaskar and a differentiated notion of causation, the article advances a “dialectical causal” framework for the analysis of representations of danger instead. Applying it to contemporary Swiss terrorism politics, the article shows how this framework improves on constitutive argumentation in disentangling the political powers involved in the production and enactment of representations of danger.     

What's so ‘religious’ about ‘religious terrorism’?

This article assesses the validity of the concept of ‘religious terrorism’ and its consequences for research and policy practices. It explores the origins, assumptions and primary arguments of the term and subjects them to an analytical assessment. It argues that the distinctions typically drawn between ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ terrorism are problematic, both conceptually and empirically, and that the term is misleading in its typical assumptions about the motives, causes and behaviour of groups classified as ‘religious terrorist’. In particular, it shows that the behaviour of those thus labelled is so diverse, and often so indistinguishable from their ‘secular’ counterparts, that the term has little meaning without further qualification, while simultaneously obscuring important aspects of both ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ violence. It then goes on to illustrate how the term, rooted in a particular historically situated understanding of religion and a particular set of power structures, serves as a disciplinary device to domesticate ‘political religion’, delegitimising certain actors while legitimising a number of highly contentious counterterrorist practices designed to deal with those described as ‘religious terrorists’. The article ends with some suggestions for alternative ways to study the role of beliefs and institutional structures, religious or otherwise, in producing political violence.     

Deconstructing the Multiple Readings of a Terrorist Event in Turkey: The Case of the Council of State (Danıştay) Assault of 2006

Terrorism is a pivotal matter in Turkish politics. In this article, a specific terrorist activity, which is still having an impact upon Turkish politics, has been analyzed. It scrutinizes two perspectives of the event. Some actors lean towards a secular/positivist reading of events while others favour a conservative/postmodern reading. This serious factional political debate is possibly just the result that the terrorists had in mind. Being imbued by republican principles, the seculars' claims compel the conservatives to raise defensive points since they are blamed for murdering secular figures and targeting the very essence of the republic. Using different symbolic readings, both sides arrive at opposing conclusions: for the seculars the aim/message of the terror is clear—it is the republic; for the conservatives the aim/message is hidden—destabilizing the country.     

Why the “Sacred” Is a Better Resource Than “Religion” for Understanding Terrorism

The popular media and many in academia often overstate the role that religion, and its supposedly unique qualities, has played in recent acts of terror. In this article, I argue that the notion of religious violence is unhelpful and that there is a more useful concept that we can utilize to draw out the values and ideas that play a role in the move to violence in both religious and secular groups. From a series of case studies on religious and non-religious groups, I have drawn out an alternative framework for investigating and learning from the role that beliefs play in motivations and justifications for terrorism. This framework uses the concept of non-negotiable (or “sacred”) beliefs. It is as applicable to secular as it is to religious groups, and can show us much more about how such beliefs can contribute to violence.     

Does Country-Level Social Disorganization Increase Terrorist Attacks?

This study examines the effects of a measure of country-level social disorganization on levels of terrorist attacks and fatalities in 101 countries from 1981 to 2010. We measure social disorganization as the presence of state instability: revolutionary and ethnic war, adverse regime change, and genocide. The classic social disorganization perspective posits that individuals experiencing these types of rapid social change will be freed from the institutional and informal restraints that bind them to society, and keep them conforming to social norms and laws. We examine the extent to which this reasoning applies to the number of terrorist attacks and fatalities from terrorist attacks occurring in countries. To control for the possibility that better functioning states are better able to prevent terrorist attacks, we include two measures of state capacity. We find that controlling for state capacity and a wide variety of other variables, social disorganization is consistently associated with increases in terrorist attacks and fatalities. We consider implications of the results for future research and policy.     

Delegating Terror: Principal–Agent Based Decision Making in State Sponsorship of Terrorism

State sponsorship of terrorism, where a government deliberately provides resources and material support to a terrorist organization, is common in the international system. Sponsorship can provide significant strategic and political benefits for a state, but there are inherent international and domestic risks associated with delegating foreign policy to these actors. Using principal–agent analysis, I develop a model that evaluates the impact of potential costs and benefits on a state’s decision to sponsor terrorism. I test my model by using a novel dataset on sponsorship behaviors that ranges from 1970 to 2008. The results of my analysis support the validity of the principal–agent model in explaining sponsorship, as states will be more likely to engage in sponsorship when the strategic benefits of weakening the targeted state are high and the risks of international reputation loss and domestic dissatisfaction are low.     

Developing a critical pedagogy of ‘research-based’ teaching in Islamic studies

Studying Islam and Middle Eastern politics has become highly popular, particularly in American and British universities after the 9/11 and 7/7 terrorist events. Unfortunately, the increasing interest in Islam and Muslims in the West is often based on (mis)recognition of images of Muslims in the media. This has created a new set of problems of ignorance and misunderstandings about terrorism and the Islamic world. The intent of this article is to outline a ‘critical pedagogy’ of research-based teaching for Islamic studies and illustrate how this kind of pedagogical engagement better equips students to ‘problematise the natural, cultural and historical reality’ and dominant Orientalist assumptions about the relationship between Islam and terrorism. This article shows how research-based teaching can help students to become critical thinkers to connect knowledge and power while studying Islam and Middle Eastern politics.     

Video games,terrorism, and ISIS’s Jihad 3.0

This study discusses different media strategies followed by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). In particular, the study attempts to understand the way ISIS’s video game that is called “Salil al-Sawarem” (The Clanging of the Swords) has been received by the online Arab public. The article argues that the goal behind making and releasing the video game was to gain publicity and attract attention to the group, and the general target was young people. The main technique used by ISIS is what I call “troll, flame, and engage.” The results indicate that the majority of comments are against ISIS and its game, though most of the top ten videos are favorable towards the group. The sectarian dimension between Sunnis and Shiites is highly emphasized in the online exchanges, and YouTube remains an active social networking site that is used by ISIS followers and sympathizers to promote the group and recruit others.