22 Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies Vol. XXX, No. 4, Summer 2007 Use of Religion in Violent Conflicts by Authoritarian Regimes: Pakistan and Malaysia in Comparative Perspective Arshi Saleem Hashmi* Three decades ago, most social scientists saw religion as a remnant of a long-gone age. Around 1979, surprisingly enough for many, religion began to take on a new political importance as phrases like “liberation theology,” “fundamentalism,” “revivalism” became common. R. Scott Appleby argued that much of this religious violence is attributable to religious actors who are actually quite ignorant of their own traditions, much like the foot soldiers of the Balkan atrocities who knew nothing about Christianity. 1 Marc Gopin, however, predicted that as religion became more important in the lives of hundreds of millions of people, the political power generat- ed by this commitment would either lead to a more peaceful world or a more violent world, depending on how that power was utilized.” 2 Gopin asserts that the religions of the world have all contributed at one time or another to the creation and perpetuation of ethical values and behaviors that are indispensable to peace and civil society. It is equally within the capacity of the world’s religions to generate, justify and even exult in the most cruel and barbaric behavior that human beings are capa- ble of perpetrating. Religions go through periods of history in which one or the other of these two alternatives will dominate, and it is also invariably * Ms. Arshi Saleem Hashmi is a Research Analyst at the Institute of Regional Studies, Islamabad, Pakistan. 1 R. Scott Appleby, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000). 2 Marc Gopin, “Judaism, the Limits of War, and Conflict Resolution,” Paper presented at Princeton University, April 27, 2001.