Global Gradations of Secularism: The Consociational, Communal and Coercive Paradigms

Abstract

In engaging with heterogeneous societies, states have oscillated between three modes of dealing with social diversity: accommodation, segregation and eradication. Accordingly, this article cross-examines three typologies of secularism: Consociational secularism (Lebanon), communal partition (India and Pakistan) and coercive secularization (China and Turkey). The article argues that while each state shared the challenge of establishing state sovereignty in pluralistic societies, the central authorities' attempt to impose homogenization varied according to the strength of state institutions, the hold of communal ideologies and the degree of disparate socio-economic interests. The legitimacy of regimes hinged on the perceived impartiality of the state in meeting the demands of diverse socio-economic and ethno-religious constituencies. The article argues that the potential for fragmentation was particularly high when socio-economic fault-lines overlapped with, and reinforced ethno-religious fissures. When sectarian solidarity trumped loyalty to the state, partition along communal lines unfolded within the caldron of civil war, as was the case in Lebanon in 1975 and the Indian Subcontinent in 1947 and 1971. By contrast, the authoritarian states of Maoist China and Kemalist Turkey could enforce, albeit violently and at great human cost, a rigidly secular, cultural homogenization in part because they were perceived to be lessening socioeconomic inequalities despite their assault on traditional identities. In all cases, and regardless of whether or not a dominant majority existed or not, sovereignty and state legitimacy was ultimately predicated not so much on the absence or presence of democracy or diversity, but on the provision of a critical measure of justice for all citizens irrespective of origin or identity. 4) That sectarian solidarities are by no means a sufficient guarantee of unity became evident during the partition of Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh in 1971.

Who Benefits from Consociationalism? Religious Disparities in Lebanon’s Political System

“…Several political developments in post-war Lebanon have been largely beneficial to Sunni and Shia political interests, while Christians have lost a measurable amount of political influence, and the Druze have struggled with a sense of vulnerability (El-Husseini 2012;Haddad 2002;Harris 2012). Lebanon's Maronite population has "lost their grip on Lebanon" and "by the 1990s, there was a recognizable Christian collective with a common sense of frustration and disempowerment" (Harris 2012, p. 233).…”

“…In accordance with the Taif Agreement, which was responsible for ending the Civil War, a significant amount of political power was transferred from the office of the President (a Maronite Catholic) to the office of the Prime Minister (a Sunni Muslim). The Shia led parliament was then delegated official control over most government activities (El-Husseini 2012). Christians lost their statistical majority status, and accordingly, their majority status in the parliament was replaced with a one-to-one split with Muslim parliamentarians (see Table 1).…”

“…While all militias were required to disarm at the end of the Civil War, Hezbollah, which currently courts the majority of Lebanon's Shia voters, was granted an exception (El-Husseini 2012). Hezbollah and the Amal movement, another Shia political party, have since made significant gains in the political sphere (Hamzeh 1994;Harik 1996;Harris 2012).…”

“…Hezbollah and the Syrian government have been accusing of assassinating Prime Minister Hariri, who represented the majority of Sunni citizens and had campaigned across sectarian lines with relative success. Hezbollah actively tried to block investigations into the assassination of Hariri, providing a sense of injustice among his supporters and exacerbating Sunni-Shia tensions (Bahout 2016;Cammett and Issar 2010;El-Husseini 2012;Harris 2012). …”

“…Specifically, this structure ensures that Christians and Muslims will occupy seats in the nation's parliament relative to their demographic presence and requires the President of Lebanon to be a Maronite Catholic, the Speaker of the Parliament a Shia Muslim, and their Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim (El-Husseini 2012;Salamey 2013). Other ministerial posts and political offices are also allocated according to religious confession in an attempt to maintain peace and equality.…”