Muslim claims-making in context

Abstract

The aim of this article is to investigate through a comparison of the Danish and the Swedish Muhammad cartoons controversies (1) why only the Danish controversy escalated into a conflict of global dimensions; and (2) what accounts for the differences in level and form of local Muslim claims-making in the two cases. The article takes advantage of the initial similarities of the two controversies in making a paired comparison, which provides an opportunity to evaluate the importance of context-specific particularities and of specific events/actions taken in the two cases. Despite several initial similarities, why did the two controversies produce such different outcomes? The article argues that the answer should be found in the interplay between distant contextual characteristics such as dominant elite discourses about Islam/Muslims, different styles of institutionalization of Islam in the two countries, and more situational circumstances of how the publications were initially framed by the relevant newspapers, the contingent choices of action by the political elites and cross-context lesson drawing.