No other Gods before me: spheres of influence in the relationship between Christianity and Islam.

• Author: Gartenstein-Ross, Daveed

1. INTRODUCTION

   The relationship between Christianity and Islam vaulted to great national importance following the September 11, 2001 attacks and the "war on terror" that the United States declared thereafter. Since the attacks, various commentators have attempted to contextualize the role that religion plays in this conflict. For example, Salman Rushdie, in a much-discussed New York Times op-ed, declared bluntly that the war in Afghanistan following the September 11th attacks was "about Islam." (1) On the other hand, the Toronto Star editorialized: "That the Sept. 11 hijackers were Arab Muslims says no more than that Timothy McVeigh was Christian or Baruch Goldstein was Jewish." (2) But regardless of these differences between commentators, virtually nobody would argue that religion is simply irrelevant to the war on terror. Whether it is expressed through fears that combat on Islamic soil will inflame the Muslim street (3) or concern about the influx of Christian missionaries that have tended to follow such military operations, (4) virtually all observers agree that religion is a significant factor in this conflict.

   Without a proper appreciation of both Muslim religious sensibilities and the manner in which the West is perceived by that faith's adherents, policymakers do indeed risk exacerbating extant problems, by, for example, increasing public sympathy for terrorists within the Islamic world. Thus, this article describes a powerful strain of thought that has historically existed within both Christianity and Islam, and that continues to guide a significant number of both faiths' adherents today. This strain of thought holds that both religions possess distinct geographical "spheres of influence," in the same way that nation-states are thought to possess their own spheres of influence. (5) Thus, Christians whose worldviews are shaped by this concept will be very concerned about perceived encroachments into the "Christian West," while Muslims who share this perspective will be worried about the erosion of Islam's power within the "Islamic world."

   The notion that Christianity and Islam possess distinct geographical spheres of influence is by no means universally held by Christians and Muslims. However, a large number of adherents to both faiths conceptualize their religion as possessing a geographical sphere of influence. Moreover, the believers who hold this view tend to wield disproportionate influence within both faiths. (6) This view thus merits our attention, since even small, committed groups of believers have often heavily influenced the course that Christianity and Islam have followed. (7) A framework for understanding the interactions between the Christian world and Muslim world that takes into account this perception of religious spheres of influence can thus help to reduce the potential for conflict between the two faiths.

   The spheres of influence concept is usually identified with both realist and neorealist theories of international relations (IR), which argue that nation-states seek to maximize their power. (8) The perception of Christians and Muslims who believe that their faith possesses a geographic sphere of influence mirrors the predictions of realist IR theories; these adherents view their faith as operating in a manner similar to the nation-state, with the religion's power waxing or waning in relation to a variety of competitors. Indeed, they may view their religion as a more vital and more legitimate actor than the nation-state. (9) However, this article employs liberal IR theory to examine how this perception of religious spheres of influence affects the way that individuals and states behave internationally. In contrast to realism, the liberal theory of international relations places greater emphasis on state-society relations than on the structural relationship between nation-states. (10)

   Although realist theory holds that spheres of influence are only one strategy among many that nation-states may employ to expand their power, Christians and Muslims who believe that their faith possesses a geographic component view spheres of influence as far more important to their religion than to nation-states. Such believers perceive spheres of influence as an essential strategy. In part, they think spheres of influence are important for reasons rooted in the history and doctrines of both faiths, (11) but there is also a structural reason for this view. This structural reason derives from the facts that while religions may be powerful elements within the state--and while some religions may even deny that any separation should exist between the state and the faith (12)--religions are not themselves coterminous with the nation-state. Instead, both Christianity and Islam are today forced to vie for power within the state. The spheres of influence strategy provides the nation-state a reason to act on the dominant religion's behalf and also generates pressure from the faithful demanding that the state do so. (13)

   Both Christianity and Islam enjoy religious primacy within their perceived spheres of influence. Many adherents to both faiths seek to expand these spheres of influence while simultaneously preventing competitors from gaining a foothold within them. One way these adherents attempt to expand their religions' spheres of influence is through aggressive proselytism. (14) Also, both religions often employ the coercive power of the state to increase their power and inhibit competitors' growth (although in the contemporary context, this is done more frequently and more dramatically in the Islamic world). Individual adherents to the dominant religion may simultaneously attempt to discourage competitors' growth independent of the state's policies. In their extreme form, these efforts may result in religiously motivated violence, but such efforts are not always so sinister.

   The main competitors that Christianity and Islam face within their perceived spheres of influence today are other faiths, secularism, and certain sects within the same religion. Despite this variegated competition, Christians who believe in a Christian sphere of influence are especially wary of Islam, while Muslims who believe in an Islamic sphere of influence are especially wary of Christianity. This mutual suspicion stems both from the faiths' historical relationship and also from the fact that, in the words of R. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, they are "major competitors ... for the convictions and the souls of human beings around the world." (15) Indeed, while Christianity is the world's largest faith, (16) Islam is acknowledged to be one of the world's fastest growing religions. (17)

   Part II explains the concept of spheres of influence. Thereafter, Parts III and IV illuminate the perception held by a significant number of Muslims and Christians that their faiths possess geographic spheres of influence, as well as the historical and contemporary strategies that adherents to both religions have employed to preserve and expand these spheres. (18)

   Finally, this article concludes by discussing the predictive value of applying the spheres of influence concept to the relationship between Christianity and Islam, and by suggesting policy prescriptions that follow from the concept's application. If Western policymakers are sensitive to the widespread perception in the Muslim world that the Islamic faith possesses a geographical sphere of influence, and if they are aware of the potential for their own actions to be perceived as attempts to extend the Christian sphere of influence, then they should be able to reduce the potential for their pursuit of the war on terror--as well as other actions that they take within the perceived Muslim sphere of influence--to result in more recruits to the terrorists' cause.

2. FRAMEWORK

   This Part describes the "spheres of influence" framework. Part II.A defines and discusses the spheres of influence concept in the context of the nation-state because this is the context in which scholars have traditionally understood and developed the concept. Part II.B then discusses how the idea of spheres of influence can help to produce a better understanding of the relations between Christianity and Islam.

   1. Nation-States' Use of Spheres of Influence

      1. Early Use of Spheres of Influence

      A "sphere of influence" is a geographic area within which a dominant state exerts its power and attempts to exclude other states outside the region from doing so. (19) A state's sphere of influence will, of course, include the territory within its own borders. But, in addition, a state's sphere of influence will typically include an area beyond its borders. This area may be large or small. It may be one that the state firmly controls and from which the state successfully excludes competing states, or it may be a sort of buffer zone or disputed frontier area in which a state struggles with other states for influence or supremacy. A state's sphere of influence is like a set of concentric circles, the innermost being the state's own territory, often followed by geographic areas that are outside of the state but that the state controls (through allegiances, agreements, or even brute force), and ending with the outermost circle, which includes contested regions overlapping with the outermost spheres of another state (or states). The outermost circles, where states' spheres overlap, are where inter-state conflicts commonly emerge.

      The term "spheres of influence" describes more than just geographic areas, however. It also describes a strategy that has been used since the advent of the nation-state. The strategic concept of "spheres of influence" refers to the method by which states define, defend, and expand territory under their control, while attempting to undermine competing states' attempts to do the same. They employ this strategy in order to maintain their security or increase their...