Disputes over the Divine

Svensson, Isak; Nilsson, Desirée

doi:10.1177/0022002717737057

Cited by 63 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar findings have been made at the domestic level with regard to the issue of religion in armed conflict (Svensson 2007;Toft 2007;Svensson and Nilsson 2018). As noted by Svensson (2007), religious intrastate conflicts are often treated as indivisible disputes, where it is exceedingly difficult for either side to offer concessions without violating the integrity of the divine goals.…”

Section: Previous Researchsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…While dormant for much of the resurgence in civil war research (Sanin and Wood 2014), ideology has become a more common explanation for political phenomena in intrastate conflict (Svensson 2007;Polo and Gleditsch 2016;Svensson and Nilsson 2018;Hirose, Imai, and Lyall 2017). Ideologies, defined here using Sanin and Wood's (2014) definition noted earlier, are often used to identify a target group, the contentious issues under dispute, and possible policy solutions to address the contentious issues.…”

Section: Ideology In Civil Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mutually Assured Distrust: Ideology and Commitment Problems in Civil Wars

Keels

Wiegand

2020

Journal of Conflict Resolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the study of intrastate armed conflicts, many scholars rely on a bargaining model when explaining why some civil wars are intractable. Primarily, scholars posit that commitment problems represent a key barrier to settling conflicts through negotiations. Yet, some civil wars are more easily resolved than others. If commitment problems are a universal feature of civil wars, what explains why commitment problems are more salient in some conflicts as compared to others? We argue that ideological differences between combatants enhance commitment problems in civil wars. Assuming that ideology is used by combatants to generate support, concessions that violate the ideological goals of each side may alienate supporters. With extreme ideological polarization, concessions may be viewed as relative as opposed to absolute, making it difficult for either side to credibly commit to offer concessions. To test these claims, we quantitatively examine the duration and outcome of all intrastate conflicts from 1975 to 2011.

show abstract

Section: Previous Researchsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Ideology In Civil Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutually Assured Distrust: Ideology and Commitment Problems in Civil Wars

Keels

Wiegand

2020

Journal of Conflict Resolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finnbogason et al (2019) provide a conceptual framework of different sectarian dimensions of armed conflicts. Their empirical analysis, which builds upon the Religion and Armed Conflict (RELAC) dataset (Svensson and Nilsson 2018) on the religious dimensions of state-based conflict, as well as the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) on one-sided violence (Eck and Hultman 2007) and non-state conflicts (Sundberg et al 2012), demonstrates how levels of violence with different Shia-Sunni dimensions have increased over the last two decades. The authors distinguish between three dimensions of Shia-Sunni conflict: an identity-dimension, an alliance dimension, and an ideological (explicitly sectarian) dimension.…”

Section: The Increasing Levels Of Violence With Shia-sunni Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Is There So Little Shia–Sunni Dialogue? Understanding the Deficit of Intra-Muslim Dialogue and Interreligious Peacemaking

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a growth in fatalities resulting from organized violence with Shia–Sunni dimensions over the last two decades, in this study, we show, using existing data-bases on interreligious dialogue and peacemaking, that only less than two percent of the interreligious peacemaking organizations in the world are specialized in dialogue between Shias and Sunnis. Why is there so little institutionalized Shia–Sunni dialogue occurring when the need for such dialogue is evident? This study identifies and discusses this lack of institutional initiatives designed to prevent violence, manage conflicts and facilitate processes of intra-Muslim de-sectarianization. We discuss what we see as the three seemingly most obvious explanations—(1) the dismissal of the relevance of a Shia–Sunni cleavage, (2) the inappropriateness of the interreligious dialogue concept in the Muslim context, and (3) the substitution of institutional interreligious dialogue by other channels. Although we suggest that the third is the most potent explanation to pursue, we do not aim to provide a comprehensive explanation for the Shia–Sunni religious dialogue deficit. Instead, our aspiration is mainly to present and substantiate a puzzle that has not been identified or discussed in previous research. This can set an agenda for a reinvigorated research endeavor into the contemporary challenges for interreligious peacemaking.

show abstract

“…Before describing patterns, we should clarify what 'religious' armed conflicts are. It has become increasingly accepted to distinguish two socially relevant dimensions of religion for such conflicts (Fox 2004;Svensson and Nilsson 2017): Warring factions can differ over the content of religion. For instance, they can hold different views on the role of religion in the state.…”

Section: Taking Stock: Patterns and Trends In Religious Discriminatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Religious discrimination and religious armed conflict in sub-Saharan Africa: an obvious relationship?

Basedau

Schaefer-Kehnert

2018

Religion, State and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relative deprivation theory suggests that discrimination increases the risk of violence. While religious armed conflicts have been increasing in sub-Saharan Africa, effects of religious discrimination have rarely been investigated. Using the new Religion and State dataset and other sources, this contribution investigates this question in a two-level analysis. The analysis yields three main results. First, religious discrimination has been increasing over the last 15 years but in interregional comparison sub-Saharan Africa has a low level of discrimination. Second, at the crosscountry level there is a significant correlation between religious discrimination and armed conflict over religious content. Third, looking closer at four pertinent country cases (the Comoros, the Gambia, Mali and Mauritania) reveals that discrimination is probably not a direct driver of religious conflicts. High levels of discrimination are embedded in problematic state-religion relations and existing cleavages become mobilised along religious lines through transnational influences and geography.

show abstract

Disputes over the Divine

Cited by 63 publications

References 33 publications

Mutually Assured Distrust: Ideology and Commitment Problems in Civil Wars

Mutually Assured Distrust: Ideology and Commitment Problems in Civil Wars

Why Is There So Little Shia–Sunni Dialogue? Understanding the Deficit of Intra-Muslim Dialogue and Interreligious Peacemaking

Religious discrimination and religious armed conflict in sub-Saharan Africa: an obvious relationship?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About