Embedded Files
Book
Book
Weapon of Peace: How Religious Liberty Combats Terrorism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
Articles
Articles
“Paradoxes of Pluralism, Privilege, and Persecution: Explaining Christian Growth and Decline Worldwide.” Sociology of Religion. Forthcoming (with Stuti Manchanda).
This article examines the effect of church–state relations on rates of Christian population growth or decline worldwide. It makes the paradoxical argument that contexts of both pluralism and persecution do not impede Christian growth rates. In these environments, Christians do not have the luxury of becoming complacent. On one hand, pluralism means that Christianity must actively compete with other faith traditions in order to gain and maintain adherents. On the other hand, persecution can, paradoxically, sometimes strengthen Christianity by deepening attachments to faith and reinforcing solidarity among Christians. Rather, it is a third type of relationship—privilege, or state support for Christianity—that corresponds to the greatest threat to growth in Christianity. Countries where Christianity is privileged by the state encourage apathy and the politicization of religion, resulting in a less dynamic faith and the overall decline of Christian populations. We test these propositions using a cross-national, time-series analysis of a global sample of countries from 2010 to 2020. Our findings provide support for our theory that Christianity suffers in contexts of privilege but not in environments of pluralism or persecution. The finding is robust to a number of model specifications and statistical approaches.“Why Freedom Defeats Terrorism.” Journal of Democracy 32, no.2 (2021): 105-115.
Since the attacks of 11 September 2001, there has been a sharp increase in attacks by Islamist terrorists. Analysts have posited a number of causes behind terrorism’s global intensification, including poverty, failed states, and political unrest. One explanation, however, stands out as being uniquely important: a country’s level of freedom. Freedom combats Islamist terrorism in two broad ways. First, it strikes at the root of Islamist extremism, making it more difficult for terrorists to credibly claim that their faith is under attack. Second, freedom is an effective weapon of counterterrorism. The recognition that freedom naturally combats terrorism suggests that countries around the world have national-security interests in reversing decades of democratic backsliding.“Weapon of the Strong: Government Support for Religion and Majoritarian Terrorism.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 64, no.10 (2020): 1943-1967 (with Peter S. Henne and Ashlyn W. Hand*).
This article addresses a puzzle in terrorism studies. That terrorism functions as a “weapon of the weak” is conventional wisdom among terrorism researchers. When it comes to religious communities, however, often it is those groups favored by the state—rather than repressed minority communities—that commit acts of terrorism. We argue that this is because official religious favoritism can empower and radicalize majority communities, leading them to commit more and more destructive terrorist attacks. We test this claim using a statistical analysis of Muslim-majority countries. Our findings support the idea that the combination of state support of religion and discrimination against minorities encourages terrorism from majority religious groups.“Do Burqa Bans Make Us Safer? Veil Restrictions and Terrorism in Europe.” Journal of European Public Policy 27, no.12 (2020): 1781-1800 (with Stuti Manchanda*).
Over the past decade, several European states have moved to ban or restrict the wearing of Islamic face veils. Supporters of these bans maintain that they are necessary to ensure national security and cultural assimilation. Opponents, on the other hand, argue that prohibitions on the veil unjustly restrict the religious liberty of Muslim women. Interestingly, though, despite the controversy surrounding restrictions and bans on the veil and conflicting expectations on the effects of these limitations, little research has attempted to rigorously analyze their effect on radicalization. We seek to address this gap through a statistical analysis of the effects of these laws on Islamist terrorism in the states of Europe. We find that states that enforce veil bans are indeed statistically much more likely to experience more and more lethal Islamist terrorist attacks than countries where such laws do not exist.“Confronting Apocalyptic Terrorism: Lessons from France and Japan.” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 43, no.9 (2020): 375-395.
Terrorists who believe they have a role to play in bringing about the apocalypse pose a serious threat to countries around the world. In their quest to eradicate this especially pernicious form of terrorism, states, including liberal democratic ones, confront the understandable temptation to eliminate such groups through brute force: repression of apocalyptic groups and their constituencies at home and overwhelming military force abroad. Using a comparative case study of France and Japan, this article argues that such policies actu- ally serve to perpetuate the very conditions that generate further terrorism rooted in apocalyptic beliefs. France’s policies of repression of Islam at home and militarism abroad have had the unintended consequence of encouraging attacks by those affiliated with the apocalyptic group the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Conversely, the case of Japan shows that successfully combating apocalyptic terrorism requires far more understated measures, including respecting religious rights at home and caution in using force abroad.“Anti-conversion Laws and Violent Christian Persecution in the States of India: A Quantitative Analysis.” Ethnicities 20, no.3 (2020): 587-607 (with Stuti Manchanda*).
Seven of India’s 29 states enforce ‘anti-conversion’ laws, which are designed to prevent individuals and groups from converting or attempting to convert, either directly or otherwise, persons through ‘forcible’ or ‘fraudulent’ means, including ‘allurement’ or ‘inducement.’ This might seem a noble enough goal; nevertheless, we argue that anti-conversion laws actually serve to generate violent anti-Christian persecution by creating a culture of vigilantism in the states where such laws exist. This article empirically tests this proposition, along with alternative hypotheses, using a time-series, negative binomial analysis of the Indian states from 2000 to 2015. Our analysis finds that states that enforce anti-conversion laws are indeed statistically more likely to give rise to violent persecution against Christians than states where such laws do not exist. The statistical analysis is supplemented with a brief case study of Madhya Pradesh.“Pluralism and Peace in South Asia.” Review of Faith & International Affairs 17, no.4 (2019): 12-22.
This article examines the relationship between religious pluralism and peace in the context of South Asia. It notes that today South Asia is one of the most hostile regions of the world for religious pluralism, owing, in large part, to resurgent religious nationalism. It argues that attempts to establish religious uniformity have worked at cross purposes with the desired goal of cultivating stability and security in Sri Lanka, India, and Pakistan.“Comparing Classification Trees to Discern Patterns of Terrorism.” Social Science Quarterly 100, no.4 (June 2019): 1420-1444 (with Anthony Scime).
Though applied widely in the fields of medicine, finance, ecology, psychology, and computer science, machine learning algorithmic-based methods are a relatively novel approach to social scientific analysis that have yet to be extensively applied. Yet as we argue in this article, a specific form of algorithmic analysis known as C4.5 classification trees has much to offer social analysis and, specifically, the study of social and political violence. This article describes four novel classification model comparison techniques for the C4.5 classification method and applies them to the study of terrorism. Our state-level analysis suggests that there is something fundamentally different in the targeting choices of religious and secular terrorists. This analysis highlights the ability of classification trees to heighten our understanding of terrorism and even provide recommendations to policymakers for avoiding future attacks.
“Religion, State and Terrorism: A Global Analysis.” Terrorism and Political Violence 31, no.2 (April 2019): 204-223.
This article investigates two ways in which state involvement in religion—minority and majority restriction—generates terrorism. Using a time- series, cross-national negative binomial analysis of 174 countries from 1991–2009, this study finds that when religiously devout people find themselves marginalized through either form of religious restriction, they are more likely to pursue their aims through violence. The article concludes with recommendations for policymakers.“Taking God Seriously: The Struggle Against Extremism.” Middle East Policy, 25, no.1 (Spring 2018): 80-95 (with Joshua Fidler*).
While violence rooted in all faith traditions has been increasing since the late 1960s, Islam has come to play a disproportionately large role in global religious extremism. According to political scientist Monica Duffy Toft, more than 80 percent of religiously motivated civil wars involve Muslim communities, and Islamic ideology features prominently in more than 98 percent of religious terrorist incidents. Suicide missions by radical Islamist groups have been rising sharply over the past decade, in contrast to those by secular organizations, which have declined markedly. Of the 60 violent extremist groups currently classified as “foreign terrorist organizations” by the United States, 44 claim an Islamic mantle.“Blasphemy and Terrorism in the Muslim World.” Terrorism and Political Violence 29, no. 6 (November 2017): 1087-1105.
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.“Testing the Hillary Doctrine: Women’s Rights and Anti-American Terrorism.” Political Research Quarterly 70, no.2 (June 2017): 421-433. (with Tasneem Zaihra and Joshua Fidler*).
In her various roles as First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State, and Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton has long maintained that the subjugation of women poses a national security threat to the United States. Clinton’s proposition has come to be termed the “Hillary Doctrine.” Yet does this principle receive support from the empirical record? In this paper, we offer a test of the Hillary Doctrine by analyzing if more anti-American terrorism emanates from countries that restrict women’s rights than from countries that are not gender restrictive. Using a time series, cross-national analysis of 156 countries from the period 1981 to 2005, our negative binomial models offer strong support for the Hillary Doctrine and suggest that the promotion of women’s rights may well enhance the national security of the United States with respect to terrorism. These results are robust to a wide range of changes to the empirical research design.“How Dangerous are Virtual Worlds Really?: A Research Note on the Statecraft Simulation Debate.” Social Science Computer Review 35, no.2 (Spring 2017): 287-296.
This brief article weighs in on a pedagogical debate concerning the didactic usefulness of an online international relations computer simulation called Statecraft. In a 2014 article, Gustavo Carvalho, a teaching assistant at the University of Toronto, claimed, based on the results of a survey he administered to an international relations class that used Statecraft, that the simulation had little to offer students as a teaching tool. In a rebuttal, Statecraft creator Jonathan Keller took Carvalho to task for not employing the simulation properly, which biased his results. While Carvalho only presented results for one class, the present analysis reports on survey responses of students over six different classes which used Statecraft from 2013 to 2014. The results call into question Carvalho’s findings and suggest that the context and curriculum matter as much as the simulation itself when judging the pedagogical value of computer-mediated learning tools.“Religious Freedom, the Arab Spring and U.S. Middle East Policy.” International Politics 54, no. 1 (February 2017): 43-53.
This article examines the critically important but often neglected topic of religious freedom in the Middle East and North Africa in the context of the Arab Spring. While conceding that the Arab world generally suffers from a dearth of religious freedom, it argues that religious freedom is both achievable and necessary for regional peace and stability. The article concludes with some recommendations for American policymakers, proposing that one of the key ways the USA can foster climates conducive to American security interests is by taking religious freedom seriously as an instrument of foreign policy.“The Statecraft Simulation and Foreign Policy Attitudes among Undergraduate Students.” Journal of Political Science Education 12, no.1 (March 2016): 58-71.
Professors of international relations are increasingly realizing that simulations can be a fun and effective way of teaching the complexities of the field to their students. One popular simulation that has emerged in recent years—the Statecraft simulation—is now used by more than 190 colleges and universities worldwide. Despite Statecraft’s popularity, however, little scholarship has attempted to assess its impact on learning objectives and students’ perceptions of the real world. This article attempts to help fill that void by evaluating Statecraft’s influence on foreign policy attitudes among undergraduate students. It finds that, while participation in Statecraft did not generally change students’ foreign policy preferences, it did have the effect of inducing foreign policy moderation among students who were initially very hawkish or dovish in their foreign policy orientations. The most important individual characteristics predicting foreign policy attitudes include a student’s political orientation and interest in the Statecraft simulation itself. The article concludes with some potential avenues for future research.“Religion, Democracy and Terrorism.” Perspectives on Terrorism 9, no.6 (December 2015): 51-59.
One of the most important policy-relevant questions terrorism researchers have attempted to address is the relationship between democracy and terrorism. Some extol the virtues of democracy in combating or discouraging terrorism. Others claim that the vulnerabilities inherent in democracy make terrorist activity easier to carry out. This essay suggests that both schools of thought may be correct: democracies suffer disproportionately from certain manifestations of terrorism but not others. Specifically, I show that religious terrorists - those who prescribe for themselves religious aims and identities-are more likely to target authoritarian states, while non-religious terrorists tend to attack liberal democracies. The reason for this is two-fold: (i) religious terrorists are not as deterred by systemic repression as their secular counterparts and (ii) authoritarian countries breed religious extremism by radicalizing religious actors, weakening moderates and increasing support for extremism by making religion a point of cohesion against the state. States that provide religious security for their citizens, on the other hand - the common understanding that religious identity (including beliefs and practices) of groups and individuals in society is inviolable–undercut the narrative propounded by religious militants that their faith is under attack, thus dampening the impetus towards violence. Religiously secure countries also allow for the development of cross-cutting cleavages other than those rooted in religion. For this reason, secular terrorism is more likely to occur in liberal countries than in repressive ones.“Explaining Religious Terrorism: A Data-Mined Analysis.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 32, no.5 (November 2015): 487-512. (With Anthony Scime).
What is the relationship between religious liberty and faith-based terrorism? The wider litera- ture on freedom and terrorism has failed to reach a conclusive verdict: some hold that restrict- ing civil liberties is necessary to prevent acts of terrorism; others find that respecting such rights undermines support for terrorist groups, thus making terrorism less likely. This article moves the debate on liberty and terrorism forward by looking specifically at terrorism moti- vated by a religious imperative and a country’s level of religious liberty—something not attempted in previous studies. Using classification data mining, we test a unique dataset on reli- gious terrorism in order to discover the characteristics that contribute to a country experien- cing religiously motivated terrorism. The analysis finds that religious terrorism is indeed a product of a dearth of religious liberty. The study concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for policy-makers.“The Religious Freedom Peace.” International Journal of Human Rights 19, no. 3 (June 2015): 369-382.
Around the world, religion’s influence on societies and politics is increasing. Arguably religion is today a more salient feature of international politics than at any point in the last 300 years. Yet this increase in religion’s prominence comes at the precise time that religious expression has come under unprecedented assault from both state actions and communal hostilities involving religion. At the same time, religious extremism and violence have also been on the rise globally. This article makes the case that these two trends – repression of religion and resistance on the part of believers – are intertwined. Here, I survey four forms of violence: domestic religious terrorism, international religious terrorism, religious civil wars and interstate conflicts. In each case, I outline different pathways through which restrictions on religion lead to violence, marshal data derived and coded from conflict databases, and present brief case studies showing how states that hinder religious freedom are disproportionately more likely to both experience and give rise to all four forms of violence. On the other hand, religiously free countries are far less susceptible to and do not encourage religious violence. The article concludes with some recommendations for policy.“Classification Trees as Proxies.” International Journal of Business Analytics 2, no. 2 (April-June 2015): 31-45. (With Anthony Scime, Steven J. Jurek, and Gregg R. Murray).
In data analysis, when data are unattainable, it is common to select a closely related attribute as a proxy. But sometimes substitution of one attribute for another is not sufficient to satisfy the needs of the analysis. In these cases, a classification model based on one dataset can be investigated as a possible proxy for another closely related domain’s dataset. If the model’s structure is sufficient to classify data from the related domain, the model can be used as a proxy tree. Such a proxy tree also provides an alternative characterization of the related domain. Just as important, if the original model does not successfully classify the related domain data the domains are not as closely related as believed. This paper presents a methodology for evaluating datasets as proxies along with three cases that demonstrate the methodology and the three types of results.“Navigating the International Academic Job Market.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47, no. 4 (October 2014): 845-848.
Given the extraordinarily competitive academic job market in the United States, this article explores a relatively new prospect for American-trained political science PhD graduates: teaching at a foreign institution. The article proceeds in two parts. First, it discusses various benefi ts and challenges associated with working abroad. Second, it provides practical guidance for candidates considering the international job market.“Onward Christian Soldiers: American Dispensationalists, George W. Bush and the Middle East.”
Holy Land Studies 11, no. 2 (Fall 2012): 175-204.
The goal of this paper is twofold. First, it attempts to explain why dispensationalist Christians were successful at influencing American foreign policy during the administration of George W. Bush, particularly towards the Middle East. Specifically, I connect this success to their ties to Washington neo-conservatives, the personal faith of Bush himself and his links to conservative Christians, and their broad cultural appeal and grassroots strength. Second, it will present two brief case studies on the influence that dispensationalism has had on US policy towards Israel and Iraq during the administration of George W. Bush.“The U.S. Recognition of Israel: A Bureaucratic Politics Model Analysis.” Concept 23, no. 1
The bureaucratic politics model holds that each bureaucracy in the federal government has institutional beliefs it is seeking to maximize. The competition is based upon relative power and influence. I seek to examine how these competing bureaucracies helped influence U.S. foreign policy toward Israel during the Truman administration. Specifically I hope to address the following question: How does the bureaucratic politics model explain the United States decision to recognize Israel?Chapters
Chapters
“Explaining Religious Terrorism,” in Murat Haner and Melissa Sloan, (eds.), Theories of Terrorism: Contemporary Perspectives (London: Routledge), forthcoming.
“The Geopolitics of Religious Liberty,” in Luke Herrington, Alisdair McKay, and Jeffrey Haynes, (eds.), Nations Under God: The Geopolitics of Faith in the Twenty-First Century (E-international relations, 2015): 133-138.
“Religion and International Relations,” in Emilian Kavalski (ed.), Encounters with World Affairs: An Introduction to International Relations (London: Routledge, 2015): 397-414.
“Explaining Religious Violence Across Countries: An Institutional Perspective," in Kevin R. den Dulk and Elizabeth Oldmixon (eds.), Mediating Religion and Government: Political Institutions and the Policy Process (New York: Palgrave, 2014): 209-240.
“Religious Terrorism: What Remains to be Said?,” in Michael C. Desch and Daniel Philpott (eds.), Religion and International Relations: A Primer for Research (South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame, 2013): 152-162.
Public Affairs Commentary
Public Affairs Commentary
“Strongmen Don’t Fight Terrorism. They Fuel It,” Slate, May 17, 2021.
“Proof that Political Privilege is Harmful for Christianity,” Christianity Today, May 6, 2021.
“Sri Lanka’s Proposed ‘Burqa Ban’ Would Backfire,” The Diplomat, March 26, 2021.
“Swiss Vote to Ban Burqas Increases Risk of Extremism,” EUobserver, March 19, 2021.
“Biden Must End American Support for Islam’s Repression,” Berkley Forum, Georgetown University, December 11, 2020.
“On the Need for a New Pluralism in South Asia,” Religion and Global Society Blog, London School of Economics, December 4, 2020.
“Why Veil Restrictions Increase the Risk of terrorism in Europe,” EUROPP Blog, London School of Economics, December 17, 2019.
“Religious Repression and the Easter Attacks: The Hidden Connection,” The Diplomat, April 30, 2019.
“Why Championing Women’s Rights Abroad Should Be a Central Part of US Foreign Policy,” USAPP Blog, London School of Economics and Politics,” August 15, 2018.
“A Necessary Step? Examining Religious Freedom and Counterterrorism,” Cornerstone Blog, Religious Freedom Institute, June 28, 2017.
“Why Colorado Could Decide the 2016 Presidential Election,” The Denver Post, October 3, 2016.
“The Real Tragedy of Trump’s Foreign Policy,” USA Today, September 21, 2016.
“Why the U.S. Military Needs Religious Literacy,” Cornerstone Blog, Berkley Center for Religion Peace and World Affairs, Georgetown University, September 21, 2015.
“Does Religious Liberty Encourage or Curb Faith-based Terrorism?,” Cornerstone Blog, Berkley Center for Religion Peace and World Affairs, Georgetown University, April 20, 2015.
“Religious Freedom Crucial to National Security,” Philadelphia Inquirer, January 16, 2015.
“Religious Freedom: The Best Weapon Against Terrorism,” Arc of the Universe Blog, Center for Civil and Human Rights, University of Notre Dame, November 29, 2014.
“Putin’s Point of View,” The Baltimore Sun, April 7, 2014.
“Abysmal Foreign Policy Relies Far Too Much on U.S. Military Might,” The Buffalo News, December 15, 2013.
“Flaws in U.S.’s Afghan Policy,” Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, December 5, 2013.
“The Real Death of Bin Laden’s Ideology,” South Bend Tribune, June 7, 2012.
“Obama Shows by His Actions That He Wants to Be a Unifier,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, December 18,
2008.
“Bush Mindset Helps to Blur Islamic World,” Harrisburg Patriot News, March 11, 2007.
Reviews
Reviews
“Pentecostalism and Politics of Conversion in India,” Journal of Church and State 61, no.4 (Autumn 2019): 709-711.
“Model Diplomacy,” Journal of Political Science Education 13, no.2 (March 2017): 243-245.
“State Responses to Minority Religions,” Journal of Church and State 57, no.2 (Spring 2015): 364-366.
“The Future of Religious Freedom: Global Challenges,” International Journal for Religious Freedom 7, no.1/2 (2014): 220-222.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse