Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

In this paper we contextualise and test the ‘exclusion/repression-radicalisation’ hypothesis and its counterpart, the ‘inclusion-moderation’ hypothesis. We do so by studying the evolution of Muslim empowerment movements in Tanzania and Kenya, two religiously heterogeneous East African societies.

Paper long abstract:

Since the early 2000s, the study of political Islam has been increasingly guided by social movement studies. As part of this development, the combination of political exclusion and repression has been identified as a key driver of violent Islamist radicalisation. Regionally, this proposition mainly grounds in comparative research on the MENA region and Southeast Asia. By contrast, countries in sub-Saharan Africa have been relatively neglected when it comes to discussing the relevance of the ‘exclusion/repression-radicalisation’ hypothesis and its counterpart, the ‘inclusion-moderation’ hypothesis. Against this background, in this article we contextualise and test the two hypotheses by studying the evolution of Muslim empowerment movements in Tanzania and Kenya, two religiously heterogeneous East African societies characterised by persistent Muslim grievances. Drawing on the logic of a ‘most-similar’ research design, we reinforce the validity of the ‘exclusion/repression-radicalisation’ hypothesis. Furthermore, resorting to ‘within-case’ process-tracing, we show that in both cases the competitive authoritarian openness of political systems worked against Islamist radicalisation. At the same time, we find that in Tanzania and Kenya, the electoral process has not counteracted radicalisation independently of the ideological outlook of individual Islamist movements.