Expanding the Islamist Case Universe: Three Ways of Bringing in the Shia

• In Event: Islamism and Islamist Politics in the Middle East

Abstract

One of the fundamental questions of social science concerns the question of scope conditions. A field of study can grow around a set of empirical puzzles, making generalized assertions without reflecting on whether the field covers all possible cases. This becomes particularly acute when socio-political changes have led to a diversification of cases. This paper takes the case of Islamism studies, which has been dominated by studies of Sunni Islamists, and offers a systemic reflection on when, why and how expanding the case universe to include Shia can strengthen and deepen Islamism studies.

For half a century, Islamism has figured prominently on the research agenda on Middle East politics. In one way, scholarship on Islamism has become increasingly sophisticated, nuanced, and attentive to the diversity of the Islamist scene. This can also be recognized in the post-Arab uprisings debate. In addition to countless studies about how various Islamist movements have influenced and themselves been affected by the last decade’s events, it is also possible to identify a more self-reflexive current in scholarship on whether the recent changes of the Islamist scene demands a fundamental rethinking of past assumptions about Islamism.

Within this more self-reflexive current, there is an emerging focus on a blind spot in the study of Islamism. For, on closer inspection, large parts of the Islamism debate turn out to be predominantly Sunni-centric in the sense that broader claims about Islamism are mainly drawn from studies of Sunni Islamists. Shia Islamists, in various variants, have received far less attention and the much smaller research community focusing on Shia Islamists has largely run on parallel tracks, with little engagement with core debates among those studying Islamism

The recent decade’s exacerbation of an already emerging “sectarianization” of regional politics and the proliferation of Shia Islamist groups in the Middle East has made this bias in Islamism research increasingly untenable. There has been an emerging attention to this omission reflected in calls for bringing the Shia into the broader Islamism debate. So far, however, there has been no systematic reflection on how the inclusion of research on Shia Islamists can not only enrich our understanding of Shia Islamism, but also strengthen the broader field’s theoretical and empirical basis and deepen our overall understanding of Islamism.

In order to remedy this gap, this paper provides the first steps toward a more systematic reflection on why the case universe should be expanded, how it should be expanded, and what outcomes should be envisaged. In the first of three parts, the paper shows why the field of Islamist studies, despite having become increasingly multifaceted, can be said to be relatively narrow, and how “the other Islamists” and the Shia/Sunni distinction have become more visible over the past decade and increasingly difficult to neglect. Against this background, the second part of the paper turns to the question of how a broadened case universe can enrich a field of study. By taking cues from experiences from other fields that have witnessed an expansion of their case universe, e.g. democratization studies, the paper shows how an agreement in principle to expand the case universe does not necessarily translate into a consensus on why and how a greater exchange of insights on Sunni and Shia Islamism can contribute to the broader Islamism debate. Based on a novel typology for the rationales and modi operandi for case extension, the third part of the paper outlines three different ideal-typical ways inclusion of Shia Islamists can enrich the field of Islamism studies. In addition to offering new empirical case material to test classic hypotheses and settle well-known disputes (theory-testing operating at a first order level), the paper shows that a broadening of the case universe and a greater dialogue between the research communities around Sunni and Shia Islamism can also generate completely novel research puzzles or provide new “twists” to well-known theoretical disputes (theory-challenging at a second order level). Finally, the paper also points to how a case extension can give rise to more meta-theoretical (self)reflections on basic assumptions regarding the study of Islamism as such (meta-theorising at a third order level).

By proposing this new typology for possible outcomes of a case universe extension, the paper does not only offer new insights into the study of Islamism and the current efforts of bringing in Shia Islamists. It does moreover contribute to the broader and more general debate in the social sciences on scope conditions and when, why and how an extension of a case universe can enrich a field of study.

Authors

• Morten Valbjorn, Aarhus University

• Jeroen Gunning, King’s College London