Explaining Variation in Western Muslim Elected Officials Roles in Religious and Identity Based Conflicts

The 120 or so individuals of Muslim background or faith who have served in Western parliaments in the past two decades differed considerably in how they addressed divisive social issues centered on religious practice and identity. Some studiously avoided the issues, several behaved as mouthpieces of secular establishments, others as defenders of religious freedoms and multiculturalism, and yet others acted as cultural interpreters and mediators among those on opposite sides. What explains variation in the roles and attitudes of Western Muslim elected officials regarding religion and identity-based tensions?  I explain variation across countries and parliamentarians by making use of 220 interviews and fieldwork in six Western liberal democracies. I test a large number of hypotheses based on party structure, electoral system, constituency composition, class status, gender, ethnicity, and place in the ethnic hierarchy within the country. I find that the answer varies from one context to another but that structural factors have considerably more weight than social ones in explaining variation.  The matter is worth studying because effective representation is essential to allowing parliaments to play a constructive role in resolving social conflicts.