Framing Freedom of Religion or Belief for Countering Violent Extremism in Kenya: The Equivalency Framework of the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya

Abstract

Over the past years, and in the aftermath of terror attacks, religious organizations in Kenya have issued press statements which conflate discourses on war against terror, security, and freedoms of religion. Using the example of one umbrella religious organization, the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK), this paper demonstrates how freedom of belief is framed in contexts of terror violence. Using framing theory and specifically the equivalency approach, EAK as a frame sponsor presents an alternative interpretive scheme on religious freedoms for judgements relating to terror attacks and related violence.

Keywords:

• Kenya
• Framing
• Press statements
• Extremism
• Evangelical Alliance of Kenya
• Religious Freedom

The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) was established in 1975 under the auspices of the Association of Evangelicals in Africa (AEA) as the Evangelical Fellowship of Kenya. It serves as the representative umbrella organization for evangelical churches in Kenya across the country. EAK as a societal actor responds to attacks meted against its members and seeks to provide credible and successful frames. Using framing theory, this article examines two press statements issued by EAK in the aftermath of violent attacks in Kenya to show how the end product of their framing processes are embedded in power relations and also done to suit their audience. The statements selected for analysis in this article decry violence and terror attacks witnessed against Christians in Kenya. It was issued in the aftermath of violent attacks, while at the same time making religious identity pronounced. An investigation into the framings of religiously motivated violence by EAK as a frame-sponsor is fruitful to note convergences, divergences, and contrasts. In so doing, EAK provides contrastive framings for terroristic violence and religious extremism in Kenya as an alternative interpretive schemata for evaluation of events in the society. The equivalency approach to framing by EAK points to how violent extremism presents the potential loss of religious freedoms.

Framing Theory

The concept of framing has emerged within a range of disciplines such as political science, sociology, media studies, psychology, cognitive linguistics, communication and others. There is a wide range of approaches and paradigmatic diversity on framing. This variety is celebrated as leading to a comprehensive understanding of framing. However, others insist that framing has been used synonymously with approaches that are distinctly different and call for a single paradigm to be used (Entman 1993). Recent examinations of conceptual issues and approaches in framing theory have revealed many pertinent directions for future research (Borah 2011).

According to the journalism and communications scholar Robert M. Entman,

To frame is to select some aspects of perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment recommendation for the item described. (Entman 1993, 52)

Framing theory has been used to understand and investigate communication and related behaviour in various disciplines (D’Angelo 2002).¹ Since framing theory is useful for examining what occurs in public media spaces, it is conceptually relevant to examine information streams, make judgments, and to draw inferences about the happenings in the world (Scheufele 1999; Entman 1993). Through frames, otherwise meaningless successions of events are packaged into something for the audience and are “schemata of interpretation” (Goffman 1974, 2). Framing goes on to facilitate the organization of enormous amounts of information into meaningful doses through frames which are “persistent patterns of cognition, interpretation and presentation of selection, theoretical and methodological approaches to framing, emphasis and exclusion” (Gitlin 1980, 7). Framing thus, highlights some aspects of reality while excluding other elements, leading individuals to interpret issues differently. In general, framing entails looking for ideational elements within the cultural universe of the target group, especially beliefs and ideologies, that can best present the issue at hand in ways that may lead to successful mobilization (Snow and Benford 2005, 209).

Framing is a process that is undertaken by both individuals and organizations in responding to the social forces that surround them. Framing at the organizational level is exemplified in the EAK response to religious extremism and terrorist violence that is the focus of this paper. But it is also engaged in by governments, in defending and communicating rationales for their policy agendas. Whether a government prioritizes trade and economic development over human rights, for example, is an indication of where it sees the major problems lying in society. Thus, issue framing can be a key element of agenda setting for governments. Moreover, governments may find themselves, in the course of framing issues and agendas, in the business of managing social perceptions, as the EAK example illustrates.

There are different approaches to framing, for example, the emphasis approach and the equivalency approach. The emphasis approach accentuates certain considerations in a message in order to influence the audience to focus on those considerations. The idea here is to lay emphasis on a subset of potentially relevant considerations, in order that individuals may focus on these specific ones for decision making (Druckman 2001, 230). The equivalency approach to framing, which my paper takes up further, posits that when losses are highlighted, readers are more inclined to take risks (Druckman 228). The equivalency frame focusses on gains or losses experienced. It brings to the fore the loss-gain ratio experienced. Depending on what message is to be communicated, individuals are inclined to take risks when more losses are highlighted to them as opposed to gains. Further, the equivalency approach gives a preview of subsequent decision making after framing (Kahneman and Tversky 1984).

The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya

The concentration of Pentecostal and charismatic churches in Nairobi, as in other African cities, has more than doubled since the 1970s (McClendon and Riedl 2015). According to Nairobi Baptist Church Senior Pastor Calisto Odede, “Kenya in particular has 82% Christian, with the second highest evangelicals all over the world, as 45% claim to be born again.”² It is this large number of claimants that drives the need to have them organized and mobilized, as EAK draws its membership from denominations, parachurch organizations, development agencies and government agencies. In December 2015, the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya celebrated its fortieth anniversary at the Kenyatta International Conference Centre, in Nairobi. In this meeting, an Annual General Meeting (AGM) was conducted and a strategic plan, dubbed “From Now On. National Transformative Agenda. Transforming Kenya, County by County,” was launched. This is in line with the core mission of EAK, which is to empower persons to bring God's transforming grace to the people of Kenya through a united prophetic voice and holistic ministries. Transformation is seen as important for lasting impact, hence the transformative agenda that is set to roll out county by county and later outpour to other nations.

EAK was established as Evangelical Fellowship of Kenya under the auspices of the Association of Evangelicals in Africa (AEA). It has a current membership of 308 denominations whose branches are across the country. It represents over 38,000 congregations of different evangelical denominations in Kenya.³ Beyond Africa, it has an international affiliation with the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA). Central to the EAK convention held in December 2015 was an evangelical summit, which sought to encourage its members to carry out good works and be relevant in society. Further, there was considerable reflection on issues that affected the church in Kenya. These issues include among others drug abuse, human trafficking, corruption, violence and negative ethnicity.

The leadership of EAK includes a national board with four executive office bearers and fifteen other board members representing church denominations and parachurch organizations. The Board Chair Bishop Mark Kariuki considers EAK to be the voice of the church in the nation. Further, he adds that the strategic direction provided by the new campaign “From Now on” is set to change the nation, something that the politicians, the government and the opposition cannot, except the church as it stands firm.⁴ In recent times, following the spate of terroristic violence, EAK has issued press statements that resonate with their objective of advocacy and leadership in issues affecting the spiritual, social, and physical welfare of the nation. This they have done this with an intention that captures their other objective of facilitating conflict and dispute resolution and peacebuilding. The two press statements sampled for this paper are the July 4, 2012 statement and the April 3, 2015 statement.

Following twin attacks on churches in Garissa on Sunday, July 1, 2012, simultaneously launched on the Africa Inland Church (AIC) in Garissa and Our Lady of Consolata Churches in Garissa,⁵ EAK issued a press statement. Police sources insist that attackers used grenades and guns at worshippers. In the first attack, at the Africa Inland Church (AIC), gunmen shot two policemen outside the church, and grenades were then thrown inside. As the panicked congregation rushed out to escape, gunmen fired on them indiscriminately, thereby killing many. In the second attack, at Our Lady of Consolata Catholic Church, two grenades were thrown inside the church. One failed to go off, but police say three people were injured by the second grenade. Though up to seven gunmen were involved in the attacks, the police said that none had been apprehended. The total death count was fifteen people in the two church attacks. Additionally, on April 2, 2015, Al-Shabaab militants stormed Garissa University College and killed 148 people in an attack. This led EAK to release another press statement on April 3, 2015.

Background to the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) Press Releases

Kenya is considered a very religious country with 94 percent of respondents in a Gallup poll indicating that religion is significant in their lives (Gallup Global Reports 2009). Among its different religions Kenyan Christians make 78 percent of the population, Muslims 10 percent, African Traditional Religions 10 percent, and other religions about 2 percent (CIA World Factbook). In general, there is a pervasive multi-religious atmosphere in Kenya demonstrated through the many Christian and Muslim public holidays, major TV channels giving many hours on Sunday mornings to religious programmes, religious radio and TV channels, and the prayers from major religions during official functions. This landscape raises the question of whether religious identities make violence more likely and whether transnational religious groups are growing in importance. There have been a series of violent attacks in Kenya. Besides attacks on the country's infrastructure, there has been a religious dimension to security where people are out rightly asked their religious affiliations before they are shot, while churches are razed to the ground.

The Al-Shabaab are understood to be an Al-Qaeda linked Somali-based militant group who thrive in the ungoverned areas of Somali. Al-Shabaab declared war on Kenya at the beginning of its counterinsurgency campaign in Somalia on October 16, 2011. Kenya went into Somalia in October 2011 with the intention of securing its seacoast which had been attacked variously by the Al-Shabaab. Kenya's desire was to bring an end to kidnappings on Kenyan soil and other violence which it blamed on Al-Shabaab. In general, their purpose was to capture the port city of Kismayo and to crush the Al-Shabaab Islamist militia.

A Kenyan operation was mooted called, Operation Linda Nchi, and was immediately declared an invasion by the Somali extremists. Since then there have been low-profile and high profile attacks in Kenya such as the September 21, 2013, Al-Shabaab attack on the Westgate Mall in Nairobi, which resulted in at least 67 deaths. On April 2, 2015, Al-Shabaab militants killed 148 people in an attack on Garissa University College and several other targets considered low key. In January 2016, Kenya Defence Forces soldiers were slain in southwest Somalia's El-Adde region by Al-Shabaab. More recently, Al-Shabaab issued a video vowing more devastating attacks on Kenyan soil. This and other media productions have tended to portray religion as a hostile and divisive force. The repeated link between religion with acts of violence in films, documentaries, news reports and YouTube makes religious violence a recurring narrative.

There is evidence of an ongoing resurgence in the group's activity inside Kenya. This implies that the Al-Shabaab is regrouping in order to stage cross-border incursions into Kenya. This resurgence in the present times has been said to be due to several factors, namely the ongoing Africa Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) military campaign, even as Al-Shabaab is seeking a boost in recruitment to continue its insurgency in Somalia. Second, Al-Shabaab is losing its foreign fighters, including in East Africa, to the so-called Islamic State (also known as ISIS or Daesh) even after it reaffirmed its loyalty to al-Qaeda in July 2015. Third, by rebranding itself as a leading regional Islamist force, Al-Shabaab may hope to stop the East African recruitment flows and redirect them back to Somalia, and high-casualty attacks may be seen as vital to achieve this.

More recently, on Friday, July 7, 2017 Al-Shabaab struck again near the Witu African Inland Church in Lamu County. Non-residents were evacuated to safety over fears of fresh Al-Shabaab attacks after the militants killed nine people. The heavily armed Al-Shabaab terrorists are rounded up the residents before beheading men only with knives.⁶ This is the ground reality within the Kenyan border, which has an impact on the security of the Kenyan people. It has been well-documented elsewhere that there are distinct ways in which different Christian groups in Kenya respond to threats and persecution. At the same time, their responses are deemed to impact the prospects of greater religious freedom (Dowd 2017). For the purpose of this paper, I shall not consider responses by individual evangelical groups, rather I focus on the Christian umbrella organization, representing all Evangelical Fellowships in Kenya, the EAK and how it proceeds to lend a voice in regard to the happenings in the country. The two statements sampled are given by EAK after attacks in the same region of Garissa, Kenya. but after a period of three years.

Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) Press Release of 4 July 2012

Church Attacks in Garissa Sunday 1st JULY 2012: Why is the Church Targeted?

It is with great sorrow that the entire fraternity of the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) console and empathize with the families of our brothers and sisters who were massacred last Sunday (1st July 2012) at our member denomination churches at the Africa Inland Church (AIC) in Garissa. Our prayers are with those who were injured both at the Africa Inland Church and Catholic Churches in Garissa. It is our prayer that God will give them a quick and full healing. We share the pain and losses arising out of the senseless and devilish act.

The Evangelical Alliance condemns the horrific bombing and the shooting of innocent worshippers at the Africa Inland Church and Our Lady of Consolata Churches in Garissa. We are deeply saddened that these innocent Kenyans were worshipping God when they were murdered by the terrible criminals.

It is extremely worrying on our part that these attacks on Churches are on the increase and assurances of security by the Government of Kenya appear more rhetoric than pre-emptive. The National Security and Intelligence Service (NSIS) and the police seem to be sleeping on the job. The statement by the commissioner of police that the police service had information about imminent attacks but were not sure where ‘is devoid of security intelligence.’

As evangelicals, we feel targeted by these Islamic forces because even before Al-Shabaab, our churches were still being bombed as witnessed in 2006, where Nairobi Pentecostal Church – Valley Road was bombed, church workers died and property destroyed. To date, no one has been arraigned in court and those who were arrested were left free.

2010, a prayer meeting at Uhuru parked was bombed, 13 Kenyans died, more than 100 worshippers injured. No one has been arrested to date.

2011, East Africa Pentecostal Church (EAPC) Garissa. 3 Kenyans died.

2012 April, Mtwapa joint crusade – Kilifi. 3 Kenyans died.

2012 June, Ngara – Nairobi, 4 Kenyans died.

2012 July – AIC - Garissa, 17 Kenyans died.

In all the above instances those arrested have been freed and none brought to court. Kenyans, especially Christians should not be fooled that Al-Shabaab does not spare anyone. This is because their attacks against their Muslim brothers are either accidental or against those they deem to be working against their agenda. Their major targets are Christians and our places of worship. The bombings and killings of innocent Kenyans may be termed senseless but that is not without sense for those sponsoring these acts. We believe the killings and bombings are being done according to plan in order to instill fear with subsequent aim of eradicating religious freedom, democratic liberties with the Church being the primary target. It is the Government of Kenya that declared war on Al-Shabaab, why is it that Al-Shabaab would not be targeting the government's interest but the Church?

The Kenyan public and the international community has been witness to the step by step escalation of violence against innocent citizens with Christians and the Church suffering the greatest loss. We have persistently pleaded with the government to take courage and act to stop the scourge of terror. Due to the unfolding insecurity challenges it is now irrelevant whether the root cause is political, religious, ethnic or ideological. The main issue is that the intimidation, killings, bombings and wanton destruction of lives and properties must stop forthwith. We hereby make an appeal to Kenyan government to use all resources available to clearly define and neutralize the problem as other nations have done. The Church leadership has put restraint on the aggrieved millions; we can no longer guarantee cooperation if this trend of terror is not halted immediately.

We therefore call upon the Government of Kenya to take issue of security of Christian worshippers in Churches and crusade grounds seriously. The following actions require urgent consideration:

The police must secure places of worship and open air preaching by increasing the number of armed officers.

The police should increase vigilance and intelligence gathering.

The government should without delay remove taxes on security equipment acquired by the Church for self defense.

We call upon the Churches to be vigilant in security matters and be ready for self defense.

Further, considering that Kenya is at war, homeland security must be given greatest priority by the government. We ask all Kenyans to earnestly pray for our nation, soldiers fighting in Somalia and for the security agents working within the country. May the Almighty God protect all of us.

Rev Dr Willy Mutiso

EAK – General Secretary”⁷

An initial analysis of the tone presents the statement as combative, head on and assertive with figures. In a sense, it narrows the gap between freedom of speech and hate speech in the constellation of religious identities where violence is concerned. According to Aziz Esmail, violence to which religious discourse is joined and violence which is explained or justified in religious terms would fit as religious violence (Esmail 2011, 50). The sentiments that delimit this violence as religious in origin, within a multi-religious landscape can, thus, fan animosity. Indeed, freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) has its limits in such cases. It cannot be seen to denigrate other people's identity and self-image.⁸ Freedom of religion and belief and the freedom of speech must strike a clear balance so that hate speech is not hidden in the guise freedom of speech.

The statement in some ways stirs negative emotions by asserting that such acts of hostility and violence against Christians are not senseless but are planned and carefully executed. Perhaps such bold statements after previous repeated terror incidences served as one way of naming and making explicit the real threats some church communities consider themselves to be faced with on a daily or existential basis. An evaluation of the connections and disconnect between the figures provided is useful at this point. The twin attacks in Garissa that left fifteen people dead took place in two small local congregations which host few members; thus, the latitude of space to diminish or exaggerate casualties was more limited than the accounts of terrorist attacks in larger population centres, such as the internationally reported Westgate Mall attack in Nairobi, Kenya.

Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) Press Release of 3rd April 2015⁹

“Thursday, 2nd April, 2015 was a very sad day for Kenya, as 147 Christians, were massacred, and 79 others injured and are recuperating in various hospitals, as a result of yesterday's horrific attack carried out by Al-Shabaab at Garissa University College.

The Evangelical Alliance of Kenya (EAK) condemns, in the strongest term possible this shooting and killing of innocent students, and we echo the voices of other leaders and categorically state that this is unacceptable.

We condole with the families of those who have lost their loved ones, their sons, daughters, relatives. Our prayers are with them during this very difficult period of their lives and we pray that God will comfort them. We also send our condolences to students of the Garissa University College, who lost their friends and colleagues during the unfortunate and regrettable incident. We share your pain and tears. For those who are injured and recuperating in hospitals, we pray that God give you a quick recovery.

We would like to appreciate the swift action of the security forces in responding to the attack and the manner in which they coordinated the rescue of the students that were held hostage. This helped to reduce the death toll.

We are calling on Government to enhance security by employing more resources and security personnel in order to provide adequate security to its citizenry. We are also requesting that there should be enough funding for the security apparatus in our nation, for the acquisition of modern technology and the gathering and dissemination of intelligence and for appropriate training of security personnel, which will enable them deal with terrorism attacks and other threats to Kenya.

As Evangelicals and as Christians at large, this attack has come when we are celebrating and remembering the death and resurrection of our Saviour Jesus Christ. This is yet another blow to the Christians in Kenya, as we have learnt that the students massacred were killed because of their faith. Christians and Churches have been targeted by Islamic extremist groups for some years now, we are therefore asking the Government to reassure us of safety and to beef up security in Churches and other places of worship, especially during this Easter Season.

We call on all Kenyans to be calm, and ask them to keep hope alive, for a better day in Kenya is dawning. To all God fearing Kenyans, and Christians at large, to earnestly pray for our nation during this Easter season. EAK will be calling for a National day of Prayer in the next two weeks and date will be communicated later.

GOD BLESS KENYA

Bishop Mark Kariuki”

In the two statements it is clear that the first is more combative than the second statement. The second statement was signed by the chairman of EAK whereas the first was signed by the secretary general. These statements were made after attacks in the same Garissa region. Though the second attack appears worse in its nature, EAK seems to have toned down its combative tone in the second statement. Usually it is the secretary of the organization who issues announcements and press statements. The second statement is signed by the chairperson. Perhaps internal power dynamics between the two executive offices have a role to play in this change of tone.

Equivalency Approach to Framing an EAK Statement

The EAK statement of July 4, 2012 makes prominent the idea that the church is targeted by asking the question “Why is the Church Targeted?” at the very start. From where EAK stands, the word “Church” is self-explanatory and comprises both the body of Christian believers including their faith and sacred objects. But new framing has an influence on the information processing and the subsequent action by the audience. The audience has been said not be passive, as they do not immediately accept the elite frames presented to them (Entman 1993). As such, EAK, in taking steps to frame the violent attacks, paid attention to what would most influence their target audience to action. Some of the action they wanted from their members is implied in the following statement: “We call upon the Churches to be vigilant in security matters and be ready for self defense.” This call signals the need for churches to take their security seriously, to put in place security apparatus around their premises and even have extra training for their members and ushers on security. If churches hire armed security guards in their precincts, they will be able to tackle or foil any possible attacks. It is not uncommon in Kenya today to see armed security personnel at many church venues in Kenya.

Since, not all frames nor proffered interpretations are accepted, different presentation of the same information can lead to wider acceptance (Kahneman and Tversky 1984). Analytically, the framings of the above statements by EAK has significant implications, as they highlight aspects of reality which lead individuals to interpret issues differently. It may elicit, between Christians and Muslims, the idea of religious intolerance or animosity and even exacerbate violence justified in terms of self-defense. Framing influences information processing in the equivalency approach as EAK points out the loss of lives and property by Christians, thus highlighting the losses involved.

The losses by Christians highlighted in the statements are as follows. First is the loss of life and injury to many others, as referenced in the in the July 2012 statement. The statement notes the “great sorrow” of the “entire fraternity” of the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, as well as the need to “console and empathize” with the families of those who were “massacred,” also extending prayers to those who were injured in the church attacks. The statement emphasized the sense of feeling “targeted” by Islamic groups even before the rise of Al-Shabaab. The statement notes the deaths of church workers and the destruction of property, along with the fact that no one had been brought to the court, and that the perpetrators were still free. Thus, there was no justice. In the April 3, 2015 statement, EAK stressed that 147 Christians were massacred and 79 others injured and recuperating in various hospitals, as a result of the attack carried out by Al-Shabaab at Garissa University College. EAK selected this aspect of loss and made it prominent in the communication, in this way defining the problem as being that many Christians have been killed in violent attacks. To this end, they lent credibility by listing various occasions when this has happened as above.

The EAK framing has selected aspects of perceived reality and made them more pronounced within the text of the statement. This further makes the link of a possible causal interpretation on the matter at hand. The figures and facts listed above perhaps have been or have not been substantiated. In such cases, there stands the risk which may be exploited to exaggerate or diminish the records. Hence at face value, statements could seek effectiveness much more than be truth-seeking. To address this problem, in this paper, my focus is to explain the effect of the figures and facts as presented for framing and not to investigate the individual figures in each attack event.

The second measure of loss is damage to property, and the EAK notes that lots of property has been destroyed in these attacks. EAK indicates that it has “persistently pleaded” that the government “take courage and act” to put an end to the “scourge of terror.” The organization describes the situation as one of “insecurity challenges” to be addressed, whether “political, religious, ethnic or ideological” in origin. The group references not only the “destruction” of lives and property, but the “intimidation” with which its members are forced to live. Whereas much of what comes to the public domain is the loss of lives, EAK also draws attention to the additional loss of property. Church establishments additionally make losses into millions of Kenya shillings when their Church buildings, offices, schools and premises are targeted. This often goes unnoticed in the immediate reporting hence EAK highlights this additional loss.

The third measure of loss is the potential loss of freedoms, religious and democratic. EAK reads mischief and intimidation in the attackers, who over time have become more courageous and heinous. As they suggest, the church attacks seem to be being “to instil fear” and with the further aim of “eradicating religious freedom, democratic liberties with the Church being the primary target.” In April 3, 2015 statement, EAK insists that Christians and their churches have been targeted by Islamic extremist groups for several years and their safety and that of their churches and other places of worship ought to be reassured. EAK asserts that religious freedoms for its members, especially in certain areas like Garissa, where Christians are a minority stand the risk of eradication through the fear that terror attacks against churches elicits. With this in mind, EAK recommended, out of concern for their safety, that members stay in their houses and avoid places of worship, which impinged greatly on their religious freedom.

When EAK highlights these three losses above, it is clear that the presentation gives sharp focus to loss. Studies indicate that when losses are highlighted, the recipients of the communication are more prone to take risks (Druckman 228). The equivalency frame in this case has not focused on the gains but on the losses. Given the accentuation of the losses, the target audience can be easily mobilized to take risks to avert further losses. In general, the equivalency approach also considers subsequent decision making after framing. Owing to the EAK statement, individuals are inclined to take risks as many losses are highlighted to them as opposed to gains.

A further loss indicated by EAK is loss of faith in the Kenyan intelligence and security service. This is indicated in the part of the July 2012 EAK statement which describes it as “extremely worrying” that church attacks are increasing and maintains that “assurances of security” by the Kenyan government appear “more rhetoric than pre-emptive.” The National Security and Intelligence Service (NSIS) and the police are described as “sleeping on the job.” The police commissioner of police admission that the police had information about imminent attacks is declared to be “devoid of security intelligence.” The April 2015 EAK statement urged the government to hire additional security personnel and train security forces adequately. In the EAK's focus on the incompetence of intelligence security and the inability to prevent or apprehend any attackers this far, the hearer or reader of the statement feels at loss as to what steps to take and begins to think about their own security and how to ensure it. Christians in Kenya would, perhaps, begin to consider installing additional security infrastructure and personnel at their meeting points for their own safety (Maseno 2018, 142).

This equivalency approach to framing by EAK gives rise to the interpretation that there are many more losses experienced from acts of violence—such as damage to property, loss of religious freedom—besides the loss of lives that Al-Shabaab is accused by the state of perpetrating.¹⁰ The range of losses due to terrorist violence are long-lasting and are lived with well after the incidents. Besides material loss of property, the loss of community in a region where people once lived in harmony can be permanent and irreparable. The hatred that threatens religious freedoms can creep into people's hearts and could trigger worse actions many years down the line between the deemed terrorists and the victims.

The equivalency approach harnesses the power and poignancy of these losses by making prominent the point that the targets of the violence are Christians and by listing all the attacks that have been previously carried out against them. As EAK asserts July 2012 statement: “As evangelicals, we feel targeted by these Islamic forces because even before Al-Shabaab, our churches were still being bombed.” This salient idea therefore accentuates the role of Islamic forces as the ones responsible for the loss of Christian lives, and such an interpretation presents a contrastive narrative from that which the Kenyan Government has continued to give in isolating the Al-Shabaab. The Kenyan Government position has over the years been that the Al-Shabaab group, a foreign, external entity and an enemy of the nation is the one to blame for the wave of violence. It has not seriously considered other possible causes of the violence and the role played by its own citizens in these happenings.

Toward a Conclusion: The Importance of Framing and Framing Theory

Building on the above Kenyan case study we can derive some broader reflections from the importance of framing and framing theory on FoRB and other religion and security matters. This is in no way exhaustive of all the possibilities, however, it highlights some critical perspectives going forward and which include the following three areas.

Framing Theory and Securitization

Religious organizations, non-governmental organizations and governments are essential actors, though not the only ones, in securitization. They make pronouncements on what they consider to be dangers. Barry Buzan, a scholar in the field of international relations and global security, understands securitization to include the process through which an issue is presented as an existential threat requiring urgent measures and justifying alternative actions outside the usual prescribed procedure (Buzan, Wæver, and De Wilde 1998, 24). It creates a second-order system that is useful in observing how main actors in the field of security studies operate. “It studies how security issues are produced by actors who pose something (a referent object) as existentially threatened and therefore claim a right to use extraordinary measure to defend it” (Laustsen and Wæver 2000). Securitization theory shows the effects of securitization as referent objects elevated to a level that makes particularly demands in the name of survival and threatens that if these are not dealt with swiftly, there will come a point of no return (Laustsen and Wæver, 708). The process of securitization is thus a speech act in which the utterance itself is the act, and it is by that labelling something a security issue that it actually ends up becoming one (Watson 2012).

The speech act contained in the EAK statement touches upon the security of Christian worshippers in churches and crusade grounds, which EAK demands should be taken seriously. The existential threat presented by EAK as a securitizing actor is the threat targeting Kenyan Christians, churches, and their faith. Indeed, the act by EAK of pronouncing Christian places of worship and Christians to be targets raises the question of their security to another level. EAK sounds the alarm by insisting that those killed are Christians. This invokes the matrix of identity for the victims of the attacks first as Christians, then as Kenyans. Further, in its statements, EAK deems Christian worshippers, churches, grounds, and their religion itself targeted by terrible criminals in repeated terror attacks. The very act of referring to sacred objects as threatened operates as a means of securitizing them. As indicated above, the speech act labelling something as threatened initiates the process of securitizing it. The threat of violent attacks against Christians in their places of worship is presented by EAK as an existential threat that brings to end the lives of many Christians, limits their religious and democratic freedoms, accrues material losses in a way that demands immediate action and extraordinary measures.

Political scientist Scott Watson has suggested that framing and securitization are substantially similar and that perhaps moving forward, security might be deemed as a distinct master frame whilst securitization may be a subfield of framing. According to Watson, securitization and framing have significant overlaps in terms of the power of actors to frame or securitize, the role of actors in constructing problems or threats through discursive practices, and the identification of audience, culture, and communicator in the construction of meaning (Watson 2012, 279–284). Framing and securitization can be merged meaningfully by religious organizations like EAK, parliamentarians and the government who as actors construct and communicate threats.

Parliamentarians and the government, like EAK engage in framing and securitizing. The rationale for certain policy agenda concerned with religious freedom should be credible and seen as such in the quest to counter violent extremism. Informed by different priorities in their need to counter violent extremism their speech act on matters of religion and religious freedoms frames the threat they envisage. Their pronouncements present issues which they deem require urgent actions outside of the normal procedures. When these are made in places where there are multiple religious identities, a hint toward the potential loss of religious freedoms of its citizenry can yield counter results. Indeed, a concern for religious freedoms requires careful reflection on the importance of how a matter is framed and securitized by the communicator.

The Connection Between Facts/Truth Value and Framing in Matters of Freedom of Belief and Security

With enormous information streams in Kenya and the world at large, framing is constantly carried out by people at various levels. It follows that some ideas will be counted, discounted, or ignored in the framing of the events and messages by the media, the government, or the community and these have an impact on religion-state relations. Frame sponsors range from individuals, to organizations, communities, neighbourhoods, the media, and many others.

The connection between facts and framing can best be understood using the criteria posed by international relations scholar Vânia Carvalho Pinto. Pinto argues that the successful frame is the one which the target audience finds credible according to tests of credibility and salience. According to Pinto, credibility includes being consistent, having arguments that flow in a logical sense, being in line with the audience's perceptions of the problem, and being conveyed by a person or entity that credible in the eyes of the audience. The salience criterion considers the importance of the message and how it connects to the audience's vision of the world and the audiences’ worldview (Pinto 2014). EAK's framing addressed both to Kenyan Christians and the Kenyan government, is presented logically and with empirical facts, and EAK is considered legitimate in the eyes of Kenyan Evangelical Christians. In the wake of violent attacks on churches, its message in the statement remains important as it connects to this audience.

A successful frame may not always satisfy seekers of truth, or even the corroboration of evidence. Pinto's criteria of successful framing provide for credibility that may not necessarily encompass the truth content in narratives as presented. This can be problematic for those who would emphasize the need for truth in the given accounts. The challenge remains that even though a frame could be successful, it may at the same time not account for the truth. In which case, frame sponsors, be they religious organizations, parliamentarians, and the government ought to be cognisant of this dilemma and seek out the less obvious voices and narratives that may be overshadowed in the subsequent constructions of meaning.

Whose Perspectives are Heard or Silenced in Framing?

Individuals must process vast information and can only do so with some forms of framing. New framing has an influence on the information processing and the action by the audience. The audience plays an important role on which perspectives carry the day and the framing elicits a response from the audience who thereafter respond in certain ways. The audience is not passive, as they may not immediately accept the elite frames presented to them (Entman 1993). According to sociologist William Gamson and colleagues, instead of the term audience, it is appropriate to use terms such as readers or listeners to imply that they are active processors who engage in decoding of meaning. As readers or listeners, it is clear that various perspectives will be prioritized at various levels and influenced by a number of factors. Depending on the power they wield, frame sponsors may make their views known in a very pronounced and emphatic way. However, the reader or listener is not powerless in their decoding. Ultimately, the audience's engagement will play a role in which views carry the day and which are considered insignificant.

In general, framing processes are embedded in power relations. EAK, as an actor, occupies a social position and possesses social capital, allowing it to be a frame sponsor from which pronouncements are weighed. EAK's influence must be seen within its complex interplay with the state, economics, ethnic nationalism, and other social variables. Though EAK as actors do have an influence on conflict and peace in Kenya, they cannot reduce away the complexities found within the Kenyan society. The equivalency approach to framing leads us to understand, in part, the multiple losses that occur when violent extremism is experienced. This approach goes beyond the analysis of the losses and takes the audience to the level of being ready to take risks in the name of self-defense. In the case of countering violent extremism, EAK proceeds to make clear that religious freedoms may be a thing of the past unless action is taken against the propagators of violence. This approach is problematic, in that the frame sponsor may exaggerate losses with an intention to whip emotions from followers who are willing to risk their own lives for a cause. It is also notable that powerful frame sponsors may silence the less powerful frame sponsors and organizations even if their cause is deficient. All of these factors, however, exemplify the importance of understanding framing when it comes to issues of FoRB and violent extremism, especially when the latter is manifested in violence against religious minority groups who come to frame their experience in terms of the existential threat of terrorist attack.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Loreen Maseno

Loreen Maseno is a Senior Lecturer, Department of Religion, Theology, and Philosophy, Maseno University. She is also a Research Fellow, Department of Biblical and Ancient Studies, University of South Africa. She was recently a Humboldt Fellow, University of Bayreuth, Germany. Her books include How Abanyole African Widows Understand Christ: Explaining Redemption Through the Propagation of Lineage and The Bible and Sociological Contours: Some African Perspectives. Essays in Honor of Professor Halvor Moxnes (with Zorodzai Dube and Elia Mligo).

Notes

1 Framing research has accrued in a range of academic disciplines such as literature, sociology, economics, psychology, cognitive linguistics and communication. As a result, there are multiple theoretical and methodological approaches to framing (see D’Angelo 2002).

2 Address by Rev Calisto Odede, Senior Pastor, Nairobi Baptist Church in his speech on 2 December 2015 at the EAK convention.

3 See the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/EAKenya.

4 See “Bishop Mark Kariuki—Evangelical Alliance of Kenya #FromNowOn,” 13 November 2015. Online at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWiuJ60fE6Q

5 See “Kenya church attacks ‘kill 15’ in Garissa,” BBC News, 1 July 2012.

6 See Kalume Kazungu, “Non-locals evacuated over fears of fresh Al-Shabaab attacks in Lamu,” Daily Nation, 9 July 2017.

7 Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, press statement issued 4 July 2012, following church attacks in Garissa on Sunday 1 July 2012.

8 See the article of Grüll and Wilson for more on conflicts between the language of FoRB and religion conceived as identity.

9 Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, press release on Garissa, issued 3 April 2015. Online at: http://eaclj.org/religion/13-religion-feature-articles/188-evangelical-alliance-of-kenya-eak-press-release-on-garissa.html

10 For a recent rendering of the place of Al-Shabaab in the East Africa Constellation see Anderson and McKnight 2014.