WOH2001 Essay \" Clash of Civilizations\" PDF

Preview

Summary

The Clash of Civilizations? purports that civilization conflicts will take the place of conflicts over ideologies and that there is greater likelihood of “conflicts between groups in different civilizations”, however, this is not advocated nor desirable. In light of David Brooks’ column in the New Y...

Description

WOH2001 U01 16 September 2018 Prof. Saad AbiHamad, PhD A Summary of “The Clash of Civilizations?” The Clash of Civilizations? is a 1993 article by Samuel P. Huntington regarding the emergence of a new era of relationships and interests between the various global communities, split along lines of culture, which he refers to in a broad sense as civilizations. Published in Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No. 3, Huntington states that the world will begin to organize itself along these cultural lines rather than political or ideological lines, to exert greater power in a diminished Western influence scenario. Huntington views the world as shaping into seven or eight civilizations, which would include Western civilization, Islamic, Hindi, Slavic-Orthodox, Confucian, Latin American, African, and distinctly, Japanese civilization. His central thesis or argument is that upon the end of the Cold War that saw the global arena divided as an East-West and rest of world battleground model, the globe would not organize itself into a harmonious “One World” paradigm, but rather one of distinct large civilizations that share cultural features, one that will define “the next pattern of conflict”. In this thesis, world conflicts could arise between groups of countries that share cultural kinship, giving way to dangerous cultural conflicts. In his own words, Huntington declares “The most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating these civilizations from one another”. 1 There are at least six critical arguments for which Huntington believes the above mentioned to be the case. Firstly, that the cultural differences between the civilizations run deep, they are centuries old, and are 1very real. They are fundamental and cannot be easily dismissed as would be a political ideology. Secondly, as we move towards a more globalized world, the

1 Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations?. (New York: Foreign Affairs, 1993), 25.

various civilization’s interactions are intensifying, leading to greater consciousness and awareness of differences. As third, he identifies economic modernization as a catalyst for removing local and nation-state identity, leaving a gap filled by other cultural identities and religion which transcend boundaries. Fourth, the influence of the West is at its peak, and declining. Non-Western nations structure their societies in their own way instead. In the fifth argument, Huntington points to the immutable nature of ethnicity and religion, which cannot be changed. Sixth and last, the growth of economies around regional centers is increasing. Thus the strong economic centers and trade areas between countries within North America, East Asia, and so on. It should be noted however that the form in which culture is defined has been challenged by others such as Brooks, stating that Huntington may be over-emphasizing the values of the elite leadership of these nation countries, not the people they rule.2 Each civilization, in the process of looking out for their own self-interest, will eventually clash with one another. Huntington points to two levels of conflict between the civilizations: The microlevel, in which neighboring civilizations along the ‘fault lines’ clash over territory, and macrolevel, in which civilizations contend for military and economic power. ‘Fault lines’ are meant to describe the geographical boundaries that are created by the apparent civilizations, in some cases clearly arising from political boundaries but in others through historic boundaries of past empires. Huntington points to the division along Russia with Eastern Europe, a Western Christian division with Orthodox Christian & Muslim civilizations to the west, along a boundary that splits the Ukraine and Romania and includes Bosnia, Serbia, Macedonia, and Bulgaria with the Orthodox Christian and Islam side. This is referred to as the ‘Velvet Curtain’ that has replaced the former ‘Iron Curtain’ of the Cold War. There are examples of these ‘fault lines’ throughout the globe, evidenced in Italy, France, and Germany with Arab and Turkish migrants, 2 Brooks, David. Huntington’s Clash Revisited, 1.

the Arab and Black Christians confrontations in Sudan and other parts of Africa, or that of the Orthodox and Muslim conflicts in Bosnia and Sarajevo, Serb and Albania.3 Huntington also argues that countries have also pursued rallying and support from culturally similar countries, or those people that share civilizational ties, something deemed as “kin-country syndrome”, such as when Saddam Hussein of Iraq sought to rally the support of Arab governments, for example. A second example is that of the conflicts that have occurred in the former Soviet states, where Turkey came in support of Azerbaijan. In yet another, third example, the Yugoslav conflict, the West and Vatican were quickly recognized Slovenia and Croatia, while Russian nationalists sided with the Orthodox Serbians. At a more macro-level, Huntington establishes that the West, as a civilization, has reached its peak of power and consolidated its influence over political and economic institutions at a global level. In fact, the power of the West within the U.N. Security Council is considerable, when the decisions of both bodies are proposed as something desirable to the “world community”. Examples include the U.N. Security Council’s decisions in support of military actions or economic sanctions against Iraq and Libya in recent history. Western civilization is viewed as being a universal one by the West, with its ideas of individualism, human rights, liberty, rule of law, democracy, and so on. But Huntington sustains that these views do not echo within collective or minimalist societies such as Confucian, Japanese, Hindu, Buddhist and more. Thus some countries are left to either isolate themselves from the West, try to adopt some, or integrate with and adopt all of its doctrines, leading some countries to be ‘torn’ in which route to take. In retrospect, this view has been challenged by critics such as David Brooks, who wrote that some values are indeed universal, such as dignity, and political systems that respond to the

3 Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations?, 33.

people. Brooks says that Huntington has erred in that values are derived from within the context of the situation, committing a “Fundamental Attribution Error” (Brooks, 2011, 2). “Torn Countries” are those in which a considerable amount of cultural homogeneity exists but are not clear as to what civilizational philosophy it should adopt. Turkey has sought to join the European Union, while Mexico has joined the North American trade area. Russia is a vast land with Slavic, Orthodox, and Muslim identities. In order to redefine themselves, their leaders must first support the move, its public must be willing to accept it, and the other civilization must be willing to accept them too. Many of the largest non-Western powers have sought to increase their military presence as a means of leveling up to the Western warfare supremacy. In doing so, a coalition is created between Confucian and Islamic civilizations for the acquirement of weapons, including nuclear ones. These major powers include therefore China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, India, Libya, and Algeria.4 In conclusion, The Clash of Civilizations? purports that civilization conflicts will take the place of conflicts over ideologies and that there is greater likelihood of “conflicts between groups in different civilizations”, however, this is not advocated nor desirable. In light of David Brooks’ column in the New York Times, we must also consider the possibility of ‘contagion’, or tumultuous events that redefine long-standing ideologies and assumptions of a country or civilization’s culture values. 5 The West should have both a short-term and long-term approach in light of these implications. The West must therefore work, in the short term, to cooperate within its own civilization. In the long term, the West must gain understanding and accommodate these nonWestern modern civilizations in order to coexist.

4 Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations?, 46. 5 Brooks, Huntington’s Clash Revisited, 2....