Radicalization ecosystem as a confounder of violent extremism’s drivers

Figures & data

Video Abstract

Read the transcript

Watch the video on Vimeo

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

Figure 1. Estimated number of active Salafi jihadist fighters, 1980–2018.

Source: Jones, S. G., Vallee, C., Sharb, C., Byrne, H., Newlee, D., & Harrington, N. (2018). Evolution of the Salafi jihadist threat. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/evolution-salafi-jihadist-threat.

Table 1. Public support levels for Sharia correlated with jihadist activity.

Country	SSL (%)	SRLP (%)	SRRF (%)	SRRS (%)	SRRN (%)	SCPF (%)	SCPS (%)	SCPN (%)	HJA
Kosovo	20	27	10	26	6	10	28	6	No
Albania	12	17	11	55	5	9	43	4	No
Bosnia	15	17	6	24	3	13	32	10	No
Kyrgyzstan	35	46	44	65	33	37	54	28	Weak
Turkey	12	36	14	48	9	12	35	9	Strong
Tajikistan	27	28	33	66	21	20	40	13	Weak
Kazakhstan	10	24	14	59	9	13	31	11	Weak
Azerbaijan	8	14	8	NA	NA	6	NA	NA	Weak
Russia	42	58	36	62	17	23	39	11	Strong
Malaysia	86	82	84	88	59	61	66	30	Weak
Indonesia	72	75	66	71	53	37	45	16	Strong
Afghanistan	99	82	78	78	78	81	81	81	Strong
Bangladesh	82	69	71	78	39	50	50	50	Strong
Pakistan	84	54	84	87	68	85	88	69	Strong
Egypt	74	75	94	95	91	70	70	70	Strong
Pales. Terr.	89	72	75	80	35	72	76	40	Strong
Tunisia	56	58	42	62	17	28	44	8	Strong
Iraq	91	57	73	76	43	55	56	45	Strong
Jordan	71	80	93	93	93	54	57	47	Weak
Lebanon	29	37	53	75	44	20	50	8	Strong

Source:

Data were taken from Muthuswamy, M. (2022). Does Sharia act as both a mediator and moderator of Salafi radicalism? Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 1–22.

Support Levels for Sharia as the Law of the Land (SSL), a Political Role for Religious Leaders (SRLP), Religious Leaders as Religious Judges (Combined (SRRF), Among Those Who Did (SRRS), and Did Not (SRRN) Favor Sharia as the Law of the Land), Corporal Punishment (Combined (SCPF), Among Those Who Did (SCPS), and Did Not (SCPN) Favor Sharia as the Law of the Land), and the Extent of Homegrown Jihadist Attacks (HJA).

Table 2. Confounding measures for different radical agendas in Kosovo.

Public support levels for radical agendas	No Sharia preference Q (%)	Favor Sharia P (%)	Do not Favor Sharia R (%)	Confounding Measure CM (%)	Lowest CM limit (%)
Cutting off thieves’ hands	10	28	6	367	35
Death penalty for apostates	3	11	1	1000	0
Stoning adulterers	9	25	5	400	20

Table 3. Summary of linear regression analysis parameters for the combined data in Table 1.

Linear Regression Equations	R^2	p-value	β	δβ
B = βA+α	0.83	<.001	0.76	0.08
C = βA+α	0.85	<.001	0.96	0.10
B = βC+α	0.86	<.001	0.74	0.07
Mediation Equation: B = β1A+β2C+α	0.88	.01	0.32 0.46	0.18 0.17
Moderation Equation (A*C is the interaction term): B = β1A+β2C+β3A*C+α	0.91	.02 .02 .03	0.42 0.40 0.84	0.16 0.15 0.35

Source:

The table was taken from Muthuswamy (2022). Does Sharia act as both a mediator and moderator of Salafi radicalism? Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 1–22.

β, the path coefficient (unstandardized); δβ, standard error; α, intercept; A, B, & C, public support levels for religious leaders as religious judges, the radical agenda of cutting off thieves’ hands, and Sharia as the law of the land, respectively.

Table 4. Average support levels for the radical agenda and religious judges for countries in Table 1.

	Average public support levels for Sharia (%)	Average public support levels for corporal punishment (%)	Average public support levels for religious judges (%)
Less than the majority	22.4	16.3	22.9
Less than the majority, scaled	80.8	58.8	82.6
More than the majority	80.8	59.3	76.0

Muthuswamy, M. S. (2022). Does Sharia act as both a mediator and moderator in Salafi radicalism? Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2030452

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar