INAF U 8797: RESEARCH SEMINAR ON RELIGION, RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS [FALL 2007]
J. Paul Martin, jpm2@columbia.edu
Day/ Time: Thursday 4-6
[Outline as of July 15, 2007]
Purpose
The aim of this inter-disciplinary seminar is to produce research that examines the role of religions in international affairs, using international human rights as a normative perspective. The Fall 2007 semester will focus on the impact of the US International Religious Freedom Act 1998 (IRFA) on international and domestic affairs, on religious freedom around the world, and on the more general roles that international religious agencies play. In their individual research papers may examine other aspects of the role that religions play in international affairs, with attention also to the US and other states’ domestic actors and priorities, including the ways in which world religions interact with one another and influence their own and others’ agenda. Such topics will include poverty alleviation, humanitarian and missionary activities and inter-religious dialogue.
Background
In a world where the changes brought, and continuing to be brought, about by globalization are multi-faceted, the US International Religious Freedom Act has provided the US Government with major new tools for foreign affairs. It has also highlighted the international roles that religions play. The US Act brought into existence new offices, a new ambassadorial post, a very active Commission, a research unit, annual State Department reports on religious freedom around the world, and the power to use a range of sanctions that distinguish between serious and minor state-violators. These institutions have functioned for the past eight years, but there has been no formal assessment of the net outcome. Measuring such outcomes, as well as other ways in which religions have a major impact of international affairs, is complex task on account of the variety of potential criteria and the domestic and international stakeholders, ranging from US missionary organizations to poor foreign governments dependent on international trade and aid. Simultaneously since 2001, the foreign policies of most Western governments have evolved under pressure from such concerns as the war on terrorism, development aid and the promotion of democracy, not to mention the global commercial activities of their businesses. Equally challenging in any assessment is accounting for, and responding to, the continuing rise of militant Islam and the increased intermingling of religions across the globe. Religious institutions and beliefs and related issues, including religious freedom, also continue to be mobilized to support other political and social agenda. While most countries accept in principle an ethical obligation to tolerate believers from other traditions, the practices and laws in many countries leave many lacunae with respect to freedom of religion and belief. The course will wrestle with these issues.
The aim of the course in 2007 is to produce original research and case studies that identify and examine the ways in which IRFA and its institutional ramifications have had an impact in international affairs. The course will use as primary case studies Egypt, North and South Korea, Philippines, Spain, Tibet, and Turkey. With the exception of N. Korea and Tibet, these cases are more in the middle range and illustrate a wide range of local contexts.
Methodology
The first part of the course (sessions 1-5) will be devoted to reviewing the history and to identifying the major themes and domestic actors (legislators, religious organizations and other advocacy groups), noting changes before and since the Act. The second part will be devoted to multi-disciplinary research and case studies that assess the international impact of the Act. Case studies will seek to evaluate the effectiveness of actions (such as reporting, informal diplomacy as well as actual sanctions) threatened or taken under the Act. . While the focus will be on freedom of religion and belief, the research will look broadly at influential religious figures in international affairs during the period (1998-2006), such as the role of the Pope or the Dalai Lama. Equally important in the research will be situating and evaluating initiatives under IRFA in comparison with other US policy initiatives, notably the promotion of democracy, human rights and economic development, as well as evaluating the ways in which religions have responded to each other’s ideas and practices with respect to religious freedom and to peaceful inter-religious relations as a whole. Future courses with different foci will follow the same pattern, looking at rights and the domestic pressures that result in international policies reflecting or impacting on religious factors.
International human rights will be used to serve as common template to measure the ways in which individual countries and religions define religious freedom, tolerance, and programs in social justice. This is not to privilege international human rights regime as superior to religion or religious norms or US law, but merely to make use of it as a set of common standards that enjoy substantial international and national endorsement. The course also does not privilege western views of religious freedom and democracy. Quite contrary, one of the goals will be to identify and evaluate other approaches not based on secularism and separation of church and state. Interviews will be an important research tool as many of the key actors (legislators, NGO and religious leaders, current and former Commissioners etc.) are still active.
Pre-requisites
Prospective students must have completed one or more graduate courses that show a mastery of either religious studies, human rights studies or foreign policy. In addition they should be familiar with the ideas of scholars such as Benedict Anderson, Ernest Gellner, Samuel Huntington and David Little. Students considering theses or dissertations in this field are especially welcome.
Course Requirements
Participation in all classes; consistent evidence of having digested the weekly readings; integration of readings into presentations of outlines and final research paper; insightfulness of comments on other students’ writings; and writing that engages analytical and /or policy literature. (40% grade)
Final research paper, including showing attention having been given to problems identified by the class and the instructor in the classroom presentation. (60%)
Required Books
Stahnke, Tad & Martin, J. Paul, Eds. (1998), Religion and Human Rights: Basic Documents
(available $10,00 Center for the Study of Human Rights, 1108 Intl. Affairs)
Reader (Village Copier and cost to be determined) Please note that this selection of texts is illustrative of the issues to be examined. They are not chosen because of their accuracy or the real life causes they advocate.
Course Outline
Asterisk indicates available in reader
Thursday 6, September: Introduction: Religion and International Human Rights
The religious influences on the modern international human rights movement. The human rights regime. How are the political, social and theological contexts changing? What is the geography of religious discrimination and persecution? How is social change effected? What is the role of international norms and institutions? Is religion a privileged right? Does freedom of religion and belief add to the other rights (assembly, freedom of expression etc.) outlined in the UDHR?
What is the relationship between freedom of religion and belief and other basic freedoms? Does the international rights regime endorse a particular view of religion?
Required:
*Martin, J. Paul (2005) “The Three Monotheistic World Religions and International Human Rights,” Journal of Social Issues, 61,4
Arcot Khrishnaswami, (1960) “Study of Discrimination in the Matter of Religious Rights and Practices” in Martin and Stahnke pp. 2-55
UN Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion or Belief in Martin and Stahnke pp. 102-4
*Peter Danchin (2002), “An Introduction,” Religion, Religious Minorities and Human Rights, Peter Danchin et al. Eds., pp. 1-29
Recommended:
Universal Declaration on Human Rights, in Stahnke and Martin p. 8
General Comments #8 and #23 in Stahnke and Martin, pp.89 & 97
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in Stahnke and Martin
Jean Cohen (2005) “Whose Sovereignty?” in Christian Barry and Thomas W. Pogge, Global Institutions and Responsibilities, Oxford, Blackwell
Jose Casanova (1994), Evangelical Protestantism: From Civil Religion to Fundamentalist Sect to New Christian Right, in Public Religions in the Modern World, University of Chicago Press
Willy Fautre (2006), “Non-State Actors and Religious Freedom in Europe,” in George Andreopoulos, George et al., (2006) Eds, Non-State Actors in the Human Rights Universe, Bloomfield Conn., Kumarian Press,
Thursday 13 September: Freedom of Religion and Belief in different traditions
The concept of freedom of religion and belief takes shape in other traditions, in history and in the contemporary world. How do these various patterns affect religion as a factor of personal, group or national identity? How essential is religious freedom to a true democracy?
Required:
*Alfred Stepan (2001) ‘The World’s Religious Systems and Democracy: Crafting the “Twin Tolerations”’ in Arguing Comparative Politics, Oxford U. Press pp.213-253
*Jose Casanova, “Spain: From State Church to Disestablishment” in Public Religions in the Modern World
The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990) in Stahnke and Martin pp. 185-189
*Masao Abe, (1986) “Religious Tolerance and Human Rights: A Buddhist Perspective” in Swidler pp. 193-211
Abdullahi an Naiem, Chapter I, in The Future of Shariah, “Secularism from an Islamic Perspective” to be found at
http://www.law.emory.edu/cms/site/fileadmin/faculty_documents/abduh/English_Ch3.doc
Recommended:
Jonathan Fox (2000), Religious Causes of Discrimination against Ethno-religious Minorities, International Studies Quarterly, 44, 423-450
Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naiem, (1996) “Islamic Foundations of Human Rights” in Religious Human Rights in Global Perspective, Vol. II, John Witte and Johan van der Vyver Eds., Martinus Nijhoff
Muhammad Sharid Chaudry (1995), Non-Muslim Minorities in an Islamic State, Lahore, Pakistan, Impact Publications International
Thursday 20 September: Religious Freedom in Domestic and International Law and Practice
There is only a very limited consensus on the idea of religious freedom among the international community. What progress has been made in recent years? Is it an impasse? How different are national systems protecting religious freedom? Do some privilege religion and if so how? At whose expense? What are the current goals of the international community with respect to religious freedom? Are there was it can be circumscribed, such as by banning forms of proselytization so that a greater degree of international consensus can be achieved? Does the International system still reflect its Western/Christian roots?
Required:
*Johan D. van der Vyver (1996), “Introduction: Legal Dimensions of Religious Human Rights: Constitutional texts” in Witte and van der Vyver Vol I, ppxi-xlvii
*W. Cole Durham jr.(1996), “Perspectives on Religious Liberty: A Comparative Framework.” In Witte and van der Vyver, Vol. I, pp.1-44.
*Tad Stahnke and Robert C. Blitt, (2005) “The Religion-State Relationship and the Right to Freedom of Religion and Belief: A Comparative textual Analysis of the Constitutions of Predominantly Muslim Countries,” Georgetown Journal of International Law, 36,4, Summer pp. 947-1031
Tad Stahnke, (1999) “Proselytism and the Freedom the Change Religion in International Human Rights Law, Brigham Young University Law Review, 1 pp. (available free from instructor)
Recommended:
General Comment #22, in Stahnke and Martin, p.92
The Example of Spain in Stahnke and Martin pp. 235-254
Jeffrey Haynes (2205), “Religion and International Relations after ‘9/11,’” Democratization, 12,3, June, pp. 398-413
Muhamad Mugraby, “Rule of Law and Free Speech in securing Global Peace and Democracy,” Unpublished Speech, Montreal October 12, 2006
Thursday 27 September: Freedom of Religion in IRFA and its Implementation since 1998
The origin of IRFA; the goals of its domestic supporters; how IRFA compares with international standards of religious freedom. Related and competing interests in US foreign policy. Changes in the implementation of IRFA since 9/11; Perspectives and responses of overseas constituencies. Respective places of multilateral, bi-lateral and unilateral actions.
Required
- Jude Howell and Jenny Pearce (2001), Civil Society and Development, Lynne Reiner, Colorado, Ch. V. (pp.89-122) [While not on religion, its concepts will be used to frame the debate in class and the later one on external actors.]
- Rosalind I.J. Hackett, Mark Silk and Dennis Hoover Eds. (2000) Religious Persecution as a US Policy Issue, Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life pp. 7-17
- Laurie Cozad, (2005)“The US Imposition of Religious Freedom: The International Religious Freedom Act and India” India Review, 4,1, pp. 59-83
- Matthew Fore, (2002) “Shall Weigh Your God and You: “Assessing the Imperialistic Implications of the International Religious Freedom Act in Muslim Countries.” Duke Law Journal 52, pp. 423-454
- Eugenia Relano Pastor (2005) “The Flawed Implementation of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998: A European Perspective,” Brigham Young U. Law Review
Recommended:
National Endowment for Democracy (2006), The Backlash against Democracy Assistance, available at www.ned.org
“Global Suffering: Re-thinking the Christian Response” Faith and International Affairs, 2,3 Winter 2004-5, Numerous articles
Elizabeth Castelli (2005), “Praying for the Persecuted Church: US Christian Activism in the Global Arena, Journal of Human Rights, 4:321-351
Abdeslam M. Maghrani, (2006) “American Foreign Policy and Islamic Revival,” United States Institute of Peace, Special Report, (July), (www.usip.org)
Last four Annual Reports of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom: notably those on China (Tibet), Turkey, Egypt, North and South Korea. (www.uscirf.gov)
Jeffrey Haynes (2005), “Religion and International Relations After 9/11,” Democratization, 12,3 pp.398-413
Thursday 4 October: Monitoring and Reporting on Freedom of Religion and Belief:
The Major Issues and Patterns visible in the annual State Department Reports. How they compare with other major Human Rights Reports. (Countries of focus: China (Tibet), Turkey, Egypt, North and South Korea, Philippines and Spain.) Impact of special interest groups. Have some of these US Government reports, such the special reports of the Commission, been effective outside the spheres of religion and religious freedom? E.g. the report on immigration.
Required:
The 1999 and the last annual (2006) reports by the State Department on the above countries. See: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2005/
Annual Report, U.S. Commission on Religious Freedom found at http://www.uscirf.gov/countries/publications/currentreport/2006annualRpt.pdf#page=1
US Commission on International Religious Freedom (2005) Thank You, Father Kim Il Sung; Eyewitness Accounts of Severe Violations of Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion in North Korea to be found at http://www.law.emory.edu/cms/site/fileadmin/faculty_documents/abduh/English_Ch3.doc
*Yong-Bock Kim (1986) “Religious Freedom in Korea” in Swidler, pp.95-107
*Center for Religious Freedom, Freedom House (2004) Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology, pp. 19-38
Recommended
Kevin Boyle and Juliet Sheen, (1997) Freedom of Religion and Belief, A World Report, Routledge
Thursday 11 October: Collecting Oral Data. Guest Lecturer:
Thursday October 18: Student Presentations
Review of the Outlines and Bibliographies of proposed research papers.
(Texts to be on Courseworks three days before class)
Thursday October 26: Case Study I: National and Religious Identity: Religion and Politics in China, Guest Lecturer:
China has nationwide policies that restrict religion and religious observance. These have been especially detrimental to the traditional life and culture of Tibet. Are the beliefs of Tibetan Buddhism especially problematical for Beijing? What are, and how effective have been, the strategies of the international supporters, including the US Dept of State, of freedom for Tibet?
Required:
Basic International Documents on the Rights of Religious Minorities in Stahnke and Martin pp. 162-181
*Eric Kolodner (1994), “Religious Rights in China: A Comparison of International Human Rights Law and Chinese Domestic Legislation” Human Rights Quarterly, 16, pp. 455-490
*Human Rights Watch (1997) China: State Control of Religion, pp. 1-49
*Ashlid Kolas (1996), “Tibetan Nationalism: The Politics of Religion,” Journal of Peace Research, 33,1, Feb. pp. 51-66
*Jude Howell and Jenny Pearce (2001), Civil Society and Development, “The Case of China”
pp. 123-146
Recommended:
Study on the Rights of Persons belonging to Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, Francesco Capotorti, (1991) UN
Thursday November 1: Case Study II: National and Religious Identity: Religion and Politics in Turkey.
Required:
Declaration on Religious Freedom: Dignitatis Humanae, (1965), Vatican Council, pp. 210-220 in Martin and Stahnke
*Zedenka Kodelja and Terrice Bassler, (2004), Religious Schooling in Open Society, Open Society Institute (Selections)
*Jonathan Fox, (2000) “Religious Causes of Discrimination against Ethno-Religious Minorities,” International Studies Quarterly, 44, pp.423-450
Recommended:
Johan van der Vyver, (2002) “Self-Determination and the Rights to Secession of Religious Minorities under International Law” in Danchin and Cole
Pamuk, Orhan, Snow
Thursday November 8: Religion and Responses to Violence
How and when does tolerance degenerate into violence? Were there signs of conflict, for example, among Christians and Muslims in the Former Yugoslavia. How can society and religions in particular respond to groups and individuals who see their violence as divinely sanctioned? What are the options under IRFA?
Required:
*Mark Juergensmeyer, Terror in the Mind of God, University of California Press, pp. 3-15, 216-243.
*Andreas Hasanclever and Volker Rittberger, (2000)“Does Religion make a difference? Theoretical approaches to the impact of faith on political conflict,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 29,3, pp. 641-674.
*Miklos Biro et al (2004), “Attitudes toward Justice and social reconstruction in Bosnia and Herzogovina and Croatia” in Eric Stover and Harvey M. Weinstein, My Neighbor, My Enemy,
Cambridge U. Press
*Richard V. Wagner, (2005) “Terrorism: A Peace Psychological Analysis” in Journal of Social Issues, 62, 155-171
Recommended:
Colm Campbell (2005), “’Wars on Terror and Vicarious Hegemons: The UK, International Law and the Northern Ireland Conflict” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 54, April, pp. 321-356.
Jessica E. Stern (2003) Terror in the Name of God: Why Religious Militants Kill, New York: Ecco, Chapter 10
Howell and Pearce (2001), “Civil Society Discourses and the Guatemalan Peace Process” pp.147-175.
Thursday November 15: Case Study #3 The Roles of External Agents in Promoting Religious Freedom and Democracy: US and other Actors, notably with respect to Egypt.
What are the roles, symbolic and otherwise that Copts played and play today in Egyptian political life? What is their reaction to IRFA? How do Copts in Egypt see the role of Copts and Muslims in the US? How do religious factors impinge on Egyptian-US relations? How responsive have the various entities established by IRFA been to US domestic constituencies? Have these constituencies found IRFA a useful tool?
Required:
*Thomas Philipp (1988), “Nation State and Religious Community in Egypt: The Continuing Debate” Die Welt des Islams, New Ser., Bd. 28,14 pp 379-391
*Peter Danchin (2002), “External Monitoring and the International Protection of Freedom of Religion and Belief.” In Danchin and Cole.
*Abdullahi Ahmed an-Naiem (1986), “Religious Freedom in Egypt: Under the Shadow of the Islamic Dhimma System” in Swidler pp. 43-60
*Institute for Religious Minorities in the Islamic World (1993), Church under Siege: Christians in Egypt, John Eibner, Ed.
Recommended:
Paul D. Sedra (2002), “Modernity’s Mission: Evangelical Efforts to discipline 19th Century Coptic Community,” in Reeva Spector Simon and Eleanor H. Tehijirian, Eds., Altruism and Imperialism, Middle East Institute, Columbia University
Ibrahim, Saad Eddin (1996), The Copts of Egypt, London, Minority Rights Group
Hasan, S.S. (2203), Christians versus Muslims in Modern Egypt, Oxford, Oxford University Press
Philipp Thomas (1988), “Nation State and Religious Community in Egypt: The Continuing Debate.” Die Welt das Islams pp. 379-391
Edward Wakin (1963), A Lonely Minority: The Modern Story of Egypt’s Copts, New York, William Morrow and Co.
Woodberry, Robert D. “Reclaiming the M-word; The Legacy of Missions in NonWestern Societies,” The Review of Faith and International Affairs, 4, Spring, 2006
Laurie Cozad (2005), “The United States’ Imposition of Religious Freedom: The International Religious Freedom Act and India.” India Review 4,1, pp. 59-83.
Piccone, Ted and Youngs, Richard, Eds. (2006) Strategies for Democratic Change; Assessing the Global Response, Washington, Democratic Coalition Project, Ch. #3, pp 77-95
Thursday November 29: Religion and Gender Discrimination: Religion and International Norm-setting with respect to women in the Muslim World.
Required:
Donna J. Sullivan (1992), “Gender Equality and Religious Freedom: Toward a Framework for Conflict Resolution,” NYU Journal of International Law and Politics, 24, pp.795-856
*Ayse Saktanber (2002), Living Islam: Women, Religion and the Politicization of Culture in Turkey, London, Tauris pp 1-29, 213-239.
*Soon-Yong Pak (2004), “Articulating the Boundary between Secularism and Islamism: The Iman-Hatip Schools of Turkey,” Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 35,3, pp. 324-344.
*Anna J. Secor (2002), “The Veil and Urban Space in Istanbul: women’s dress, mobility and Islamic Knowledge, Gender, Place and Culture, 9,1 pp. 5-22.
Recommended:
Nussbaum, Martha (2000), Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach, Chapter 3 pp167-240
Cheryl de la Rey and Susan McKay (2006), “Peacebuilding as a Gendered Process” in Journal of Social Issues, 62, 141-153
Miriam Cooke and Bruce B. Lawrence (1996), “Muslim Women Between Human Rights and Islamic Laws”, in I. Bloom et al.
Thursday December 6: Student Presentations
Texts to be on Courseworks three days before presentation
Optional:
Roundtable with external experts to identify key factors that have influenced the implementation of IRFA.
“Religious concepts of cosmic war are ultimately beyond historical control, even though they are defined as this-worldly struggles. A satanic enemy cannot be transformed; it can only be destroyed.” Mark Jeurgensmeyer p. 217.
How does IRFA interface with images of martyrdom, satanization and cosmic war? But also with a war on terror, the promotion of the rule of law and economic aid and development?
General Bibliography
Baderin, Mashood A (2003), International Human Rights and Islamic Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press
Bloom, Irene, Martin, J. Paul, Proudfoot, Wayne L., Eds. (1996). Religious Diversity and Human Rights, Columbia University Press,
Boyle, Kevin & Sheen, Juliet, (1997) Freedom of Religion and Belief, A World Report, London: Routledge
Casanova, Jose Public Religions in the Modern World, University of Chicago Press
Danchin, Peter & Cole, Elizabeth A. (2002), Protecting the Human Rights of Religious Minorities in Eastern Europe, Columbia University Press
Fox, Jonathan (2001) “Religion as an Overlooked Element of International Relations,” International Studies Review, 3,3
Gagnon, V. P. Jr., (2004) The Myth of Ethnic War: Serbia and Croatia in the 1990’s, Ithaca, Cornell U. Press
Howell, Jude and Pearce, Jenny (2001), Civil Society and Development, Colorado: Lynne Reiner.
Human Rights Watch (2004), Creating Enemies of the State: Religious Persecution in Uzbekistan
Human Rights Watch (1997) China: State Control of Religion
Johnston, Douglas, & Sampson, Cynthia, (1994) Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft.
Kepel, Gilles (2004) The War for Muslim Minds. Islam and the West, London, Harvard University Press
Martin, J. Paul (2005) “The Three Monotheistic World Religions and International Human Rights,” Journal of Social Issues, 61,4
Marty, Martin E. & Appleby, R. Scott (1995) Fundamentalisms Comprehended
Norris, Pippa and Inglehart, Ronald (2004) Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide. NY: Cambridge University Press
Swidler, Leonard, Ed., (1986) Religious Liberty and Human Rights in Nations and in Religions, Ecumenical Press, Temple University
Stahnke, Tad & Martin, J. Paul, Eds. (1998), Religion and Human Rights: Basic Documents
Witte, John, & van der Vyver, Johan, Eds. (1996), Religious Human Rights in Global Perspective, Vols. I and II
