全球智库信息集成服务系统

Geography matters

• Border management was critical in several cases, determining whether certain communities became more vulnerable to sectarian actors.
• Although borders cannot always prevent sectarian mobilization, physical borders still matter in local settings. This is particularly the case in active war zones, where the ability of sectarian militia groups to easily traverse borders can fuel conflicts that otherwise might not turn violent.

Political elites foster and impede sectarianism

• Political elites with patronage systems, particularly from external sources, tended to foster sectarianism and stymie cross-sectarian cooperation. When elites lose legitimacy, however, opportunities can emerge for leaders with nonsectarian agendas.

Civil-society development is critical

• Capitalizing on opportunity is difficult if there are no alternative political leaders or movements to seize the moment with nonsectarian agendas. This requires some opening of political space for movements to form around issues that transcend sectarian identities (e.g., economic development, education reform).

Cross-sectarian interaction can be a buffer

• Cross-sectarian interaction can boost resilience even in the face of sectarian-driven armed conflict. The stronger the level of trust and social connection across sectarian lines, the better equipped communities are to avoid sectarianism when conflict emerges.
• Conversely, when communities are built to segregate citizens along sectarian lines, the prospects for division and conflict increase.

Smaller socioeconomic gaps improve resistance to sectarianism

• The narrower the socioeconomic gaps between Sunni and Shi'a residents, the less likely sectarian grievances and violence are to emerge.
• In neighborhoods where economic grievances and discrimination are greater, communities are more vulnerable to sectarian violence.