Economic Development, Religion, and the Conditions for Domestic Terrorism

This study examines the conditions that facilitate domestic terrorism. Research on domestic terrorism has been sparse in comparison to studies that examine terrorism as a general phenomenon and transnational terrorism in particular. Most researchers find that a country’s level of economic development and religious composition do not help explain its experience with terrorism. I examine if these claims apply to terrorist activity at the domestic level to explore the extent to which domestic terrorism differs from other forms of terrorism. Specifically, I employ a negative binomial regression model with time-series, cross-sectional (TSCS) data in order to observe if economic development and religion can help explain levels of domestic terrorism while controlling for other factors, including political rights, population, education, and past domestic terrorist incidents. In line with much of the empirical evidence, I observe that poor countries are no more likely to suffer domestic terrorist attacks as wealthy ones. Since domestic terrorism can resemble civil war – a type of violence that does often emerge as a result of economic problems – this finding is especially noteworthy. Religious diversity in a country is correlated with a reduction in domestic terrorism, which stands in contrast to most research on transnational terrorism. Despite the international attention to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Muslim countries seem no more prone to domestic terrorism than others

Integrating Muslims into Western Societies: Transatlantic Policies and Perspectives

This paper examines the extent to which Muslims are integrated in Western societies by comparing their experiences in the United States and Europe. It utilizes and assesses country-level data, such as public opinion polls, figures on discrimination, and data on participation in society, in order to draw comparisons between these two regions. First, integration debates and approaches are reviewed in order to provide a framework for comparison. Second, public opinion surveys are interpreted to see how factors affecting the Muslim community differ between the United States and Europe. Third, the United States and United Kingdom - countries that both espouse multiculturalism - are used as case studies to see how Muslim integration compares over time and in relation to the general public. Findings suggest that the inclusion of Muslims in U.S. society has been more successful on the whole, while European countries continue to struggle with eliminating large differences between the Muslim community and the general public. Moreover, Muslims in the United States seem to face less discrimination than other minorities, and their experience appears to be improving over time. In contrast, discrimination against Muslims in the United Kingdom is more severe than other religious groups, and seems to be remaining constant

Moving Beyond Coercive Diplomacy: A New Policy Approach Toward Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions

This article reviews recent coercive measures taken by the United States in order to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and argues that an engagement policy is more likely to achieve success. Coercive approaches have included threatening a military strike, levying UN sanctions, and supporting EU economic offers, but they have not been successful in encouraging Iran to change its present course. Although the current administration is pursuing an engagement policy, it is more likely to achieve success if it articulates its approach with more substance and precision. This should consist of two dimensions. Firstly, the United States should encourage Russia to be at the forefront of diplomatic efforts since its strategic position to both the United States and Iran makes it an appropriate mediator on the nuclear issue. Secondly, the United States must strengthen its democracy promotion efforts directly among the Iranian people, which will reinforce the democratic movement in Iran in the long run

The People’s Hired Guns? Experimentally Testing the Inclination of Prosecutors to Abuse the Vague Definition of Crimes

Legal realists expect prosecutors to be selfish. If they get the defendant convicted, this helps them advance their careers. If the odds of winning on the main charge are low, prosecutors have a second option. They can exploit the ambiguity of legal doctrine and charge the defendant for vaguely defined crimes, like conspiracy. We model the situation as a signalling game and test it experimentally. If we have participants play the naked game, at least a minority plays the game theoretic equilibrium and use the vague rule if a signal indicates that the defendant is guilty. This becomes even slightly more frequent if a misbehaving defendant imposes harm on a third participant. By contrast if we frame the situation as a court case, almost all prosecutors take the signal at face value and knowingly run the risk of loosing in court if the signal was false. Our experimental prosecutors behave like textbook legal idealists, and follow the urge of duty