A Review of "Clash of Civilizations?"

A Review of “Clash of Civilizations?”

February 21, 2003

Introduction

In the article, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Samuel P. Huntington begins this highly speculative argument by stating that the current and future conflicts in the world are going to be and currently are caused by differences between people or groups from different civilizations. He argues for a theory that “the most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating… civilizations from one another” (Huntington, 1993, p.25). He believes that since the end of the Cold War, ideological and economic answers are no longer enough, or even valid. He feels the principal actors are still the nation states, but they are influenced by more than just power and wealth. Other factors like cultural preferences, commonalties, and differences are also influential. Huntington explains that the most important classifications are not the three blocs of the Cold War, but rather the major world civilizations. He argues that in this new era as people identify themselves in terms of their ancestry and heritage, it will create a clash of civilizations.

For the most part, it is a theory with which I agree. I do, however, question some of Huntington’s components in his theory, as well as his classifications of civilization. Huntington writes: “Civilizations are differentiated from each other by history, language, culture, tradition, and most important, religion” (Huntington, 1993, p.25). His hypothesis, therefore, is that conflicts of the future will be declared primarily on religious differences. This is one idea that I have an issue with. I believe that different civilizations tend to characterize themselves differently. For some, this means a cultural identity rooted in a particular religious belief. For others, their culture may be applied to an economic principle such as capitalism or communism. I would say that most ethnic conflicts occur in times of crisis - economic or social instability. When new economic ventures fail, the search for something to fall back upon often leads people back to their roots. A fine example is demonstrated by Pakistan's return to a militant, Islamic rule after its weakening democratic rule in a secularly founded state. On the other hand, India's relative economic stability has allowed that nation to preserve national unity between the 27 states, a multitude of ethnic nationalities and hundreds of languages. I think international or intercultural conflict will always tend to include an economic or territorial element.

Why the “question mark” in his title? It must have been added with a sense of humor towards the inconsistencies of sociological predictions over the years. Otherwise, the article makes it clear that Huntington has not only made up his mind that conflict in the future will be "the West versus the Rest" (Huntington, 1993, p.39), as he puts it, but he also wants to guarantee that his prophecy turns into a self-fulfilling one by giving advice to Western policy makers.

So in this paper I am going to describe and analyze Samuel Huntington's worldview of global politics in ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

So in this paper I am going to describe and analyze Samuel Huntington's worldview of global politics in order to understand better how it relate to our world today.

Huntington’s Image of the World in the Post-Cold War Era

With the end of the Cold War, Huntington believes that international politics will move away from the period dominated by Western civilization and "its centerpiece becomes the interaction between the West and non-Western civilizations" (Huntington, 1993, pp.23). In other words, major conflict will take place on a global level among all of the world's cultures and civilizations and will not be concentrated in one region of the world.

“In the post-Cold War world, the most important distinctions among peoples are not ideological, political, or economic. They are cultural” (Huntington, 1996, p.21). In order to understand this proposed idea, Huntington later discusses what exactly he means by "civilization" and what particular groups exist. According to him, civilizations are cultural entities that are comprised of ethnic groups, nationalities, religions, and other characteristics that are distinguished from one another. There currently exits eight major civilizations, including Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Latin American, African, and Slavic-Orthodox (Huntington, 1993, p.25).

Huntington also believes the Chinese and the Islamic civilizations as presenting the most dangerous challenges to Western civilization. Although relations between China and the West remain tense, I believe that the aging leadership of China will soon be succeeded by a generation open to the West politically as well as economically. The Beijing Olympics in 2008 may yet become the symbol of this transformation. Interestingly, a week after the World Trade Center was destroyed, China was admitted to the World Trade Organization. That same week, China's foreign minister met with Secretary of State Colin Powell for two hours, promising solidarity, diplomacy, and secret intelligence. "China is also a victim of terrorist attacks," the foreign minister said (Corson, 2001).

Huntington pays special attention to the rise of Islamic civilizations because they are large, energetic, growing in power, and have asserted their superiority over Western culture. In the context of the West and Islam, he states that their conflicts "flow from the nature of the two religions and the civilizations based on them" (Huntington, 1996, pp.210-211). Thus, the "ongoing pattern of conflict" (Huntington, 1996, pp. 210-211) between the two civilizations comes from conflicts over the role of religion in politics. Even their similarities become sources of conflicts: their monotheism, which will not accommodate other gods; and their claims that contest the same territory.

His thesis has the potential to be extremely dangerous if taken as a prescription for policy making. If the leadership of a major power (i.e., United States), were to accept this world-view and adopt and implement policies based upon it, countries belonging to other “civilizations” would be forced to take counter-measures. This could cause a series of events that would turn Huntington's position into self-fulfilled reality (Sato, 1997). To prevent this from happening, governments must keep religion out of their plans towards foreign policy. As far as I can ascertain, judging by the number of largely critical reactions from around the world, including from the United States and Western Europe, it seems quite unlikely that Huntington's ideas will be adopted as guidelines by the world's policymakers.

Are Today’s Conflicts due to a Clash of Civilizations?

In Huntington's opinion, democracy is a Western creation that cannot be transferred to the unfriendly environments of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East (Huntington, 1996, p.39). Over the centuries, these countries have developed their own habits and practices, which the West should respect rather than attempt to change. Anything else would be considered forceful cultural imperialism. He feels the best that the U.S. can do is to team up with its western European allies to form a kind of union that can resist these problem civilizations. We can see this prophecy unfold right before our eyes as the Western allies attempt to deal with Sadaam Hussein and Iraq. In the wake of the September 11 attacks, which have been blamed on Islamic extremists, political scientists throughout the world have referred to Huntington's theory. Popular opinion is probably that Huntington had predicted this inevitable divide between Islam and the West. I don’t feel Huntington’s theory adequately explains September 11 and its aftermath. After speaking with several Muslim friends and co-workers, I believe that the radical Islamic movements are more characteristic of "clashes" within Islam than between "global" Islam and "The West". Besides, al-Qaeda also targets Muslim governments, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which it views as godless. Another example of this is the U.S. led campaign in Afghanistan to rid the Taliban rule, which acquired significant support for the Moslem World. Even Iran and Turkey supported the U.S. led actions and played an active role in this campaign as well as the campaign against al-Quida terrorists. On the other hand, bin Laden openly seeks a clash between Islam and the West. From bin Laden’s perspective, it is a clash that has been under way for centuries, with the Americans as the latest incarnation of the Christian Crusaders (those arrogant Western meddlers out to oppress Muslims). In an October 2001 interview on al-Jazeera, the Arabic satellite news channel, bin Laden talked about the “clash of civilizations” thesis (Council on Foreign Relations). The similarity between bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Hitler suggests we are now witnessing not a clash of civilizations so much as a distorted obsession that can arise out of virtually any civilization. Rather than looking at Islam to understand the terror that confronts us today, we might do better to understand the similarities between Mr. bin Laden, Sadaam Hussein and people like Hitler and Stalin.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is quite evident to me that The Clash of Civilizations is a theory that has yet to completely materialize. I feel as if this theory was a response to the growing tensions between the West and Islam over the past decade or so, and that response was merely a hasty and quick-tempered reaction to fear. In the past few centuries, the West has never experienced a real threat from outside civilizations. It basically has dominated the world in all possible ways and never had a serious danger posed to it by a non-Western force. But today, there exists a very real threat, and that which comes from Islamic extremists, a civilization that is on the opposite side of the spectrum in regards to politics, religion, and the like. The West has realized that any type of attack on Islam, whether it be militaristic or economic, usually is accompanied by repercussions of some sort. One only needs to look at the events of the last 5 years to see the threat that is very real. However, the conflict between the West and Islam does not necessarily mean that the future is going to be characterized by such conflicts between major civilizations. Many more factors need to be looked at, such as conflicts in political ideology, for they are much too important to be ignored. It’s important that we analyze how these situations are dealt with and what will be done in the future to combat them so the world can be a peaceful environment.

References

Corson, Trevor. (2001, October 26). “China: New ally or old foe?” Christian Science

Monitor. Available at:

Council on Foreign Relations. Terrorism: Q & A. Available at:

Huntington, Samuel P. (1993). “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72(3):

22-49.

Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World

Order. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Huntington, Samuel P. (1996, November/December). “The West: Unique not Universal”

Foreign Affairs 75(6): 38-46.

Sato, Seizaburo. (1997). “Clash of Civilizations or Self-Renovation through Mutual

Learning?” The Institute for International Policy Studies. Available at:

A Review of "Clash of Civilizations?"