Burstein (2018) ‘Ideological Rigidity and Flexibility of Secular and Religious Terror Groups.’
Citation: Burstein, Alon (2018) ‘Ideological Rigidity and Flexibility of Secular and Religious Terror Groups: The Case of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Hamas,’ Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 41:9, pp. 696-721.
Time Period Covered:
Theory, Research Question, Hypothesis: Burstein (2018:712): “(1) are the ideological positions of secular and religious terror groups influenced by similar opportunities and constraints? And (2) what is the difference in the flexibility of ideologies held by secular and religious terror groups?”
Relationship to Other Research/Ideas Contested/Noted Gaps:
Concepts and Definitions:
Method:
Primary/Original Data:
Argument/Conclusion: Burstein (2018): The ideologies of both Hamas and the PLO responded to similar changes in opportunities and restraints, even though the two movements had very different ideological foundations. Repression led Hamas to abandon any specific long-term goals, but changes in resources and political alignments had a more significant impact on both groups’ framing strategies. Shifts in identity, specification of enemies, and goals were much more limited in the case of Hamas than PLO.
Limitations/Flaws: Burstein (2018): [Frames the debate as considering differences between secular and religious groups, but considers only one instance of each, and both within a singular environment]
Abstract: This article explores the ideological rigidity of secular and religious terror groups. Analyzing leaflets disseminated by two Palestinian groups during the First Intifada, it examines if and how each shifted its identity and goals in response to repression, political shifts, or resource changes. The results suggest that while similar catalysts led to ideological reformation among the secular and the religious group, the extent of ideological change within the religious group was more limited. The article argues for the need to disaggregate ideological analysis further in order to identify more subtle shifts, alterations, and omissions, in the positions held by religious terror groups, moving past the exploration of if such changes exist in ideological templates and instead focusing on the extent and type of alterations the different groups allow.
Notes:
Burstein (2018:714-715): “while the ideological tenets of religiously motivated terror groups are not immune to political developments and changing circumstances, the groups may in fact be more rigid regarding the extent of deviations allowed for.”