Jillian Schwedler

Bio: Jillian Schwedler is an academic researcher from Hunter College. The author has contributed to research in topics: Transparency (behavior) & Politics. The author has an hindex of 20, co-authored 36 publications receiving 1133 citations. Previous affiliations of Jillian Schwedler include City University of New York & University of Maryland, College Park.

Faith in Moderation: Islamist Parties in Jordan and Yemen

Abstract: List of figures List of tables Preface Acknowledgements List of abbreviations Note on transliterations and translations 1. Moderation and the dynamics of political change 2. Political liberalization as a mechanism of control 3. Public political space 4. Cultural dimensions of political contestation 5. Justification and moderation 6. Conclusion: does inclusion lead to moderation? References Index.

Can Islamists Become Moderates?: Rethinking the Inclusion-Moderation Hypothesis

Abstract: Recent years have seen a surge of studies that examine the inclusion-moderation hypothesis with reference to political Islam: the idea that political groups and individuals may become more moderate as a result of their inclusion in pluralist political processes. Most of these interventions adopt one of three foci: (1) the behavioral moderation of groups; (2) the ideological moderation of groups; and (3) the ideological moderation of individuals. After a discussion of various definitions of moderate and radical, the concept of moderation, and the centrality of moderation to studies of democratization, the author examines the scholarship on political Islam that falls within each approach. She then examines several studies that raise questions about sequencing: how mechanisms linking inclusion and moderation are posited and how other approaches might better explain Islamist moderation. Finally, she offers a critical analysis of the behavior-ideology binary that animates many of these models and suggests some fruitful paths for future research.

Who Opened the Window? Women's Activism in Islamist Parties

Abstract: At the onset of political liberalization in Jordan and Yemen in 1989 and 1990, respectively, the largest Islamist group in each country expressed strong views opposing women's full and equal political participation. Yet just a decade later Jordan's Jabhat alCAmal al-Islami (Islamic Action Front, or IAF) and Yemen's Tajammac al-Yamani li-i Islah (Yemeni Reform Group, or Islah) not only have women in their highest decisionmaking bodies but have more than any other party in either country. Why has women's participation in these two highly conservative parties increased so dramatically over a relatively short period of time? One leading explanation points to the triumph of "moderates" over "hardliners." As party leaders learn that bargaining and cooperation are necessary to advance political agendas within a multiparty political field, pragmatists are gradually able to advance their agendas as hardliners lose support. Women within these parties see gains either because party moderates hold more progressive views toward women or because they recognize the utility of promoting women's participation to gain votes and/or appease domestic and international critics. These explanations misidentify the reasons for the increased participation of women within these two parties. While shifts in party ideology and/or strategy may indeed be at play, gains made by Islamist women have come as they have taken advantage of structural openings created by shifting divisions within each party. Women have made significant advances when they recognized and seized windows of opportunity for increased participation, as when moderates and hardliners within their parties were preoccupied with intraparty disputes and external challenges. While the evidence from Jordan and Yemen does not disprove the hypothesis that inclusion leads to moderation, the trope of a single moderate-radical divide in the Islamic Action Front and the Islah party obscures the complexity of intraparty conflicts. Careful attention to the actual (and often multiple) mechanisms behind the adoption of more moderate practices within conservative parties will enrich an understanding of whether and how the inclusion of conservative religious groups in multiparty politics produces a moderating effect on their policies and practices. Research conducted in Jordan and Yemen between 1995 and 1998 illuminates why women's participation in Islamist political parties has increased in Jordan and Yemen.

The Third Gender: Western Female Researchers in the Middle East

Abstract: Field research on politics in the Middle East poses far less problems for Western female researchers than many Westerners assume. The questions most commonly asked of me by colleagues include whether anyone will speak to an American woman (yes), and whether I need to wear a veil (no, but see below). Female researchers do face many challenges, but most have less to do with gender than with examining sensitive political issues in highly repressive environments. Of those that do concern gender, many vary by degree rather than type from the issues faced by female scholars conducting field research elsewhere. I draw heavily on my own overwhelmingly positive experiences with ethnographic research in Jordan and Yemen—totaling more than four years over the past decade, including nearly a year of research conducted post-September 11—and those of many friends in outlining the following issues facing Western female political scientists conducting field research in the Middle East.I would like to thank Laryssa Chomiak, Janine Astrid Clark, Sam Fayyaz, and Lisa Wedeen for their thoughtful comments on earlier versions of this article.

Authoritarian Institutions and the Survival of Autocrats

Abstract: Why do some autocrats survive for decades, and others fall soon after taking power? The authors argue that when authoritarian rulers need to solicit the cooperation of outsiders or deter the threat...