ArticlePDF Available

Review of Religion and international security: by Lee Marsden, Cambridge, Polity, 2019,256 pp., $22.95 (paperback), ISBN: 978-0-7456-6363-0

Authors:
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cpar20
Global Change, Peace & Security
formerly Pacifica Review: Peace, Security & Global Change
ISSN: 1478-1158 (Print) 1478-1166 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cpar20
Religion and international security
Peter S. Henne
To cite this article: Peter S. Henne (2019): Religion and international security, Global Change,
Peace & Security, DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2020.1695590
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2020.1695590
Published online: 05 Dec 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
BOOK REVIEW
Religion and international security, by Lee Marsden, Cambridge, Polity, 2019, 256
pp., $22.95 (paperback), ISBN: 978-0-7456-6363-0
Lee MarsdensReligion and International Security is a well-written book on the important and
diverse impacts religion has on international security. It should be of interest to those
seeking an introductory text to this topic. Yet, Marsden gives too much away to critics of reli-
gions importance. He also could have moved the book beyond its broad discussions, providing
space to develop some interesting insights hidden inside.
In this book, Marsden hopes to go beyond approaching religion using good/bad or violent/
pacic binaries(2019, 2). Instead, he claims: that religion and its political applications are social
constructs, that the good/bad dichotomy enables states to control and use religion, that poli-
tics shapes religion as much as religion shapes politics, that what is described as religious is
often political, and religion is inherently political(2019, 2).
Marsden elaborates on these points over the next chapters. Theorizing Religion and Inter-
national Securitysummarises the reasons for religions exclusion from international relations
theory. Sacred Violence and Clashing Civilizationsrejects religion as a cause of violence,
and instead point to mimetic rivalryto explain its role in conict. Two complementary chap-
ters, Just War and Jihadand Blessed are the Peacemakerspresent the ways religion has been
used in war and peace. Faith-based initiatives and International Securitycovers religions use
by states, while Suering and Dying in the Name of Goddiscusses religious persecution.
Marsden then ties these together with a concluding chapter.
These chapters are a useful discussion of the role of religion in international security. Sacred
Violence and Clashing Civilizationsprovides a helpful overview of religious violence across
time and traditions. Faith-Based Initiatives and International Securitydiscusses understudied
topics like military chaplains. And the concluding chapter includes some noteworthy takes on
religions role in international security.
Moreover, while this book seems geared to those new to this topic, Marsden provides some
novel thoughts on religion and international security. His discussion of the limits of Habermas
work on religion in the public sphere as indicative of the well-established constructions and
norm of a religious-secular divide in the social scienceswas compelling (19). Similarly, concep-
tualising religious terrorist movement leaders as norm entrepreneurswas fascinating (189).
Both were relatively short passages, but could inspire deeper investigations.
One issue I had with the book, though, was that Marsden gives too much away to critics. As I
noted above, a few of his key arguments have to do with religion actually being political. This
alludes to a line, used often by skeptics, that what we think of as religious inuence on inter-
national relations is really just politics. For example, Marsden points to political and organis-
ational aspects of religious terrorism to question whether we should call it religious. (100
106). This is a common critique, but one that is less eective than it seems. Few scholars
argue religious politics is driven solely by religious beliefs or dogmas. In fact, several have expli-
citly discussed the ways religious belief interacts with political calculations and strategic incen-
tives; two notable ones are Monica Toft and Daniel Philpott.
1,2
And much of my own work
1
Monica Duy Toft, Getting Religion?: The Puzzling Case of Islam and Civil War,International Security 31, no. 4 (2007): 97
131.
2
Daniel Philpott, The Religious Roots of Modern International Relations,World Politics 52, no. 2 (2000): 20645.
GLOBAL CHANGE, PEACE & SECURITY
involves analysing how religion interacts with political and organisational conditions.
3,4,5,6
He
thus slips in a facile critique of the very research he hopes to trumpet.
The other issue is the books introductory nature, as much of this has been said before. The
potential connections between religion and international relations theory were discussed in
Sandal and Foxs book on this subject.
7
And the history of secularism and international relations
was discussed by Hurd, among others.
8
To be fair, Marsden cites most of these sources, but
often sticks to summarising them.
It is ne to repeat such arguments in a text meant to provide a foundation for future studies.
But this limits the books impact. It leaves little room to elaborate on the interesting theoretical
insights I noted above. Additionally, it prevents him from engaging with current scholarship.
For example, he emphasises the grand paradigmsof international relations even though
they no longer dominate the sub-elds debates. Indeed, as Nexon and I argued, scholars of
religion and international relations risk limiting themselves by trying to work within these
paradigms.
9
I applaud Marsden for his voluminous research and compelling arguments. I think this book
is worth reading for those interested in how scholars are grappling with religion and inter-
national relations. And I understand why he feels the need to reiterate foundational claims
about religion and international security, since it feels as if the rest of the eld continues to
ignore religion. But I worry that the books failure to move beyond broad claims of religions
importance gives the impression that this work is stuck on the fundamentals, rather than
being the ourishing if scattered research program it is.
Peter S. Henne
Department of Political Science, University of Vermont
peter.henne@uvm.edu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0887-2255
© 2019 Peter S. Henne
https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2020.1695590
3
Peter S. Henne, The Ancient Fire: Religion and Suicide Terrorism,Terrorism and Political Violence 24, no. 1 (2012a): 3860.
4
Peter S. Henne, The Domestic Politics of International Religious Defamation,Politics and Religion 6, no. 3 (2013).
5
Peter S. Henne, Islamic Politics, Muslim States and Counterterrorism Tensions (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017).
6
Peter S. Henne, The Two Swords: Religion-State Connections and Interstate Conict,Journal of Peace Research 49, no. 6
(2012b): 75368.
7
Nukhet Sandal and Jonathan Fox, Religion in International Relations Theory: Interactions and Possibilities (New York: Rou-
tledge, 2013).
8
Elizabeth Shakman Hurd, The Political Authority of Secularism in International Relations,European Journal of International
Relations 10, no. 2 (2004): 23562.
9
Peter S. Henne and Daniel H. Nexon, One Cheer for Classical Realism, or Towards a Power Politics of Religion,inReligion
and the Realist Tradition: From Political Theology to International Relations Theory and Back, ed. Jodok Troy (London: Rou-
tledge, 2013).
2BOOK REVIEW
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
From 2005 to 2010, the Organization for Islamic Cooperation attempted to ban the defamation of religion internationally through a series of United Nations resolutions. Although many opposed the resolutions for their potential effects on political rights, numerous non-Muslim states supported them. What explains the dynamic of this support, especially the resolutions' religious nature and significant non-Muslim backing? I argue that non-democratic states that restrict religion have an incentive to take action on contentious international issues — such as the religious defamation resolutions — to gain support from religious groups and justify their restrictive policies, even though Muslim religious defamation concerns and developing country solidarity also contributed to support. I demonstrate this through a mixed-method study, with a quantitative analysis of states' votes on the resolutions and case studies of Belarus and Pakistan. The article contributes to the study of religion and politics, as well as studies on the dynamics of United Nations voting.
Article
Full-text available
Since the end of the Cold War, a global religious resurgence has transformed many aspects of world politics, including transnational activism, human rights, and terrorism. Yet, scholars still debate whether a generalizable influence of religion on interstate disputes exists. Despite significant progress in the study of religion and world politics, then, the fundamental question remains: under what conditions does the post-Cold War era’s religious resurgence influence interstate disputes? This article points to the significance of institutional religion–state connections and ideological distance between disputants to account for the varied significance of religion in interstate conflicts. Religion influences conflict behavior when there are close ties between religion and the state and when a religious state is in a dispute with a secular state, creating ideological distance between the combatants. In such instances, the dispute is more likely to involve the use of force. The article tests this theory through a quantitative analysis of interstate disputes, using a Heckman probit model for the effects of religion–state connections on dispute severity. The tests reveal that while religious–secular dyads do not experience greater risks of conflict compared to other dyads, conflicts involving religious–secular dyads are more severe than those including other dyads, even when numerous competing explanations are accounted for. The article contributes to the study of religion and politics by highlighting the political factors that increase religious effects on international relations; it also contributes to the broader study of interstate crises by demonstrating the means through which ideas can affect interstate disputes.
Article
Full-text available
Does religion lead to greater destructiveness from suicide terrorism? And if so, how does it influence this form of political violence? Recent analyses of terrorism point to the significance of religion, but are divided as to whether religion itself matters, or certain types of religious terrorist groups are actually driving suicide terrorist violence. This article draws on social movement theory and recent work in the study of suicide terrorism to argue that religion influences the severity of suicide terrorist attacks as an ideology groups use to justify their struggle and gain public support. This effect occurs regardless of a group's goals or organizational nature. The theory is tested using a generalized estimating equation to account for multiple attacks by several groups. The study finds that the religious ideology of a group greatly increases the number of deaths from a suicide attack, even if varying group motivations and structural factors are taken into account. The article helps to clarify the effect of religion on contemporary terrorism, contributing to the study of both terrorism and religion and politics.
Article
Secularism is an important source of political authority in International Relations theory and practice. Secularists identify something called ‘religion’ and separate it from the domains of the state, the economy and science. This separation facilitates a consensus which is sustained by a powerful yet historically contingent set of beliefs, including secularism as the realization of God’s will, secularism as the natural evolution toward universal morality and secularism as a normal consequence of economic modernization. Despite these aspirations, secularism is unequipped to serve as a universal model of public life, either domestically or internationally. The creation of the category of religion and its demarcation from politics is a highly politicized decision that is not subject to a final settlement, and the pretense of a final settlement exacerbates international conflict rather than diminishing it. The religion/politics negotiation is a fluid site of authority with complex relations to the state system, the global economy, international ethics and other more heavily theorized locations of power in international relations.
One Cheer for Classical Realism, or Towards a Power Politics of Religion', in Religion and the Realist Tradition: From Political Theology to International Relations Theory and Back
  • S Peter
  • Daniel H Henne
  • Nexon
Peter S. Henne and Daniel H. Nexon, 'One Cheer for Classical Realism, or Towards a Power Politics of Religion', in Religion and the Realist Tradition: From Political Theology to International Relations Theory and Back, ed. Jodok Troy (London: Routledge, 2013).