Abstract:
In recent years, scholarship on political Islam has shifted from exploring the compatibility between Islam and democracy towards more empirical studies revolving around the democratic commitments of Islamists. The moderation theory suggests that Islamist parties may become more moderate as a result of their inclusion in pluralist political processes. This thesis tests the cases of Hamas and Hezbollah against the inclusion-moderation theory. Can Islamist groups change their ideologies and behavior because of political participation? How does change occur and what are the tools, mechanisms and institutions that shape their moderation? Alternatively, is moderation instrumental and used for purely tactical reasons? This thesis argues that the literature on the moderation of Islamist parties is preoccupied with mainly endogenous variables. The latter helps explain the political and ideological side of the moderation of radical Islamist parties. By contrast, using Hamas and Hezbollah as case studies, this thesis argues that exogenous, namely geopolitical, factors also play an important role in whether or not radical Islamist parties choose to moderate their positions, especially vis-à-vis demobilizing their military wings and integrating fully into the political process.
