What contributes to sectarian conflict? Some existing literature essentializes sectarian identities and blames ancient hatred between different groups as the cause of conflict, this thesis argues that sectarian conflict occurs when sectarianism is politically employed by elite actors facing state weakness. The proposed theory suggests that a drop in state capacity regardless of the cause, can motivate political elite actors to instrumentalize the salience of sectarian identities as a form of either repression or cooptation targeting the sectarian outgroup for the purposes of regime survival. The theoretical claims in this study are examined using a qualitative comparative case study analysis of the Saddam Hussein and Nouri Al Maliki regimes in Iraq. The findings reveal that both Hussein and Maliki instrumentalized sectarian rhetoric and exploited divisions as a strategy of gaining or preserving political power during periods of increased state weakness. For example, Saddam's use of the Faith Campaign fueled the increased salience of sectarian identities in Iraq while Maliki's political purge campaigns marginalized the Sunnis. Furthermore, the approach of this study reveals variation in the forms of regimes that can successfully exploit and instrumentalize sectarian rhetoric, ranging from minority and majority sectarian coalitions to personalist autocratic and semi-democratic governments. The findings of this thesis can allow policymakers to identify the root causes of sectarian based conflicts more accurately. In addition, ethnic and sectarian identity groups can be influenced by politicians and potentially shaped by external actors under certain conditions outlined in the thesis.

Throughout history, radical individuals have caused violence and tarnished the reputation of many communities and beliefs. Following 9/11, Islamic Terrorism put fear into many individuals. New fronts of the War on Terror began to open as militaries began to engage terrorist groups who sought to take action through radical beliefs. Al Qaeda had opened up a new front and joined the ranks of the Sunni Insurgency to confront the armed forces of the United States as the Invasion of Iraq began to unfold. This new group had radical leaders who were able to incite a stiff and violent campaign against their enemies. The U.S. was able to slow down the group, but not the ideology, tactics, and leadership once it withdrew from the conflict zone. As leaders in the area began to divide their societies by violence and marginalization, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria were able to come into power and create small, quasi-legitimate caliphate. Although the group may be somewhat defeated in the region, the ideology will carry on. By using organizational theory, we can better compare both groups and learn from their strengths and weaknesses. Through analyzing this parallel case study, new doors may be opened up for research to be able to slow down radical ideologies and thwart violent actions. / Master of Arts / Following 9/11, we begin to see the United States devote countless amounts of resources and energy to combat radical Islamic ideologies. In this, we study Al Qaeda and its Iraq branch, AQI, and how its remnants were able to create one of the most successful and notorious Islamic terror organizations. This thesis allows growth to the study of terrorism, primarily by comparing two terror groups and understanding their rise to success and failures. This thesis also helps study how groups can split apart and form new offshoot organizations. Looking into groups' ideologies allows for the researchers to also how they may affect success. As groups rise and fall, there may a continuation of an ideology. New platforms can assist in this, and play large parts of a groups success. Leadership can be a large factor, guiding a group to success or hurting its image. To combat terror organizations, the military can affect how they grow, thus showing the power of settings and where terror organizations can thrive. By comparing and contrasting organizations, it allows for a different approach of research that can help in preventing violent actors to continue on a similar path.