Islamic Fundamentalism and the Political Systems of North African States Before the Arab Spring

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review: “Islamic Fundamentalism and the political systems of North African states before the Arab Spring”

 

This is a tidily written summary of the relationship of radical “fundamentalist” Islamic political groups to the five N. African states of the post-WW II period. The article does not provide much historical analysis (which it promises on p. 2). Rather, it briefly reviews the political circumstances of each of the five states in relation to fundamentalist Islamic groups in each case, without accounting in any social-scientifically or historically meaningful way for various differences beyond indicating different historical circumstances. It would not be adequate for a chapter  in an introductory textbook. It has no interlocutors to whom it is responding or with whom it is engaging, It is unclear what is its theoretical framework on the basis of which its historical recounting is conducted. The characteristics of each regime (“monarchy” in some cases and “republican character of government” in others) is not clearly linked to any particular outcomes in a way that gives the reader some indication of how the political results are linked to a particular regime type. Perhaps there is no link: then what is the value of this historical review?

 

Overall, the essay reads like an informed piece of journalism, but it is unclear how it is supposed to help the reader make sense of the part of the world it describes, apart from noting in very brief form the existence of several different, largely unexplained and unexplored historical trajectories.  The fact that “fundamentalist groupings [sic] were prevented from conducting legitimate political activity” is not news. Nor is the fact that such groups were understood by the regimes in place to be a threat to those regimes. The final two paragraphs of the essay might be taken as an introduction out of which the similarities and differences in each case are more fully explored. To be of scientific value, however, those similarities and differences need to be explained or at least explored on a comparative basis by means of which their profiles are illuminated by way of a “compare and contrast” methodology. This procedure is equally valid in the approaches of political science, political economy, or sociology as it is in historical studies. The essay lacks this component, making its value as a piece of scholarship too minimal to qualify for publication.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English syntax and grammar needs to be cleaned up in a number of places.

"Groupings" is not a word used in the social sciences to refer to "groups" or organizations.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions in track changes in the re-submitted files.

1. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: This is a tidily written summary of the relationship of radical “fundamentalist” Islamic political groups to the five N. African states of the post-WW II period. The article does not provide much historical analysis (which it promises on p. 2). Rather, it briefly reviews the political circumstances of each of the five states in relation to fundamentalist Islamic groups in each case, without accounting in any social-scientifically or historically meaningful way for various differences beyond indicating different historical circumstances. It would not be adequate for a chapter  in an introductory textbook. It has no interlocutors to whom it is responding or with whom it is engaging, It is unclear what is its theoretical framework on the basis of which its historical recounting is conducted. The characteristics of each regime (“monarchy” in some cases and “republican character of government” in others) is not clearly linked to any particular outcomes in a way that gives the reader some indication of how the political results are linked to a particular regime type. Perhaps there is no link: then what is the value of this historical review?

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. Therefore, I have made some improvements in the text of the article. I used them as a basis for adding to the article (see p. 1-3). Especially, I standardized the terminology to make it consistent with political science (p. 5-6).

Comments 2:  Overall, the essay reads like an informed piece of journalism, but it is unclear how it is supposed to help the reader make sense of the part of the world it describes, apart from noting in very brief form the existence of several different, largely unexplained and unexplored historical trajectories.  The fact that “fundamentalist groupings [sic] were prevented from conducting legitimate political activity” is not news. Nor is the fact that such groups were understood by the regimes in place to be a threat to those regimes. The final two paragraphs of the essay might be taken as an introduction out of which the similarities and differences in each case are more fully explored. To be of scientific value, however, those similarities and differences need to be explained or at least explored on a comparative basis by means of which their profiles are illuminated by way of a “compare and contrast” methodology. This procedure is equally valid in the approaches of political science, political economy, or sociology as it is in historical studies. The essay lacks this component, making its value as a piece of scholarship too minimal to qualify for publication.

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. Therefore, I have made some improvements in the text of the article. To meet the methodological criticism I tried to point out the chosen methods more thoroughly in the Introduction. I stressed the importance of the comparative historical research to compare the policies taken by the official authorities toward the fundamentalist organizations.

Comments 3: The English syntax and grammar needs to be cleaned up in a number of places.

Response 3: The text was proofread by a person with CAE and TOEFL certificates. Appropriate corrections have been made.

2. Additional clarification: I am aware that the review is very critical. I have tried to make changes confidently, especially in terms of methodology and terminology. Due to the lack of possibility to completely correct the concept of the article, I can only express the hope that the changes made was able to improve the quality of the analysis substantially. 

The text of the article has been modified based on the reviewers' assessment. All changes and additions have been made using a red font.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The first thing to clarify is that fundamentalism is not inherent to Islam nor does it originate in modernity; rather, it has emerged in different religions throughout history. A separate issue is the conceptualization of the term, which is indeed modern and did not originate with Islam but with the American evangelical movement. In this regard, it is essential to review the work of Ainz Galende: Terrorismos fundamentalistas: medievo armado a través de la web 2.0, which provides a precise definition of the concept and helps to delineate it properly. In fact, this work begins with an analysis of the concept of fundamentalism and includes a study of the Muslim Brotherhood, among other movements.

 

Moreover, the article assumes that the exclusion of Islamist groups in North African states contributed to stability. However, it does not analyze whether such stability was truly sustainable in the long term or whether, on the contrary, it generated greater social tensions that ultimately led to the Arab Spring.

 

Additionally, the article approaches Islamism as a purely political and religious phenomenon, but fails to examine the socio-economic factors that contributed to its rise, such as poverty, youth unemployment, and social inequality. Including these factors would provide a more comprehensive understanding of why certain segments of the population saw political Islam as a viable alternative to authoritarian regimes.

 

Another key area for improvement is the article’s tendency to generalize the situation across North African countries. Each country has unique historical, social, and political characteristics, so the analysis should be more detailed to avoid oversimplifications that could weaken the validity of the conclusions.

 

Finally, one of the most critical omissions in the article is the role of the media and social networks in the Arab Spring. This issue is fundamental, as social media played a crucial role in organizing protests, disseminating information, and mobilizing citizens. Including this analysis is essential if the article aims to be published, as its absence represents a major limitation in understanding the phenomenon.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The text is clear and understandable, but it needs significant improvements in grammar, sentence structure, and vocabulary to sound more natural and academically polished.

To enhance its fluency and credibility, I recommend:

Professional proofreading – Ideally by a native English speaker or an expert in academic writing.

- Simplifying complex sentences – Some phrases are too long and could be restructured for clarity.

- Improving word choice – Using more precise and formal vocabulary where needed.

- Strengthening logical connections – Adding transition words to create smoother flow between ideas.

- With these refinements, the artcle will be more redable, persuasive, and suitable for “Religions”

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions in track changes in the re-submitted files.

1. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: The first thing to clarify is that fundamentalism is not inherent to Islam nor does it originate in modernity; rather, it has emerged in different religions throughout history. A separate issue is the conceptualization of the term, which is indeed modern and did not originate with Islam but with the American evangelical movement. In this regard, it is essential to review the work of Ainz Galende: Terrorismos fundamentalistas: medievo armado a través de la web 2.0, which provides a precise definition of the concept and helps to delineate it properly. In fact, this work begins with an analysis of the concept of fundamentalism and includes a study of the Muslim Brotherhood, among other movements.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with and appreciate this comment. In this regard, I would like to point out that in the text of my article, I did not claim that fundamentalism is a phenomenon that can only be associated with Islam, but also with other religions. My intention was to emphasize that in the modern world, especially among Western mass media after 9/11, the phenomenon of fundamentalism is associated with Islam, which is obviously a mistake and an abuse. As a phenomenon, fundamentalism is also part of other religions, as the reviewer rightly pointed out. I completely agree with this opinion. I also agree that we can find numerous revival movements in the history of Islam, for example in the 18th or 19th centuries, such as Wahhabism in the Arabian Peninsula, Senusiyya in Libya or Mahdism in Sudan. These remarks have been incorporated into the text of the article. However, I argue that the current version of Muslim fundamentalism is a contemporary phenomenon, and one of its essential features is the process of institutionalization. Therefore, I have devoted most of my attention to the Muslim Brotherhood as a model organization of a new type of fundamentalism. Thank you for pointing out Ainz Galende's work. Unfortunately, I was unable to obtain this publication, and therefore it was not cited in the article.

Comments 2: Moreover, the article assumes that the exclusion of Islamist groups in North African states contributed to stability. However, it does not analyze whether such stability was truly sustainable in the long term or whether, on the contrary, it generated greater social tensions that ultimately led to the Arab Spring.

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. I assume that numerous social, political and economic tensions in Arab societies were the main causes of the Arab Spring. So, the exclusion of fundamentalism organizations from the official and legal political life was not the reason of the anti-government riots in 2020 or 2011. However, after the change of the political regime structure they were able to cumulate the social capital what not only help them to became the legal part of the political system, but also in a process of alternation. It was pointed up as the final part of the Conclusion.

Comments 3: Additionally, the article approaches Islamism as a purely political and religious phenomenon, but fails to examine the socio-economic factors that contributed to its rise, such as poverty, youth unemployment, and social inequality. Including these factors would provide a more comprehensive understanding of why certain segments of the population saw political Islam as a viable alternative to authoritarian regimes.

Response 3: I agree with this opinion. However, those factors were mentioned in the article. I want to point out that the level of acceptance of the Islamic organizations by the Arab states societies was not the aim of my article.

Comments 4: Another key area for improvement is the article’s tendency to generalize the situation across North African countries. Each country has unique historical, social, and political characteristics, so the analysis should be more detailed to avoid oversimplifications that could weaken the validity of the conclusions.

Response 4: Agree. I have changed part of the article and the conclusion to emphasize this point.

Comments 5: Finally, one of the most critical omissions in the article is the role of the media and social networks in the Arab Spring. This issue is fundamental, as social media played a crucial role in organizing protests, disseminating information, and mobilizing citizens. Including this analysis is essential if the article aims to be published, as its absence represents a major limitation in understanding the phenomenon.

Response 5: I agree that this issue is of a great importance. However, my article does not refer to the course of the Arab Spring itself. My aim was to analyze the functioning of fundamentalist organizations in the political systems of MENA countries before the start of the Arab Spring. For this reason, the issue indicated by the Reviewer was not analyzed.

2. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Point 1: The article was proofread by a person with a CAE and TOEFL certificate. I therefore hope that the text's communicativeness and linguistic accuracy have improved significantly.

3. Additional clarifications: The text of the article has been modified based on the reviewers' assessment. All changes and additions have been made using a red font.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In terms of scientific value, this version of the paper is better. It now makes clear what it is trying to do in the context of its disciplinary orientation (political history). There is a bit more historical analysis and better disciplinary contextualization. The paper is in no way ground-breaking, but it is more helpful and informative from a social-scientific perspective than its previous version.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

One new problem: the revision requires the attention of an English editor. In the new additions, I counted 40 syntactical, grammatical, stylistic, and typographical errors, some quite severe, others less obtrusive. 

Author Response

Comments 1: In terms of scientific value, this version of the paper is better. It now makes clear what it is trying to do in the context of its disciplinary orientation (political history). There is a bit more historical analysis and better disciplinary contextualization. The paper is in no way ground-breaking, but it is more helpful and informative from a social-scientific perspective than its previous version

Response 1: Thank you for this opinion.

Comments 2: One new problem: the revision requires the attention of an English editor. In the new additions, I counted 40 syntactical, grammatical, stylistic, and typographical errors, some quite severe, others less obtrusive.

Response 2: The text has been revised. Changes have been made to use more formal language. These changes are highlighted in blue.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors:

Please make the effort to review this reference and, as a final adjustment, incorporate the elements related to the concept of fundamentalism in order to refine and narrow down the definition.

https://revistas.ucsc.cl/index.php/analesdeteologia/article/view/1474

Author Response

Comments 1: 

Please make the effort to review this reference and, as a final adjustment, incorporate the elements related to the concept of fundamentalism in order to refine and narrow down the definition.

https://revistas.ucsc.cl/index.php/analesdeteologia/article/view/1474

Response 2:

Thank you for sending the link to the article. It has been used in the text - see footnote 1.