Violence, Terrorism and Social Upheaval: What’s really going on in Muslim countries?

“Once the institutions of sovereignty are destroyed in any state, especially one with a heterogeneous society, the odds are against any effort to build a stable alternative in the same generation.”
—Shibley Telhami, “The Return of the State”

		Patricia Rosenfield, Chair, Carnegie Scholars Program

To many Western eyes, much of the Muslim world seems on the brink of chaos. Do we understand why? Can the situation be stabilized? Do some in the Arab world share our perceptions? How do those with opposing views see the current state of affairs in Islamic societies? Such questions were tackled at a June 5th and 6th forum held at Carnegie Corporation of New York that drew together distinguished Carnegie Scholars and grantees working on issues related to Islam and the modern world. Highlighting significant work on a cluster of related themes, the colloquium’s rich conversation and exchange of ideas (some of which are summarized below) not only led to new insights, but indicated likely areas of future study as well.

Shibley Telhami, University of Maryland

Shibley Telhami, Sadat Chair for Peace and Development, University of Maryland, opened the session with a report on the results of a series of public opinion polls he has conducted over several years in six Arab countries: Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates. Intense frustration with the existing political order was highly evident in 2004, Telhami found, leading a plurality of respondents to identify themselves primarily as “Muslim” or “Arab” rather than as citizens of specific countries. Recently, however, opinions have shifted in a trend Telhami calls “the return of the state.” Due largely to developments in Iraq, a markedly greater number of Arabs have adopted a statist view of the world. Despite continued frustrations with local governments, Telhami argues, fear of anarchy has made pan-Islamic movements less popular while generating more favorable feelings toward the state.

		Rachel Bronson, Council on Foreign Relations

Arguably, nowhere is the issue of identity more pressing than in Iran, according to Shireen Hunter, visiting scholar at the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Georgetown University. There is an upsurge of Iranian nationalism, she notes, and a schism in regard to what the relationship should be between Islam and the state. Sectarianism in general is a problem, she added, and if sectarian identities become more widely accepted throughout the Muslim world, this could create a large swath of trouble from Azerbaijan to Turkey. Sectarianism is the worry of the moment, agreed Rachel Bronson, Senior Fellow and Director, Middle East Studies, Council on Foreign Relations. Is this growing problem a challenge to the state, she questioned, a result of state collapse or an instrument of the state itself?

	Laura Donohue, Stanford University

Laura Donohue, Visiting Fellow, Stanford University Center for International Security and Cooperation, wondered what type of state people want. She pointed out the double deficit that exists in countries with little regard for the rights on which democracies are built: life, liberty and property rights are consistently violated, and the state fails to provide for people at the same time. Steering the discussion toward the issue of violence, Donald Horowitz, James B. Duke Professor of Law and Political Science, Duke University, defined violent behavior as not being a single phenomenon, but a method in which determinants may differ. Collective violence is the prerogative of young men, he stressed. Young men need a pack leader, added Darius Rejali, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Reed College. Rejali studies violence, particularly the role of torture, in modern life. His research on Iran has demonstrated that the use of torture tends to rise during periods of stability. More must be understood about factors affecting the demand for and diffusion of torture methods, as well as our ability to monitor this form of violence, he believes; and he agrees, this is an understudied topic in need of qualitative, precise research.

	Bernard Haykel, New York University

Bernard Haykel, Associate Professor, Department of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, New York University, had just returned from conducting extensive research in Saudi Arabia. He pointed out that violence, jihad specifically, involves a very small percentage of the Muslim population and therefore has no real statistical significance. The 9/11 terrorists, for example, were a few individuals united by collective experience who were likely to have joined up because of a recruiter network. Jihad is a “just war” theory, he pointed out, which its proponents regard as a defensive strategy, regardless of empirical evidence.

“It has become essential for us to understand Islam as a religion, its unity, diversity and culture, ” Carnegie Corporation president Vartan Gregorian has written, “along with the roles of Muslim nations, the challenges they face, and their future place in the world. Of course, this is much easier said than done.” By supporting the development and expansion of the study of Islam within the United States, and creating opportunities for leading scholars to discuss the contours of critical issues such as the underpinnings of violence and terrorism, the Corporation aims to contribute to public debate and policymaking in this vitally important area.

		Learn more about all the Carnegie Scholars, their research and publications here: http://www.carnegie.org/sub/program/scholars.html To read “Islam, A Mosaic Not a Monolith” by Vartan Gregorian, go to http://www.carnegie.org/sub/about/ar2001.pdf
Vartan Gregorian, President, Carnegie Corporation of New York and Shireen Hunter, Georgetown University