The MENA Academy Weekly Roundup (8.28.23)

Pro-regime Iranian protests, Israeli right wing voting behavior, an Iraq war retrospective, and more.

Welcome to this week’s roundup of publications, opportunities and news from the world of Middle East Studies! We lead this week with two fascinating articles appearing in First View in the leading political science journal Comparative Political Studies, one on Iranian pro-regime mobilization and the other on how occupying land confiscated from Palestinians drives right wing Israeli voting behavior. Other intriguing new articles in this week’s roundup include a study of post-conflict reconstruction in Mosul and the framing of gender political demands by elite women in Iran and Turkey.

But first, I want to call attention to a great roundtable published in the International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies on the twenty year anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Based on a workshop held at GIGA, the roundtable explores recent Iraqi history with an eye towards centering the experience and analysis of Iraqis. It kicks off with a framing essay by Achim Rhode and Eckart Woertz, “The Past is Never Dead. It’s Not Even Past,” focusing on Iraqi collective memories of the war. The roundtable includes contributions by Balsam Mustafa on “Post-Tishreen Online Feminism”; Michael Brill on Saddam Hussein’s archives and memories of the Baathist era; David Jordan on religion and politics, with a look at the role of Sufi orders; Alissa Walter and Ali Taher Al-Hamood with a really fascinating comparative study of memory in four neighborhoods in Baghdad; Hawraa al-Hassan on prison writing and memories of the Ba’ath; and Amir Taha on memories of the 1991 uprisings. This is a really rich and well-conceived collection, which you should definitely check out!

Now, to the articles of the week:

Saber Khani and Mohammad Ali Kadivar, “Sanctuaries or Battlegrounds? State Penetration in Places of Worship, University Campuses, and State Bureaucracy for Pro-Government Mobilization: Evidence from Iran, 2015-19,” Comparative Political Studies (2023). Abstract: What factors shape different levels of pro-government mobilization in authoritarian regimes? The existing literature has considered the threat of anti-regime protests as the primary driver of pro-government mobilization. While we confirm this finding in the literature, we argue that the regime’s organizational infrastructure significantly contributes to pro-regime mobilization. We identify places of worship, university campuses, and state bureaucracy as three main sites where states could extend their organizations for pro-government mobilization. Previous scholarship has considered universities and places of worship as free spaces for oppositional activities, but we argue that states might try to penetrate these sectors to extend their organizational reach. The statistical analyses of our original data on pro-government mobilization in Iran from 2015 to 2019 at the district level (n = 429) provide robust support for this argument.

Amiad Haram Diman and Dan Miowdownik, “Bloody Pasts and Current Politics: The Political Legacies of Violent Resettlement,” Comparative Political Studies (2023). Abstract: How does living on property taken from others affect voting behavior? Recent studies have argued that benefiting from historical violence leads to support for the far right. We extend this fledgling literature with new theoretical insights and original data from Israel, using case-specific variation in the nature of displacement to uncover heterogeneous treatment effects. Exploiting the coercion during the settlement of Jewish migrants on rural lands following the 1948 war, we show that living on lands taken from Palestinians consistently led to hawkish right-wing voting—even 70 years after the violence occurred and despite the widespread rejection of guilt over that violence. We also show that exposure to the ruins of the displaced villages increased right-wing voting and that the impact of intergroup contact is divergent: it decreased intolerant voting in most villages but increased it among Jewish communities that reside on violently taken land. Our results are robust when matching is used to account for several controls and spatiotemporal dependencies.

Craig Larkin and Inna Rudolf, “Memory, Violence, and Post-Conflict Reconstruction: Rebuiling and Reimagining Mosul,” Peacebuilding (2023). Abstract: How can and should post-conflict cities be rebuilt after traumatic violence and forced displacement? Five years following Mosul’s liberation from the extremist reign of Islamic State, controversy surrounds attempts to revive the city’s rich cultural heritage and pluralistic past. This paper examines Mosul’s ongoing reconstruction initiatives, shaped by competing memory narratives and actors (local and international) vying for the right to reimagine the city. It explores how violent urbicide has ruptured Moslawi's identity and belonging, contributing to fragmented memories of the past and diverging aspirations for the future. Drawing on diverse perspectives from inhabitants within the city and its periphery, the article suggests that urban recovery must balance heritage restoration as a means to reviving traditions of co-existence while still acknowledging the traumatic memories of destruction and erasure. The opportunities for ‘building back better’ must navigate fine margins between local sensibilities, international support and the illusive search for social recovery.

Mona Tajali, ““Gender Justice” versus “Gender Equality”: Elite Women’s Framing for Political Representation in Iran and Turkey,” Journal of Middle Eastern Women’s Studies (2023). Abstract: Much of the literature on women’s-rights activism in the Muslim world presents such activism as employing discourses either of egalitarianism (secular) or of complementarianism (religious). This article analyzes the recent framing of demands for women’s right to political office by elite Islamic women in Iran and Turkey in terms outside this dichotomy. Drawing on data gathered from personal interviews as well as on careful study of public statements and publications by elite women, or those backed by state institutions, this article demonstrates the inadequacy of understanding women’s activism in Muslim contexts as employing either an egalitarian or a complementarian approach by highlighting a more nuanced conceptualization of women’s-rights framing and organizing in accordance with shifting contexts and political ideologies. Specifically, it shows how Islamic women’s-rights activists who are closely affiliated with their governments at times strategically adopt a “gender justice” framing, as opposed to “gender equality,” to appeal to more conservative sectors of their society. This strategy can have important policy implications and lead to shifts in political discourse about women and politics. However, elite women’s backing from and affiliation with conservative ruling elites can lead some groups, particularly secular feminists, to perceive their use of gender justice discourse differently and to be dismissive of their efforts.

That’s it for this week — see you at APSA (outside of strike venues) if you’re making the trip!