Political crises play a pivotal role in shaping political secularization across sub-Saharan Africa. Côte d’Ivoire, located in the heart of French-speaking West Africa, exemplifies how such crises can catalyze secularist dynamics at the political level. From the early 1990s through the 2020s, especially following the near-overthrow of the government by armed rebels in 2002, it became increasingly apparent to many politicians that institutional religious leaders, both Christian and Muslim, should step back from political involvement. This process of secularization, driven by politicians, remains confined to the political sphere and has yet to permeate broader society and culture. This paper is based on fieldwork and data collected in Côte d’Ivoire between 2017 and 2020, including interviews, archival material from political parties, major newspapers, and religious organizations. Resources from the Pew Research Center further inform this research.

Efforts to counter Christian nationalism focus on the power of ideas—that Christian nationalism is historically inaccurate, religiously heretical, or even fascist. Those efforts build upon a vast research agenda on Christian nationalism in the social sciences to argue, at least implicitly, that a Christian nationalist worldview rejects religious, racial, and political pluralism in favor of a (white) Christian-centric goal for the United States. But they may be wrong on at least one account. In a January 2024 survey of 1,500 American Christians, we piloted “anti-Christian nationalism” measures, expecting to find a robust negative relationship with established measures of Christian nationalism. Instead, we find that many Christian nationalists already hold pluralist ideas in their heads. We then explore whether anti-Christian nationalism can work to counter, moderate, or align attitudes with Christian nationalism on political tolerance. We find that Christian nationalism often overrules anti-Christian nationalism, especially when the threat is high.

This article examines how minority groups engaged in armed conflict express solidarity with similarly situated groups elsewhere. While existing research has focused on relations between minorities and majorities, far less is known about cross-minority solidarity in conflict settings. Drawing on an original nationwide survey in Turkey and in-depth interviews with members of parliament, this study analyzes how Kurds perceive the Israel-Palestine conflict in the context of the recent Israel-Hamas war. It argues that although Kurds in Turkey have historically supported the Palestinian cause, recent developments in Turkey and the broader Middle East, along with changes in Palestinian leadership, have complicated this support. The findings demonstrate that cross-minority solidarity is more limited and contingent than is often assumed, even among groups that share a common faith or a history of marginalization. Political ideology, party affiliation, and international alignments play a central role in shaping these attitudes.