Misplaced Pages

Clash of Civilizations: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:38, 23 October 2006 edit69.249.97.64 (talk) List of civilizations← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:38, 29 December 2024 edit undoDon Stroud (talk | contribs)247 edits Major civilizations according to Huntington: Buddhist cultures order according to the Book 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Theory of cultural conflict by Samuel P. Huntington}}
]
{{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}}
{{Infobox book
| italic title = no
| name = The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
| image = clash civilizations.jpg
| author = ]
| cover_artist =
| country = United States
| language = English
| series =
| subject =
| publisher = ]
| pub_date = 1996
| media_type =
| pages =
| isbn = 978-0-684-84441-1
}}
The "'''Clash of Civilizations'''" is a thesis that people's ] and ] ] will be the primary source of conflict in the post–] world.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Huntington|first=Samuel P.|date=1993|title=The Clash of Civilizations?|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/20045621|journal=Foreign Affairs|volume=72|issue=3|pages=22–49|doi=10.2307/20045621|jstor=20045621|issn=0015-7120}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web|url=http://gbse.com.my/v4no10JANUARY2018/Paper-147-i-.pdf|title=gbse.com.my|website=gbse.com.my|accessdate=9 September 2023}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Emily|first=Stacey|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RuREEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA26|title=Contemporary Politics and Social Movements in an Isolated World: Emerging Research and Opportunities: Emerging Research and Opportunities|date=2021-10-29|publisher=IGI Global|isbn=978-1-7998-7616-8|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Eriksen|first1=Thomas Hylland|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FiQfAwAAQBAJ&q=The+Clash+of+Civilizations+is+a+thesis+that+people%27s+cultural+and+religious+identities+will+be+the+primary+source+of+conflict+in+the+post%E2%80%93Cold+War+world.&pg=PA87|title=Anthropology Now and Next: Essays in Honor of Ulf Hannerz|last2=Garsten|first2=Christina|last3=Randeria|first3=Shalini|date=2014-10-01|publisher=Berghahn Books|isbn=978-1-78238-450-2|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Krieger|first=Douglas W.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=OE5VCAAAQBAJ&q=The+Clash+of+Civilizations+is+a+thesis+that+people%27s+cultural+and+religious+identities+will+be+the+primary+source+of+conflict+in+the+post%E2%80%93Cold+War+world.&pg=PT397|title=The Two Witnesses|date=2014-11-22|publisher=Lulu Press, Inc|isbn=978-1-312-67075-4|language=en}}{{Dead link|date=December 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> The American political scientist ] argued that future wars would be fought not between countries, but between cultures.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Haynes|first=Jeffrey|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-aoeEAAAQBAJ&q=The+Clash+of+Civilizations+is+a+thesis+that+people%27s+cultural+and+religious+identities+will+be+the+primary+source+of+conflict+in+the+post%E2%80%93Cold+War+world.&pg=PT117|title=A Quarter Century of the "Clash of Civilizations"|date=2021-05-11|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-000-38383-6|language=en}}</ref> It was proposed in a 1992 lecture at the ], which was then developed in a 1993 '']'' article titled "'''The Clash of Civilizations?'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA-->",<ref name="FAarticle">Official copy (free preview): , ''Foreign Affairs'', Summer 1993</ref> in response to his former student ]'s 1992 book '']''. Huntington later expanded his thesis in a 1996 book '''''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order'''''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA-->.<ref>{{cite news| url = https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/clashofcivilizations.htm| title = WashingtonPost.com: The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order| newspaper = ]}}</ref>


The phrase itself was earlier used by ] in 1946,<ref>{{blockquote|le problème russo-américain, et là nous revenons à l'Algérie, va être dépassé lui-même avant très peu, cela ne sera pas un choc d'empires nous assistons au choc de civilisations et nous voyons dans le monde entier les civilisations colonisées surgir peu à peu et se dresser contre les civilisations colonisatrices.}} {{cite web| url = http://www.ina.fr/audio/PHD85011203| title = Page non trouvée {{!}} INA| access-date = 2015-07-14| archive-date = 2015-09-24| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150924051854/http://www.ina.fr/audio/PHD85011203| url-status = dead}}</ref> by ] in his analysis of the ] in 1988,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.academia.edu/20079544|title=&quot;Some recollections from my acquaintance with Sita Ram Goel&quot;, ch.6 of K. Elst, ed.: India's Only Communalist, In Commemoration of Sita Ram Goel|first=Koenraad|last=Elst|accessdate=Oct 23, 2022|via=www.academia.edu}}</ref><ref>Elst, K. India's Only Communalist: an Introduction to the Work of Sita Ram Goel, in Sharma, A. (2001). Hinduism and secularism: After Ayodhya. Basingstoke: Palgrave.</ref> by ] in an article in the September 1990 issue of '']'' titled "The Roots of Muslim Rage"<ref>Bernard Lewis: ''The Atlantic Monthly'', September 1990</ref> and by ] in his book "La première guerre civilisationnelle" published in 1992.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AhVIAAAAMAAJ|title=Première guerre civilisationnelle|last=Elmandjra|first=Mahdi|date=1992|publisher=Toubkal|language=fr}}</ref><ref>Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations (1996), p. 246: " 'La premiere guerre civilisationnelle' the distinguished Moroccan scholar Mahdi Elmandjra called the Gulf War as it was being fought."</ref> Even earlier, the phrase appears in a 1926 book regarding the Middle East by ]: ''Young Islam on Trek: A Study in the Clash of Civilizations''. This expression derives from "clash of cultures", already used during the colonial period and the ].<ref>Louis Massignon, ''La psychologie musulmane'' (1931), in Idem, ''Ecrits mémorables'', t. I, Paris, Robert Laffont, 2009, p. 629: "Après la venue de Bonaparte au Caire, le ''clash of cultures'' entre l'ancienne Chrétienté et l'Islam prit un nouvel aspect, par invasion (sans échange) de l'échelle de valeurs occidentales dans la mentalité collective musulmane."</ref>
The '''Clash of Civilizations''' is a controversial theory that people's cultural/religious identity will be the primary source of conflict in the post-] world. The theory gained widespread attention after the ]. Popularized by ], it was originally formulated in an article titled "The Clash of Civilizations?" published in the ] '']'' in ]. The term itself was first used by ] in an article in the September 1990 issue of ] titled "The Roots of Muslim Rage." Huntington later expanded his ] in a ] book ''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order''.


Huntington began his thinking by surveying the diverse theories about the nature of global politics in the post–Cold War period. Some theorists and writers argued that ], ], and the capitalist ] had become the only remaining ideological alternative for nations in the post–Cold War world. Specifically, ] argued that the world had reached the ']' in a ] sense.
==Overview==
Huntington began his thinking by surveying the diverse theories about the nature of global politics in the post-] period. Some theorists and writers argued that ] and Western values had become the only remaining ideological alternative for nations in the post-Cold War world. Specifically, ] argued that the world had reached the ']' in a ] sense.


Huntington believed that while the age of ideology had ended, the world had only reverted to a normal state of affairs characterized by cultural conflict. In his thesis, he argued that the primary axis of conflict in the future would be along cultural and religious lines. As an extension, he posits that the concept of different ]s, as the highest rank of cultural identity, will become increasingly useful in analyzing the potential for conflict. In the ] '']'' article, Huntington writes: Huntington believed that while the age of ] had ended, the world had only reverted to a normal state of affairs characterized by cultural conflict. In his thesis, he argued that the primary axis of conflict in the future will be along cultural lines.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.slideshare.net/mehbaliyev/rashad-mehbaliyev-civilizations-their-nature-and-clash-possibilities|title=Civilizations, their nature and clash possibilities (c) Rashad Mehbal...|last=mehbaliyev|date=30 October 2010}}</ref> As an extension, he posits that the concept of different ]s, as the highest category of ], will become increasingly useful in analyzing the potential for conflict. At the end of his 1993 ''Foreign Affairs'' article, "The Clash of Civilizations?", Huntington writes, "This is not to advocate the desirability of conflicts between civilizations. It is to set forth descriptive hypothesis as to what the future may be like."<ref name="FAarticle"/>


In addition, the clash of civilizations, for Huntington, represents a development of history. In the past, world history was mainly about the struggles between monarchs, nations and ideologies, such as that seen within ]. However, after the end of the ], world politics moved into a new phase, in which non-Western civilizations are no longer the exploited recipients of Western civilization but have become additional important actors joining the West to shape and move world history.<ref>Murden S. Cultures in world affairs. In: Baylis J, Smith S, Owens P, editors. The Globalization of World Politics. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 416-426.</ref>
:It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.


==Major civilizations according to Huntington==
Huntington falls in the ] school, believing that culturally defined groups are ancient and natural. His view that nation states would remain the most powerful actors is in line with the ]. Finally, his warning that the Western civilization may decline is inspired by ] and ].
[[File:Clash of Civilizations mapn2.png|thumb|center|750px|The clash of civilizations according to Huntington (1996)
''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order''<ref> scanned image {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070312101415/http://s02.middlebury.edu/FS056A/Herb_war/clash3.htm |date=March 12, 2007 }}</ref>]]
Due to an enormous response and the solidification of his views, Huntington later expanded the ] in his ] book ''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order''.
Huntington divided the world into the "major civilizations" in his thesis as such:<ref>{{Cite web|last=Walter|first=Natalie|date=2016-06-15|title=Summary of "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order"|url=https://www.beyondintractability.org/bksum/huntington-clash|access-date=2021-10-28|website=Beyond Intractability|language=en}}</ref><ref name=":1" />
* ], comprising the ] and ], ] and ], most of the ], ], and ]. Whether Latin America and the ] of the Soviet Union are included, or are instead their own separate civilizations, will be an important future consideration for those regions, according to Huntington. The traditional Western viewpoint identified Western Civilization with the ] (]-]) countries and culture.<ref name="google.com">{{cite web|url=https://www.google.com/search?q=%22western+christianity%22+%22western+world%22|title="western christianity" "western world" - Google Search|website=google.com|access-date=2017-09-09}}</ref>
** ]n civilization, including ] (excluding ], ] and ]), ], ], ], and the ] may be considered a part of Western civilization. Many people in ], ] and ] regard themselves as full members of Western civilization.
* ] civilization, comprising ], ], ], ], ], great parts of the former ] and ].
** <small>Countries with a non-Orthodox majority are usually excluded e.g. Muslim ] and Muslim ] and most of ], as well as majority Muslim regions in the ], ] and central Russian regions such as ] and ], Roman Catholic ] and ], Protestant and Catholic ]. However, ] is included, despite its dominant faith, the ], being a part of ] rather than the ], and ] is also included, despite its dominant faith being ].</small>
* The ] is the mix of the ], ], ], ], and ] civilizations.
** The ] of China, the ]s, ], ], and ]. This group also includes the ], especially in relation to Southeast Asia.
** ], considered a hybrid of Chinese civilization and older ] patterns.
** The ] cultures of ], ], ], ], ]; and also ], ], and ], are identified as separate from other civilizations, but Huntington believes that they do not constitute a major civilization in the sense of international affairs.
** ] civilization, located chiefly in ] and ], and culturally adhered to by the global ].
** <small>Part of ], located in Muslim-Majority countries which includes ] countries of ], ] and ]. ] countries of ] and ]</small>
* The ] of the ] (excluding ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]), northern ], ], ], ], parts of ], ], ], ], ], ] and parts of south-western Philippines.
* The civilization of ] located in southern Africa, Middle Africa (excluding Chad), East Africa (excluding ], the ], ], and the ] of ] and ]), ], ], the ], ], and ]. Considered as a possible eighth civilization by Huntington.
* Instead of belonging to one of the "major" civilizations, ] and ] are labeled as "Lone" countries. ] could be considered a unique state with its own civilization, Huntington writes, but one which is extremely similar to the West. Huntington also believes that the ], former British colonies in the Caribbean, constitutes a distinct entity.
* There are also others which are considered "cleft countries" because they contain very large groups of people identifying with separate civilizations. Examples include ] ("cleft" between its ]-dominated western section and its ]-dominated east), ] (cleft between Latin America, and the West), ], ], ], ], ], and ] (all cleft between Islam and Sub-Saharan Africa), ] and ] (cleft between Hindu and Sub-Saharan African), ] (cleft between Hindu and Buddhist), and the Philippines (cleft between Islam, in the case of south western ]; Sinic, in the case of ]; and the Westernized Christian Majority). ] was also included as "cleft" between Islam and Sub-Saharan Africa; this division became a formal split in July 2011 following an overwhelming vote for independence by ] in a ].


==Huntington's thesis of civilizational clash==
==List of civilizations==
] ]]]
The definition, nomenclature, and even the number of civilizations are somewhat ambiguous in Huntington's works. Civilizations may consist of states and social groups (such as ethnic and religious minorities). Predominant religion seems to be the main criterion of his classification, but in some cases geographical proximity and linguistic similarity are important as well. Using various studies of history, Huntington divided the world into the "major" civilizations in his thesis as such:


Huntington argues that the trends of global conflict after the end of the Cold War are increasingly appearing at these civilizational divisions. Wars such as those following the break up of ], in ], and between India and Pakistan were cited as evidence of inter-civilizational conflict. He also argues that the widespread Western belief in the universality of the West's values and political systems is naïve and that continued insistence on democratization and such "universal" norms will only further antagonize other civilizations. Huntington sees the West as reluctant to accept this because it built the international system, wrote its laws, and gave it substance in the form of the ].
*]ern civilization, centered on ] and ] but also including ], ], ], ], the ], and other ]. Whether ] and the former member states of the ] are included, or are instead their own separate civilizations, will be an important future consideration for those regions, according to Huntington.
*The ] world of Orthodox and/or Slavic Eastern Europe and ].
*]
*The ] world of the ], ], ], the northwest of ] (], ], and parts of India), ], ]
*] civilization, located chiefly in ], ], and culturally adhered to by the global ]
*The ] civilization of ], ], ], ], ], and which includes the ], especially in relation to ].
*]
*], considered a hybrid of Chinese civilization and older Altaic patterns.
*Instead of belonging to one of "major" civilizations, ] and ] are labeled as "Lone" countries. ] could be considered a unique state with its own civilization, Huntington writes, but one which is extremely similar to the West. Huntington believes that former British colonies in the ] constitute a distinct entity.


Huntington identifies a major shift of economic, military, and political power from the West to the other civilizations of the world, most significantly to what he identifies as the two "challenger civilizations", Sinic and Islam.
The ] areas of northern and western India, ], parts of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ] are identified as separate from other civilizations, but Huntington believes that they do not constitute a major civilization in the sense of international affairs.


In Huntington's view, East Asian Sinic civilization is culturally asserting itself and its values relative to the West due to its rapid economic growth. Specifically, he believes that China's goals are to reassert itself as the regional ], and that other countries in the region will 'bandwagon' with China due to the history of hierarchical command structures implicit in the ] Sinic civilization, as opposed to the individualism and pluralism valued in the West. Regional powers such as the two Koreas and Vietnam will acquiesce to Chinese demands and become more supportive of China rather than attempting to oppose it. Huntington therefore believes that the rise of China poses one of the most significant problems and the most powerful long-term threat to the West, as Chinese cultural assertion clashes with the American desire for the lack of a regional hegemony in East Asia.{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}}
==Huntington's thesis of civilizational clash==
]Huntington argues that the trends of global conflict after the end of the Cold War are increasingly appearing at these civilizational divisions. Wars such as those following the break up of ], in ], and between ] and ] were cited as evidence of intercivilizational conflict. The ] is seen as its largest manifestation.


Huntington argues that the Islamic civilization has experienced a massive population explosion which is fueling instability both on the ] and in its interior, where ] movements are becoming increasingly popular. Manifestations of what he terms the "]" include the ] and the first ]. Perhaps the most controversial statement Huntington made in the ''Foreign Affairs'' article was that "Islam has bloody borders". Huntington believes this to be a real consequence of several factors, including the previously mentioned Muslim ] and population growth and Islamic proximity to many civilizations including Sinic, Orthodox, Western, and African.
Huntington also argues that the widespread Western belief in the universality of the West's values and political systems is naïve and that continued insistence on democratization and such "universal" norms will only further antagonize other civilizations. Huntington sees the West as reluctant to accept this because it built the international system, wrote its laws, and gave it substance in the form of the ]. Huntingon identifies a major shift of economic, military, and political power from the West to the other civilizations of the world, most significant to what he identifies as the two "challenger civilizations", Sinic and Islam.


Huntington sees Islamic civilization as a potential ally to China, both having more revisionist goals and sharing common conflicts with other civilizations, especially the West. Specifically, he identifies common Chinese and Islamic interests in the areas of weapons proliferation, human rights, and democracy that conflict with those of the West, and feels that these are areas in which the two civilizations will cooperate.
In Huntington's view, East Asian Sinic civilization is culturally asserting itself and its values relative to the West due to its rapid economic growth. Specifically, he believes that China's goals are to reassert itself as the regional hegemon, and that other countries in the region will 'bandwagon' with China due to the history of hiearchical command structures implicit in the ] Sinic civilization, as opposed to the individualism and pluralism valued in the West. In other words, regional powers such as the two Koreas, Vietnam, and Cambodia will acquiesce to Chinese demands and become more supportive of China rather than attempting to oppose it. Huntington therefore believes that the rise of China poses one of the most significant problems and the most powerful long-term threat to the ], as Chinese cultural assertion clashes with the American desire for the lack of a regional hegemon in East Asia.


Russia, Japan, and India are what Huntington terms 'swing civilizations' and may favor either side. Russia, for example, clashes with the many Muslim ethnic groups on its southern border (such as ]) but—according to Huntington—cooperates with Iran to avoid further Muslim-Orthodox violence in Southern Russia, and to help continue the flow of oil. Huntington argues that a "]" is emerging in which China will cooperate more closely with ], Pakistan, and other states to augment its international position.
Huntington argues that the Islamic civilization has experienced a massive population explosion which is fueling instablity both on the borders of Islam and in its interior, where fundamentalist movements are becoming increasingly popular. Manifestations of what he terms the "Islamic Resurgence" include the ], the ], and extremely widespread Islamic opposition to the United States during both Gulf Wars. Perhaps the most controversial statement Huntington made in the Foreign Affairs article was that "Islam has bloody borders". Huntington believes this to be a real consequence of several factors, including the previously mentioned Muslim youth bulge and population growth and Islamic proximity to many civilizations including Sinic, Orthodox, Western, and African.


Huntington also argues that civilizational conflicts are "particularly prevalent between Muslims and non-Muslims", identifying the "bloody borders" between Islamic and non-Islamic civilizations. This conflict dates back as far as the ], its eventual expulsion in the ], the attacks of the Ottoman Turks on Eastern Europe and Vienna, and the European imperial division of the Islamic nations in the 1800s and 1900s.
Huntington sees ]ic civilization as a potential ally to ], both having more revisionist goals and sharing common conflicts with other civilizations, especially the West. Specifically, he identifies common Chinese and Islamic interests in the areas of weapons proliferation, human rights, and democracy that conflict with those of the West, and feels that these are areas in which the two civilizations will cooperate. Russia, Japan, and India are what Huntington terms 'swing civilizations' and may favor either side. Russia, for example, clashes with the many Muslim ethnic groups on its southern border (such as ]) but cooperates with Iran in order to avoid further Muslim-Orthodox violence in Southern Russia and in an attempt to continue the flow of oil. Huntington argues that a "]" is emerging in which ] will cooperate more closely with ], ], and other states to augment its international position.


Huntington also believes that some of the factors contributing to this conflict are that both Christianity (upon which Western civilization is based) and Islam are:
Huntington also argues that civilizational conflicts are "particularly prevalent between Muslims and non-Muslims", identifying the "bloody borders" between Islamic and non-Islamic civilizations. He believes that the current global war on terror between the West and Islam is not a modern consequence of a few crazed radicals, but rather reflects a millenium-plus history of conflict between the two civilizations. This conflict dates back as far as the initial thrust of Islam into Europe, its eventual expulsion in the Spanish reconquest, the attacks of the Ottoman Turks on Eastern Europe and Vienna, and the European imperial division of the Islamic nations in the 1800s and 1900s. He believes that some of the factors contributing to this conflict are that both Christianity (upon which Western civilization is based) and Islam are:
Missionary religions, seeking conversion by others * Missionary religions, seeking conversion of others
Universal, "all-or-nothing" religions, in the sense that it is believed by both sides that only their faith is the correct one * Universal, "all-or-nothing" religions, in the sense that it is believed by both sides that only their faith is the correct one
Teleological religions, that is, that their values and beliefs represent the goals of existence and purpose in human existence * ] religions, that is, that their values and beliefs represent the goals of existence and purpose in human existence.
More recent factors contributing to a Western-Islamic clash, Huntington wrote, are the Islamic Resurgence and demographic explosion in Islam, coupled with the values of Western universalism - that is, the view that all civilizations should adopt Western values - that infuriate islamic fundamentalists.


More recent factors contributing to a Western–Islamic clash, Huntington wrote, are the ] and demographic explosion in Islam, coupled with the values of Western universalism—that is, the view that all civilizations should adopt Western values—that infuriate Islamic fundamentalists. All these historical and modern factors combined, Huntington wrote briefly in his ''Foreign Affairs'' article and in much more detail in his 1996 book, would lead to a bloody clash between the Islamic and Western civilizations.
All these historical and modern factors combined, Huntington wrote briefly in his Foreign Affairs article and in much more detail in his 1996 book, would lead to a bloody clash between the Islamic and Western civilizations. Along with Sinic-Western conflict, he believed, the Western-Islamic clash would represent the bloodiest conflicts of the early 21st century. Thus, the ] and subsequent events including the Afghanistan and Iraq wars have been widely viewed as support for the Clash theory.


===Why civilizations will clash===
==Modernization, westernization, and "torn countries"==
Huntington offers six explanations for why civilizations will clash:
Critics of Huntington's ideas often extend their criticisms to ] ]s and internal reformers who wish to modernize without adopting the values and attitudes of ] culture. These critics sometimes claim that to modernize is necessarily to become Westernized to a very large extent. In reply, those who consider the ''Clash of Civilizations'' thesis accurate often point to the example of ], claiming that it is not a Western state at its core. They argue that it adopted much ] technology (also inventing some technology of its own in recent times), parliamentary democracy, and ], but has remained culturally very distinct from the West. ] is also cited by some as a rising non-Western economy. Many also point out the ] or neighboring states as having adapted western economics, while maintaining traditional or totalitarian social government.
# Differences among civilizations are too basic in that civilizations are differentiated from each other by history, language, culture, tradition, and, most importantly, religion. These fundamental differences are the product of centuries and the foundations of different civilizations, meaning they will not be gone soon.
# The world is becoming a smaller place. As a result, interactions across the world are increasing, which intensify "civilization consciousness" and the awareness of differences between civilizations and commonalities within civilizations.
# Due to economic modernization and social change, people are separated from longstanding local identities. Instead, religion has replaced this gap, which provides a basis for identity and commitment that transcends national boundaries and unites civilizations.
# The growth of civilization-consciousness is enhanced by the dual role of the West. On the one hand, the West is at a peak of power. At the same time, a return-to-the-roots phenomenon is occurring among non-Western civilizations. A West at the peak of its power confronts non-Western countries that increasingly have the desire, the will and the resources to shape the world in non-Western ways.
# Cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily compromised and resolved than political and economic ones.
# Economic regionalism is increasing. Successful economic regionalism will reinforce civilization-consciousness. Economic regionalism may succeed only when it is rooted in a common civilization.


===The West versus the Rest===
Perhaps the ultimate example of non-Western modernization is ], the core state of the ] civilization. The variant of this argument that uses Russia as an example relies on the acceptance of a unique non-Western civilization headed by an Orthodox state such as Russia or perhaps an ] country. Huntington argues that Russia is primarily a non-Western state although he seems to agree that it shares a considerable amount of cultural ancestry with the modern West. Russia was one of the ]s during World War I. It also happened to be a non-Western power. According to Huntington, the West is distinguished from Orthodox Christian countries by the experience of the ], ], the ], overseas colonialism rather than contiguous expansion and colonialism, and a recent reinfusion of ] culture through ] rather than through the continuous trajectory of the ]. The differences among the modern ] states can still be seen today. This issue is also linked to the "universalizing factor" exhibited in some civilizations.
Huntington suggests that in the future the central axis of world politics tends to be the conflict between Western and non-Western civilizations, in ]'s phrase, the conflict between "the West and the Rest". He offers three forms of general and fundamental actions that non-Western civilization can take in response to Western countries.<ref>Hungtington SP, The Clash of Civilizations? In: Lechner FJ, Boli J, editors. The globalization reader. 4th ed. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012. 37–44</ref>
# Non-Western countries can attempt to achieve isolation in order to preserve their own values and protect themselves from Western invasion. However, Huntington argues that the costs of this action are high and only a few states can pursue it.
# According to the theory of "]", non-Western countries can join and accept Western values.
# Non-Western countries can make an effort to balance Western power through modernization. They can develop economic/military power and cooperate with other non-Western countries against the West while still preserving their own values and institutions. Huntington believes that the increasing power of non-Western civilizations in international society will make the West begin to develop a better understanding of the cultural fundamentals underlying other civilizations. Therefore, Western civilization will cease to be regarded as "universal" but different civilizations will learn to coexist and join to shape the future world.


===Core state and fault line conflicts===
Huntington refers to countries that are seeking to affiliate with another civilization as "torn countries." ], whose political leadership has systematically tried to Westernize the country since the 1920s, is his chief example. Turkey's history, culture, and traditions are derived from Islamic civilization, but Turkey's Western-oriented elite imposed western institutions and dress, embraced the ], joined ], and is seeking to join the ]. ] and ] are also consisdered to be torn by Huntingon.
<!-- Possible link target. Please check before changing sub-section header. -->
In Huntington's view, intercivilizational conflict manifests itself in two forms: fault line conflicts and core state conflicts.


'']'' are on a local level and occur between adjacent states belonging to different civilizations or within states that are home to populations from different civilizations.
According to Huntington, a torn country must meet three requirements in order to redefine its civilizational identity. Its political and economic elite must support the move. Second, the public must be willing to accept the redefinition. Third, the elites of the civilization that the torn country is trying to join must accept the country.

''Core state conflicts'' are on a global level between the major states of different civilizations. Core state conflicts can arise out of fault line conflicts when core states become involved.<ref name="Huntington1">{{cite book
| last = Huntington | first = Samuel P. | author-link = Samuel P. Huntington | title = The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order | orig-year = 1997 | edition = The Free Press | year = 2002 | publisher = Simon $ Schuster | location = London | isbn = 978-0-7432-3149-7 | page = 207f | chapter = Chapter 9: The Global Politics of Civilizations}}</ref>

These conflicts may result from a number of causes, such as: relative influence or power (military or economic), discrimination against people from a different civilization, intervention to protect kinsmen in a different civilization, or different values and culture, particularly when one civilization attempts to impose its values on people of a different civilization.<ref name="Huntington1"/>

==Modernization, Westernization, and "torn countries"==

Japan, China and the ] have modernized in many respects while maintaining traditional or authoritarian societies which distinguish them from the West. Some of these countries have clashed with the West and some have not.

Perhaps the ultimate example of non-Western modernization is Russia, the core state of the ] civilization. Huntington argues that Russia is primarily a non-Western state although he seems to agree that it shares a considerable amount of cultural ancestry with the modern West. According to Huntington, the West is distinguished from Orthodox Christian countries by its experience of the ], ], the ]; by overseas ] rather than contiguous expansion and colonialism; and by the infusion of ] culture through ] rather than through the continuous trajectory of the ].

Huntington refers to countries that are seeking to affiliate with another civilization as "torn countries". ], whose political leadership has systematically tried to Westernize the country since the 1920s, is his chief example. Turkey's history, culture, and traditions are derived from Islamic civilization, but Turkey's elite, beginning with ] who took power as first President in 1923, imposed Western institutions and dress, embraced the ], joined ], and has sought to ].

Mexico and Russia are also considered to be torn by Huntington. He also gives the example of Australia as a country torn between its Western civilizational heritage and its growing economic engagement with Asia.

According to Huntington, a torn country must meet three requirements to redefine its civilizational identity. Its political and economic elite must support the move. Second, the public must be willing to accept the redefinition. Third, the elites of the civilization that the torn country is trying to join must accept the country.

The book claims that to date no torn country has successfully redefined its civilizational identity, this mostly due to the elites of the 'host' civilization refusing to accept the torn country, though if Turkey gained membership in the ], it has been noted that many of its people would support Westernization, as in the following quote by EU Minister Egemen Bağış: "This is what Europe needs to do: they need to say that when Turkey fulfills all requirements, Turkey will become a member of the EU on date X. Then, we will regain the Turkish public opinion support in one day."<ref> {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160109202339/http://www.euractiv.com.tr/ab-ve-turkiye/article/bagis-fransanin-tutumunda-degisimin-basladigini-goruyoruz-027174 |date=January 9, 2016 }}</ref> If this were to happen, it would, according to Huntington, be the first to redefine its civilizational identity.


==Criticism== ==Criticism==
The book has been criticized by various academic writers, who have empirically, historically, logically, or ideologically challenged its claims.<ref>Fox, J. (2005). Paradigm Lost: Huntington's Unfulfilled Clash of Civilizations Prediction into the 21st Century. International Politics, 42, pp. 428–457.</ref><ref>Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Mindruta, D. (2002). Was Huntington Right? Testing Cultural Legacies and the Civilization Border. International Politics, 39(2), pp. 193 213.</ref><ref>Henderson, E. A., & Tucker, R. (2001). Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 45, pp. 317 338.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Russett | first1 = B. M. | last2 = Oneal | first2 = J. R. | last3 = Cox | first3 = M. | year = 2000 | title = Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence | url = http://www.svt.ntnu.no/iss/indra.de.soysa/pol2003h05/russet_oneal_cox_jpr.pdf| journal = Journal of Peace Research | volume = 37 | issue = 5| pages = 583–608 | doi=10.1177/0022343300037005003| citeseerx = 10.1.1.460.7212 | s2cid = 51897336 }}</ref> Political scientist Paul Musgrave writes that ''Clash of Civilization'' "enjoys great cachet among the sort of policymaker who enjoys name-dropping ], but few specialists in international relations rely on it or even cite it approvingly. Bluntly, ''Clash'' has not proven to be a useful or accurate guide to understanding the world."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/discussions/5273269/h-diploissf-teaching-roundtable-11-6-clash-civilizations-ir|title=H-Diplo/ISSF Teaching Roundtable 11-6 on The Clash of Civilizations in the IR Classroom {{!}} H-Diplo {{!}} H-Net|website=networks.h-net.org|language=en|access-date=2019-11-07}}</ref>
Huntington's piece in ''Foreign Affairs'' created more responses than almost any other essay ever published in that journal. There have been many criticisms of his thesis from wildly different paradigms. Some have argued that his identified civilizations are fractured and show little internal unity.<ref>Russett, Bruce; John Oneal & Michaelene Cox (2000). "Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence", ''Journal of Peace Research'' '''37'''(5): 583-608.</ref> The Muslim world is severely fractured along ethnic lines with ], ], ], ], ], and ] all having very different world views. Moreover, the criteria of the proposed delineation are not clear. One can argue, for instance, that cultural differences between ] and ] are not more important than between China and ].<ref>Tusicisny, Andrej (2004). "Civilizational Conflicts: More Frequent, Longer, and Bloodier?". ''Journal of Peace Research'' '''41''' (4), 485–498.</ref> However, Vietnam is put together with China under the label of the Sinic civilization while Japan is supposed to form a separate civilization. In fact, ] keeps a massive army mostly to guard against China. Whereas, Western civilization includes both ] and ] branches; and the ] and ] cultural differences in Western Europe are also disregarded. The distinction between the Western and Orthodox civilizations excludes non-religious factors, such as the post-Communist legacy or the level of economic development. It also ignores differences within Muslim communities.
<!-- Other books, written for the general public, similarly challenge Huntington's contentious claims. For example, in his work ''Identity and Violence: The illusion of destiny'', The Nobel Laureate ] advances several critiques of Huntington's main concept of an inevitable clash along civilizational lines. He argues that violence occurs when individuals see each other as having a singular affiliation (e.g., Hindu, Muslim, Christian), as opposed to multiple affiliations: e.g., Hindu, woman, housewife, mother, artist, daughter, member of a particular socio-economic class etc. In this sense, and to the detriment of civilization distinctiveness, it is argued that all of these dimensions can, and should be a source of a personal identity.<ref> Sen, Amartya (2006). Identity and Violence. New York: W.W. Norton. </ref> -->


In an article explicitly referring to Huntington, scholar <!--the same -->] (1999) argues that "diversity is a feature of most cultures in the world. Western civilization is no exception. The practice of democracy that has won out in the modern West is largely a result of a consensus that has emerged since the ] and the ], and particularly in the last century or so. To read in this a historical commitment of the West—over the millennia—to democracy, and then to contrast it with non-Western traditions (treating each as monolithic) would be a great mistake."<ref>{{cite journal |author=Sen A |year=1999 |title=Democracy as a Universal Value |journal=Journal of Democracy |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=3–17 |doi=10.1353/jod.1999.0055|s2cid=54556373 }}</ref>{{Rp|16}}
In his book ''Terror and Liberalism'', ] proposes another criticism of the civilization clash hypothesis. According to Berman, distinct cultural boundaries do not exist in the present day. He argues there is no "Islamic civilization" nor a "Western civilization", and that the evidence for a civilization clash is not convincing, especially when considering relationships such as that between the United States and Saudi Arabia. In addition, he cites the fact that many Islamic extremists spent a significant amount of time living and/or studying in the western world. According to Berman conflict arises because of philosophical beliefs between groups, regardless of cultural or religious identity.<ref>Berman, Paul (2003). Terror and Liberalism. W W Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-05775-5.</ref>


In his 2003 book '']'', ] argues that distinct cultural boundaries do not exist in the present day. He argues there is no "Islamic civilization" nor a "Western civilization", and that the evidence for a civilization clash is not convincing, especially when considering relationships such as that between the ]. In addition, he cites the fact that many Islamic extremists spent a significant amount of time living or studying in the Western world. According to Berman, conflict arises because of ] beliefs various groups share (or do not share), regardless of cultural or religious identity.<ref>Berman, Paul (2003). Terror and Liberalism. W W Norton & Company. {{ISBN|0-393-05775-5}}.</ref>
In his book, Huntington relies mostly on anecdotal evidence. On the contrary, more rigorous empirical studies show no particular increase in the frequency of intercivilizational conflicts in the post-Cold War period.<ref>Tusicisny, Andrej (2004). "Civilizational Conflicts: More Frequent, Longer, and Bloodier?". ''Journal of Peace Research'' '''41''' (4), 485–498.</ref>


] objects to the 'extreme cultural determinism... crude to the point of parody' of Huntington's idea that Catholic and Protestant Europe is headed for democracy, but that Orthodox Christian and Islamic Europe must accept dictatorship.<ref>], ''History of the Present'', Penguin, 2000, p 388-389</ref>
It has been claimed that values are more easily transmitted and altered than Huntington proposes.<ref>Russett, Bruce; John Oneal & Michaelene Cox (2000). "Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence", ''Journal of Peace Research'' '''37'''(5): 583-608.</ref> Nations such as ] and ] have become successful ], and the West itself was rife with despotism and fundamentalism for most of its history. Some also see Huntington's thesis as creating a ] and reasserting differences between civilizations.<ref>Russett, Bruce; John Oneal & Michaelene Cox (2000). "Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence", ''Journal of Peace Research'' '''37'''(5): 583-608.</ref> ] issued a response to Huntington's thesis in his own essay entitled "The Clash of Ignorance." Said argues that Huntington's categorization of the world's fixed "civilizations" omits the dynamic interdependency and interaction of culture. According to Said, it is an example of an ], where the presentation of the world in a certain way legitimates certain politics.


] issued a response to Huntington's thesis in his 2001 article, "The Clash of Ignorance".<ref>Edward Said: The Nation, October 2001</ref> Said argues that Huntington's categorization of the world's fixed "civilizations" omits the dynamic interdependency and interaction of culture. A longtime critic of the Huntingtonian paradigm, and an outspoken proponent of Arab issues, Said (2004) also argues that the clash of civilizations thesis is an example of "the purest invidious racism, a sort of parody of Hitlerian science directed today against Arabs and Muslims" (p.&nbsp;293).<ref>Said, E. W. (2004). From Oslo to Iraq and the Road Map. New York: Pantheon, 2004.</ref>
==Related concepts==
Also, in recent years the theory of ], a response to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations, has become the center of some international attention. The concept, which was introduced by former Iranian president ], was the basis for ]'s resolution to name the year ] as the Year of Dialogue among Civilizations. In 2005 Secretary General Kofi Annan launched an initiative called ].


] has criticized the concept of the clash of civilizations as just being a new justification for the United States "for any atrocities that they wanted to carry out", which was required after the ] as the ] was no longer a viable threat.<ref>{{Citation|last=TrystanCJ|title=Noam Chomsky on The "Clash of Civilizations"|date=2007-03-02|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT64TNho59I| archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211117/qT64TNho59I| archive-date=2021-11-17 | url-status=live|access-date=2018-10-31}}{{cbignore}}</ref>
==Huntington's predictions: analysis and retrospect==
After the ], Huntington was increasingly regarded as having been prescient as the ], ], the 2005 ], and the ongoing ] fueled the perception that Huntington's ''Clash'' was well underway.


In '']'', ] called the clash of civilizations a misleading thesis. He wrote that Islamic fundamentalism is more of a threat to a global civilization, rather than a confrontation with the West. He also argued that talking about civilizations using analogies from evolutionary biology is wrong.<ref>{{Cite book|title=21 lessons for the 21st century|last=Harari, Yuval N.|isbn=978-0-525-51217-2|edition=First|location=New York|oclc=1029771757|year = 2018}}</ref>
Some maintained that the 1995 and 2004 enlargements of the ] brought the EU's eastern border up to the boundary between Huntington's Western and Orthodox civilizations; most of Europe's historically ] and ] countries (with the exception of ] and countries like Switzerland and Norway who voluntarily opted out of EU membership) were now EU members, while a number of Europe's historically ] countries (with exceptions such as longtime EU member ] and newly accepted ]) were outside the EU. As others have noted, however, the strong EU candidacies of ], ], and their ] membership of Romania and Bulgaria (since 2004) present a challenge to some of Huntington's analysis.


] criticizes Huntington's thesis as inconsistent. He notes that according to Huntington, "Spanish-speaking Catholic-majority Spain is West, while Spanish-speaking Catholic-majority Mexico is not part of Western civilization, and instead belongs with Brazil as part of Latin American civilization." Robinson concludes, "If you look at the map and think these divisions make sense, which you might, it is because what you are mostly seeing here is a map of prejudices. indeed shows how a lot of people think of the world, especially in America."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Robinson |first=Nathan J. |date=2022-03-31 |title=The "Clash of Civilizations" Thesis Is Still Ignorant Nonsense |url=https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2022/03/the-clash-of-civilizations-thesis-is-still-ignorant-nonsense |access-date=2024-10-15 |work=Current Affairs |language=en |issn=2471-2647}}</ref>
] ] have pointed out that Huntington's regions of "civilizations" are affected by the concept of the "Kulturerdteile" (culture-continents) of the geographer ] - a deprecated theory from ]. In this theory, the effect of religious aspects was less important than historical and social aspects. Huntingon notes in his book that German scholars hold a separate concept of civilization than presented in his analysis.


===Intermediate Region===
==Recent issues==
Huntington's geopolitical model, especially the structures for North Africa and Eurasia, is largely derived from the "]" geopolitical model first formulated by ] and published in 1978.<ref>Dimitri Kitsikis, ''A Comparative History of Greece and Turkey in the 20th century''. In Greek, ''Συγκριτική Ἱστορία Ἑλλάδος καί Τουρκίας στόν 20ό αἰῶνα'', Athens, Hestia, 1978. Supplemented 2nd edition: Hestia, 1990. 3rd edition: Hestia, 1998, 357 pp.. In Turkish, ''Yırmı Asırda Karşılaştırmalı Türk-Yunan Tarihi'', İstanbul, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi, II-8, 1980.</ref> The Intermediate Region, which spans the ] and the ], is neither Western nor Eastern (at least, with respect to the Far East) but is considered distinct. Concerning this region, Huntington departs from Kitsikis contending that a civilizational fault line exists between the two dominant yet differing religions (] and ]), hence a dynamic of external conflict. However, Kitsikis establishes an integrated civilization comprising these two peoples along with those belonging to the less dominant religions of ], ], and ]. They have a set of mutual cultural, social, economic and political views and norms which radically differ from those in the West and the Far East. In the Intermediate Region, therefore, one cannot speak of a civilizational clash or external conflict, but rather an internal conflict, not for cultural domination, but for political succession. This has been successfully demonstrated by documenting the rise of Christianity from the ] ], the rise of the ] from the ] and the rise of ] rule from the Islamic caliphates and the Christianized Roman Empire.
The following list includes recent conflicts between states and groups belonging to different civilizations. It does not mean that all those conflicts were ] by the civilizational cleavages.
], ] president of ] (in office 1997–2005), introduced the theory of ''Dialogue Among Civilizations'' as a response to Huntington's theory.]]


===Opposing concepts===
]
In recent years, the theory of ], a response to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations, has become the center of some international attention. The concept was originally coined by Austrian philosopher ] in an essay on cultural identity (1972).<ref>"Kulturelles Selbstverständnis und Koexistenz: Voraussetzungen für einen fundamentalen Dialog" (Cultural Identity and Co-existence: Preconditions for a Fundamental Dialogue). Public lecture delivered at the University of Innsbruck, Austria, 19 October 1972, published in: ''Philosophie und Politik. Dokumentation eines interdisziplinären Seminars''. (Publications of the Working Group for Science and Politics at the University of Innsbruck, Vol. IV.) Innsbruck: Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Wissenschaft und Politik, 1973, pp. 75-78.</ref> In a letter to ], Köchler had earlier proposed that the cultural organization of the United Nations should take up the issue of a "dialogue between different civilizations" (''dialogue entre les différentes civilisations'').<ref>, addressed to the Division of Philosophy of UNESCO.</ref> In 2001, Iranian president ] introduced the concept at the global level. At his initiative, the United Nations proclaimed the year 2001 as the "United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations".<ref> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030216050648/http://www.unesco.org/dialogue2001/en/khatami.htm|date=February 16, 2003}} ''Unesco.org'' Retrieved on 05-24-07</ref><ref> ''Dialoguecentre.org'' Retrieved 05-24-07</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://archive.unu.edu/dialogue/|title=Dialogue Among Civilizations &#124; United Nations University|website=archive.unu.edu|access-date=Oct 23, 2022}}</ref>
*Conflict between "Islamic" ], supported by "Western" ], and "Orthodox" ]

]
The ] (AOC) initiative was proposed at the 59th ] in 2005 by the Spanish Prime Minister, ] and co-sponsored by the Turkish Prime Minister ]. The initiative is intended to galvanize collective action across diverse societies to combat ], to overcome cultural and social barriers between mainly the Western and predominantly Muslim worlds, and to reduce the tensions and polarization between societies which differ in religious and cultural values.
*Conflict between "Orthodox" ] and "Islamic" ]

] and ] in Kashmir
==Other civilizational models==
*Clash between "Hindu" ] and "Islamic" ] over ]
<!---♦♦♦ Please keep the list in alphabetical order ♦♦♦--->
]
* ], a Russian geopolitical concept based on the civilization of ]
*Attempt of "Islamic" ] to attack the "Western" ] and "Islamic" Jordan
* ]
Chinese reponse to the ]
* ]
*Detention of American pilots by ]
* ]
]

*Conflict between "Islamic" Al-Qaeda and the "Western" United States, a trigger of ]
=== Individuals ===
]
<!---♦♦♦ Please keep the list in alphabetical order by LAST NAME ♦♦♦--->
*"Islamic" terrorist group attacked "Western" tourists in "Islamic" ]
* ]
]
* ]
*Clash between Hindus and Muslims in ] state, India
] * ]
* ]
*Clash between "Islamic" ] militia and southern "African" tribes in ]
* ]
]
* ]
*Conflict between "Islamic" Afghanistan and a partly "Western" multinational coalition
] * ]
*Conflict between "Islamic" Iraq and a predominantly "Wester" coalition
]
*Conflict between an "Islamic" terrorist group and "Western" ]
]
*Attack by "Islamic" Chechen terrorists on a school in "Orthodox" Russia
]
*Election in what Huntingon calls the 'cleft' county of ] may reflect a civilizational split between the "Orthodox" East and the "Western" West of Ukraine
]
*Conflict between an "Islamic" terrorist group and the "Western" ]
]
*riots of predominantly "Islamic" and "African" groups in "Western" ]
]
*Riots between "Western" Australinans and "Islamic" Australians
]
*Riots of "Islamic" groups against cartoons published in "Western" Denmark
]
*Counter-terrorism raids in ]
]
*Conflict between "lone/Western" ] and "Islamic" ]
]
*Plot of "Islamic" terrorists against "Western" states
]
*International crisis over the nuclear program developed by "Islamic" Iran
]
*"Sinic" North Korea asserting nuclear weapons against predominantly "Western" and "Japanese" reactions
]
*Diplomatic conflict between "Islamic" countries and "Western" ]


==See also== ==See also==
{{portal|Civilizations}}
* ]
<!---♦♦♦ Please keep the list in alphabetical order ♦♦♦--->
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ], an American journalist.
* ]
* ], an American political economist and author of ''].''
* ]
* ]'s '']''
* ]
* ]'s '']''
* ]
* ], Professor of History at Harvard University.
* ]
* ]
** ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]

==References==
{{Reflist}}


==Bibliography== ==Bibliography==
* {{cite book|last= Ankerl |first= Guy |authorlink=Ankerl Géza|title= Global communication without universal civilization |year= 2000 |series= INU societal research |volume= 1: Coexisting contemporary civilizations: Arabo-Muslim, Bharati, Chinese, and Western |publisher= INU Press |location= Geneva |isbn= 978-2-88155-004-1 }}
* ], ''The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?'', Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005 ISBN 0-89526-015-8
* ], '[L'Anti-Choc des Civilisations: Méditations Méditerranéennes'', Editions de l'Aube, 2006, {{ISBN|978-2-7526-0208-4}}
* ], ''Civilization and Its Enemies: The Next Stage of History'', New York, The Free Press, 2004 ISBN 0-7432-5749-9
* ], '']'', Hardcover: Crown, 1995, {{ISBN|0-8129-2350-2}}; Paperback: Ballantine Books, 1996, {{ISBN|0-345-38304-4}}
* Harrison, Lawrence E. and ] (eds.), ''Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress'', New York, Basic Books, 2001 ISBN 0-465-03176-5
* ], ''The Clash of Civilizations?'', in "]", vol. 72, no. 3, Summer 1993, pp. 22-49 * ], ''The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?'', Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005 {{ISBN|0-89526-015-8}}
* ], ''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order'', New York, Simon & Schuster, 1996 ISBN 0-684-84441-9 * ], ''Civilization and Its Enemies: The Next Stage of History'', New York, The Free Press, 2004 {{ISBN|0-7432-5749-9}}
* ] (ed.), ''The Clash of Civilizations?: The Debate'', New York, Foreign Affairs, 1996 ISBN 0-87609-164-8 * ] and ] (eds.), ''Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress'', New York, Basic Books, 2001 {{ISBN|0-465-03176-5}}
* {{cite book|last= Harvey |first= David |title= Spaces of Hope |year= 2000 |publisher= Edinburgh University Press |location= Edinburgh, UK |isbn= 978-0-7486-1269-7 |pages= 79–80}}
* ] and Joseph Ratzinger (]), ''Senza radici: Europa, Relativismo, Cristianesimo, Islam'' , Milano, Mondadori, 2004 ISBN 88-04-54474-0
* ], ''The Clash of Civilizations?'', in "]", vol. 72, no. 3, Summer 1993, pp.&nbsp;22–49
* ], ''Fighting for the Future: Will America Triumph?'', Mechanicsburg, PA, Stackpole Books, 1999 ISBN 0-8117-0651-6
* Toft, Monica Duffy, ''The Geography of Ethnic Violence: Identity, Interests, and the Indivisibility of Territory'', Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 2003 ISBN 0-691-11354-8 * ], ''The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order'', New York, Simon & Schuster, 1996 {{ISBN|0-684-84441-9}}
* ] (ed.), ''The Clash of Civilizations?: The Debate'', New York, Foreign Affairs, 1996 {{ISBN|0-87609-164-8}}
* Tusicisny, Andrej, ''Civilizational Conflicts: More Frequent, Longer, and Bloodier?'', in "Journal of Peace Research", vol. 41, no. 4, 2004, pp. 485–498 ()
* ], ''The Transformation of War'', New York & London, The Free Press, 1991 ISBN 0-02-933155-2 * ], ''Bad Moon Rising: a chronicle of the Middle East today'', London, Saqi Books, 2003 {{ISBN|0-86356-303-1}}
* ] (ed.), ''Civilizations: Conflict or Dialogue?'', Vienna, International Progress Organization, 1999 {{ISBN|3-900704-18-X}} ()
* ], University of the Philippines, Manila, 2002
* ], , Tbilisi (Georgia), 2004
* ] and Joseph Ratzinger (]), ''Senza radici: Europa, Relativismo, Cristianesimo, Islam'' , Milano, Mondadori, 2004 {{ISBN|88-04-54474-0}}
* ], ''Fighting for the Future: Will America Triumph?'', Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, Stackpole Books, 1999 {{ISBN|0-8117-0651-6}}
*Potter, Robert (2011), 'Recalcitrant Interdependence', Thesis, Flinders University
* ], ''The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations'', London, Continuum, 2002 {{ISBN|0-8264-6397-5}}
* ], ''The Geography of Ethnic Violence: Identity, Interests, and the Indivisibility of Territory'', Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 2003 {{ISBN|0-691-11354-8}}
* Tusicisny, Andrej, "Civilizational Conflicts: More Frequent, Longer, and Bloodier?", in ''Journal of Peace Research'', vol. 41, no. 4, 2004, pp.&nbsp;485–498 ()
* ], ''The Transformation of War'', New York & London, The Free Press, 1991 {{ISBN|0-02-933155-2}}
* Venn, Couze "Clash of Civilisations", in Prem Poddar ''et al.'', Historical Companion to Postcolonial Literatures—Continental Europe and its Empires, Edinburgh University Press, 2008.

==Further reading==
* ], ''The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?''
* J. Paul Barker, ed. E-International Relations, Bristol, 2013.
* ], '''', 2008. (postgraduate thesis in Greek)
* Hale, H., & Laruelle, M. (2020). "" ''Nationalities Papers''
* ], , '']'', 1994
* {{cite news|first=Thomas |last=Meaney|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/opinion/nato-russia-the-west-ukraine.html |title=The Return of The West|work= ] |date=March 11, 2022}}
* ], ed. ''E-International Relations'', Bristol, 2018.
* {{cite book|first=Edward|last=Said|url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011022/said|title=The Clash of Ignorance|website=www.thenation.com|access-date=February 5, 2006|archive-date=October 30, 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091030181705/http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011022/said|url-status=dead}}
* {{cite book|first=Said |last=Shirazi|url=http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles/Shirazi_Huntington.htm |title=Your New Enemies|website=www.dissidentvoice.org}}


==External links== ==External links==
{{Commons category-inline}}
* , text of the original essay
* – Original essay from ''Foreign Affairs'' 1993
* ,Islamist site discussing news surrounding the clash and concepts such as dialogue, equality, acceptance etc between civilisations.
* , ''Foreign Affairs'', 1993
*, a critical article on Huntington's thesis
* , Interview with ], ''The Guardian'', October 21, 2001.
* , by ] and ], ''Foreign Policy'' 2003. This article discusses recent surveys of opinions in predominantly Islamic nations and claims that the real rift between civilizations does not concern the question of democracy (which is generally approved) but rather the attitudes towards sexuality and gender equality. Those societies that do not tolerate self-expression, it argues, are unlikely to become stable democracies.
*- A rare Arab public debate video about Muslim and western civilization clashes. (
* Khaled Diab and Katleen Maes examine the myths driving anti-Islamic fervour in the EU and argue that, although the two civilisations have occasionally clashed, they have more often simply mashed. Published in the European Voice, 31 March-6 April 2005
* ]'s critical review of the "Clash of Civilizations"
*)


{{Samuel P. Huntington}}
==References==
{{U.S. War on Terror}}
<references/>
{{Political philosophy}}
{{authority control}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Clash Of Civilizations}}
]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]
] ]
]

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 17:38, 29 December 2024

Theory of cultural conflict by Samuel P. Huntington

The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
AuthorSamuel P. Huntington
LanguageEnglish
PublisherSimon & Schuster
Publication date1996
Publication placeUnited States
ISBN978-0-684-84441-1

The "Clash of Civilizations" is a thesis that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post–Cold War world. The American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington argued that future wars would be fought not between countries, but between cultures. It was proposed in a 1992 lecture at the American Enterprise Institute, which was then developed in a 1993 Foreign Affairs article titled "The Clash of Civilizations?", in response to his former student Francis Fukuyama's 1992 book The End of History and the Last Man. Huntington later expanded his thesis in a 1996 book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

The phrase itself was earlier used by Albert Camus in 1946, by Girilal Jain in his analysis of the Ayodhya dispute in 1988, by Bernard Lewis in an article in the September 1990 issue of The Atlantic Monthly titled "The Roots of Muslim Rage" and by Mahdi El Mandjra in his book "La première guerre civilisationnelle" published in 1992. Even earlier, the phrase appears in a 1926 book regarding the Middle East by Basil Mathews: Young Islam on Trek: A Study in the Clash of Civilizations. This expression derives from "clash of cultures", already used during the colonial period and the Belle Époque.

Huntington began his thinking by surveying the diverse theories about the nature of global politics in the post–Cold War period. Some theorists and writers argued that human rights, liberal democracy, and the capitalist free market economy had become the only remaining ideological alternative for nations in the post–Cold War world. Specifically, Francis Fukuyama argued that the world had reached the 'end of history' in a Hegelian sense.

Huntington believed that while the age of ideology had ended, the world had only reverted to a normal state of affairs characterized by cultural conflict. In his thesis, he argued that the primary axis of conflict in the future will be along cultural lines. As an extension, he posits that the concept of different civilizations, as the highest category of cultural identity, will become increasingly useful in analyzing the potential for conflict. At the end of his 1993 Foreign Affairs article, "The Clash of Civilizations?", Huntington writes, "This is not to advocate the desirability of conflicts between civilizations. It is to set forth descriptive hypothesis as to what the future may be like."

In addition, the clash of civilizations, for Huntington, represents a development of history. In the past, world history was mainly about the struggles between monarchs, nations and ideologies, such as that seen within Western civilization. However, after the end of the Cold War, world politics moved into a new phase, in which non-Western civilizations are no longer the exploited recipients of Western civilization but have become additional important actors joining the West to shape and move world history.

Major civilizations according to Huntington

The clash of civilizations according to Huntington (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

Huntington divided the world into the "major civilizations" in his thesis as such:

Huntington's thesis of civilizational clash

Huntington at the 2004 World Economic Forum

Huntington argues that the trends of global conflict after the end of the Cold War are increasingly appearing at these civilizational divisions. Wars such as those following the break up of Yugoslavia, in Chechnya, and between India and Pakistan were cited as evidence of inter-civilizational conflict. He also argues that the widespread Western belief in the universality of the West's values and political systems is naïve and that continued insistence on democratization and such "universal" norms will only further antagonize other civilizations. Huntington sees the West as reluctant to accept this because it built the international system, wrote its laws, and gave it substance in the form of the United Nations.

Huntington identifies a major shift of economic, military, and political power from the West to the other civilizations of the world, most significantly to what he identifies as the two "challenger civilizations", Sinic and Islam.

In Huntington's view, East Asian Sinic civilization is culturally asserting itself and its values relative to the West due to its rapid economic growth. Specifically, he believes that China's goals are to reassert itself as the regional hegemon, and that other countries in the region will 'bandwagon' with China due to the history of hierarchical command structures implicit in the Confucian Sinic civilization, as opposed to the individualism and pluralism valued in the West. Regional powers such as the two Koreas and Vietnam will acquiesce to Chinese demands and become more supportive of China rather than attempting to oppose it. Huntington therefore believes that the rise of China poses one of the most significant problems and the most powerful long-term threat to the West, as Chinese cultural assertion clashes with the American desire for the lack of a regional hegemony in East Asia.

Huntington argues that the Islamic civilization has experienced a massive population explosion which is fueling instability both on the borders of Islam and in its interior, where fundamentalist movements are becoming increasingly popular. Manifestations of what he terms the "Islamic Resurgence" include the 1979 Iranian revolution and the first Gulf War. Perhaps the most controversial statement Huntington made in the Foreign Affairs article was that "Islam has bloody borders". Huntington believes this to be a real consequence of several factors, including the previously mentioned Muslim youth bulge and population growth and Islamic proximity to many civilizations including Sinic, Orthodox, Western, and African.

Huntington sees Islamic civilization as a potential ally to China, both having more revisionist goals and sharing common conflicts with other civilizations, especially the West. Specifically, he identifies common Chinese and Islamic interests in the areas of weapons proliferation, human rights, and democracy that conflict with those of the West, and feels that these are areas in which the two civilizations will cooperate.

Russia, Japan, and India are what Huntington terms 'swing civilizations' and may favor either side. Russia, for example, clashes with the many Muslim ethnic groups on its southern border (such as Chechnya) but—according to Huntington—cooperates with Iran to avoid further Muslim-Orthodox violence in Southern Russia, and to help continue the flow of oil. Huntington argues that a "Sino-Islamic connection" is emerging in which China will cooperate more closely with Iran, Pakistan, and other states to augment its international position.

Huntington also argues that civilizational conflicts are "particularly prevalent between Muslims and non-Muslims", identifying the "bloody borders" between Islamic and non-Islamic civilizations. This conflict dates back as far as the initial thrust of Islam into Europe, its eventual expulsion in the Iberian reconquest, the attacks of the Ottoman Turks on Eastern Europe and Vienna, and the European imperial division of the Islamic nations in the 1800s and 1900s.

Huntington also believes that some of the factors contributing to this conflict are that both Christianity (upon which Western civilization is based) and Islam are:

  • Missionary religions, seeking conversion of others
  • Universal, "all-or-nothing" religions, in the sense that it is believed by both sides that only their faith is the correct one
  • Teleological religions, that is, that their values and beliefs represent the goals of existence and purpose in human existence.

More recent factors contributing to a Western–Islamic clash, Huntington wrote, are the Islamic Resurgence and demographic explosion in Islam, coupled with the values of Western universalism—that is, the view that all civilizations should adopt Western values—that infuriate Islamic fundamentalists. All these historical and modern factors combined, Huntington wrote briefly in his Foreign Affairs article and in much more detail in his 1996 book, would lead to a bloody clash between the Islamic and Western civilizations.

Why civilizations will clash

Huntington offers six explanations for why civilizations will clash:

  1. Differences among civilizations are too basic in that civilizations are differentiated from each other by history, language, culture, tradition, and, most importantly, religion. These fundamental differences are the product of centuries and the foundations of different civilizations, meaning they will not be gone soon.
  2. The world is becoming a smaller place. As a result, interactions across the world are increasing, which intensify "civilization consciousness" and the awareness of differences between civilizations and commonalities within civilizations.
  3. Due to economic modernization and social change, people are separated from longstanding local identities. Instead, religion has replaced this gap, which provides a basis for identity and commitment that transcends national boundaries and unites civilizations.
  4. The growth of civilization-consciousness is enhanced by the dual role of the West. On the one hand, the West is at a peak of power. At the same time, a return-to-the-roots phenomenon is occurring among non-Western civilizations. A West at the peak of its power confronts non-Western countries that increasingly have the desire, the will and the resources to shape the world in non-Western ways.
  5. Cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily compromised and resolved than political and economic ones.
  6. Economic regionalism is increasing. Successful economic regionalism will reinforce civilization-consciousness. Economic regionalism may succeed only when it is rooted in a common civilization.

The West versus the Rest

Huntington suggests that in the future the central axis of world politics tends to be the conflict between Western and non-Western civilizations, in Stuart Hall's phrase, the conflict between "the West and the Rest". He offers three forms of general and fundamental actions that non-Western civilization can take in response to Western countries.

  1. Non-Western countries can attempt to achieve isolation in order to preserve their own values and protect themselves from Western invasion. However, Huntington argues that the costs of this action are high and only a few states can pursue it.
  2. According to the theory of "band-wagoning", non-Western countries can join and accept Western values.
  3. Non-Western countries can make an effort to balance Western power through modernization. They can develop economic/military power and cooperate with other non-Western countries against the West while still preserving their own values and institutions. Huntington believes that the increasing power of non-Western civilizations in international society will make the West begin to develop a better understanding of the cultural fundamentals underlying other civilizations. Therefore, Western civilization will cease to be regarded as "universal" but different civilizations will learn to coexist and join to shape the future world.

Core state and fault line conflicts

In Huntington's view, intercivilizational conflict manifests itself in two forms: fault line conflicts and core state conflicts.

Fault line conflicts are on a local level and occur between adjacent states belonging to different civilizations or within states that are home to populations from different civilizations.

Core state conflicts are on a global level between the major states of different civilizations. Core state conflicts can arise out of fault line conflicts when core states become involved.

These conflicts may result from a number of causes, such as: relative influence or power (military or economic), discrimination against people from a different civilization, intervention to protect kinsmen in a different civilization, or different values and culture, particularly when one civilization attempts to impose its values on people of a different civilization.

Modernization, Westernization, and "torn countries"

Japan, China and the Four Asian Tigers have modernized in many respects while maintaining traditional or authoritarian societies which distinguish them from the West. Some of these countries have clashed with the West and some have not.

Perhaps the ultimate example of non-Western modernization is Russia, the core state of the Orthodox civilization. Huntington argues that Russia is primarily a non-Western state although he seems to agree that it shares a considerable amount of cultural ancestry with the modern West. According to Huntington, the West is distinguished from Orthodox Christian countries by its experience of the Renaissance, Reformation, the Enlightenment; by overseas colonialism rather than contiguous expansion and colonialism; and by the infusion of Classical culture through ancient Greece rather than through the continuous trajectory of the Byzantine Empire.

Huntington refers to countries that are seeking to affiliate with another civilization as "torn countries". Turkey, whose political leadership has systematically tried to Westernize the country since the 1920s, is his chief example. Turkey's history, culture, and traditions are derived from Islamic civilization, but Turkey's elite, beginning with Mustafa Kemal Atatürk who took power as first President in 1923, imposed Western institutions and dress, embraced the Latin alphabet, joined NATO, and has sought to join the European Union.

Mexico and Russia are also considered to be torn by Huntington. He also gives the example of Australia as a country torn between its Western civilizational heritage and its growing economic engagement with Asia.

According to Huntington, a torn country must meet three requirements to redefine its civilizational identity. Its political and economic elite must support the move. Second, the public must be willing to accept the redefinition. Third, the elites of the civilization that the torn country is trying to join must accept the country.

The book claims that to date no torn country has successfully redefined its civilizational identity, this mostly due to the elites of the 'host' civilization refusing to accept the torn country, though if Turkey gained membership in the European Union, it has been noted that many of its people would support Westernization, as in the following quote by EU Minister Egemen Bağış: "This is what Europe needs to do: they need to say that when Turkey fulfills all requirements, Turkey will become a member of the EU on date X. Then, we will regain the Turkish public opinion support in one day." If this were to happen, it would, according to Huntington, be the first to redefine its civilizational identity.

Criticism

The book has been criticized by various academic writers, who have empirically, historically, logically, or ideologically challenged its claims. Political scientist Paul Musgrave writes that Clash of Civilization "enjoys great cachet among the sort of policymaker who enjoys name-dropping Sun Tzu, but few specialists in international relations rely on it or even cite it approvingly. Bluntly, Clash has not proven to be a useful or accurate guide to understanding the world."

In an article explicitly referring to Huntington, scholar Amartya Sen (1999) argues that "diversity is a feature of most cultures in the world. Western civilization is no exception. The practice of democracy that has won out in the modern West is largely a result of a consensus that has emerged since the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, and particularly in the last century or so. To read in this a historical commitment of the West—over the millennia—to democracy, and then to contrast it with non-Western traditions (treating each as monolithic) would be a great mistake."

In his 2003 book Terror and Liberalism, Paul Berman argues that distinct cultural boundaries do not exist in the present day. He argues there is no "Islamic civilization" nor a "Western civilization", and that the evidence for a civilization clash is not convincing, especially when considering relationships such as that between the United States and Saudi Arabia. In addition, he cites the fact that many Islamic extremists spent a significant amount of time living or studying in the Western world. According to Berman, conflict arises because of philosophical beliefs various groups share (or do not share), regardless of cultural or religious identity.

Timothy Garton Ash objects to the 'extreme cultural determinism... crude to the point of parody' of Huntington's idea that Catholic and Protestant Europe is headed for democracy, but that Orthodox Christian and Islamic Europe must accept dictatorship.

Edward Said issued a response to Huntington's thesis in his 2001 article, "The Clash of Ignorance". Said argues that Huntington's categorization of the world's fixed "civilizations" omits the dynamic interdependency and interaction of culture. A longtime critic of the Huntingtonian paradigm, and an outspoken proponent of Arab issues, Said (2004) also argues that the clash of civilizations thesis is an example of "the purest invidious racism, a sort of parody of Hitlerian science directed today against Arabs and Muslims" (p. 293).

Noam Chomsky has criticized the concept of the clash of civilizations as just being a new justification for the United States "for any atrocities that they wanted to carry out", which was required after the Cold War as the Soviet Union was no longer a viable threat.

In 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, Yuval Noah Harari called the clash of civilizations a misleading thesis. He wrote that Islamic fundamentalism is more of a threat to a global civilization, rather than a confrontation with the West. He also argued that talking about civilizations using analogies from evolutionary biology is wrong.

Nathan J. Robinson criticizes Huntington's thesis as inconsistent. He notes that according to Huntington, "Spanish-speaking Catholic-majority Spain is West, while Spanish-speaking Catholic-majority Mexico is not part of Western civilization, and instead belongs with Brazil as part of Latin American civilization." Robinson concludes, "If you look at the map and think these divisions make sense, which you might, it is because what you are mostly seeing here is a map of prejudices. indeed shows how a lot of people think of the world, especially in America."

Intermediate Region

Huntington's geopolitical model, especially the structures for North Africa and Eurasia, is largely derived from the "Intermediate Region" geopolitical model first formulated by Dimitri Kitsikis and published in 1978. The Intermediate Region, which spans the Adriatic Sea and the Indus River, is neither Western nor Eastern (at least, with respect to the Far East) but is considered distinct. Concerning this region, Huntington departs from Kitsikis contending that a civilizational fault line exists between the two dominant yet differing religions (Eastern Orthodoxy and Sunni Islam), hence a dynamic of external conflict. However, Kitsikis establishes an integrated civilization comprising these two peoples along with those belonging to the less dominant religions of Shia Islam, Alevism, and Judaism. They have a set of mutual cultural, social, economic and political views and norms which radically differ from those in the West and the Far East. In the Intermediate Region, therefore, one cannot speak of a civilizational clash or external conflict, but rather an internal conflict, not for cultural domination, but for political succession. This has been successfully demonstrated by documenting the rise of Christianity from the Hellenized Roman Empire, the rise of the Islamic caliphates from the Christianized Roman Empire and the rise of Ottoman rule from the Islamic caliphates and the Christianized Roman Empire.

Mohammad Khatami, reformist president of Iran (in office 1997–2005), introduced the theory of Dialogue Among Civilizations as a response to Huntington's theory.

Opposing concepts

In recent years, the theory of Dialogue Among Civilizations, a response to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations, has become the center of some international attention. The concept was originally coined by Austrian philosopher Hans Köchler in an essay on cultural identity (1972). In a letter to UNESCO, Köchler had earlier proposed that the cultural organization of the United Nations should take up the issue of a "dialogue between different civilizations" (dialogue entre les différentes civilisations). In 2001, Iranian president Mohammad Khatami introduced the concept at the global level. At his initiative, the United Nations proclaimed the year 2001 as the "United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations".

The Alliance of Civilizations (AOC) initiative was proposed at the 59th General Assembly of the United Nations in 2005 by the Spanish Prime Minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and co-sponsored by the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The initiative is intended to galvanize collective action across diverse societies to combat extremism, to overcome cultural and social barriers between mainly the Western and predominantly Muslim worlds, and to reduce the tensions and polarization between societies which differ in religious and cultural values.

Other civilizational models

Individuals

See also

References

  1. ^ Huntington, Samuel P. (1993). "The Clash of Civilizations?". Foreign Affairs. 72 (3): 22–49. doi:10.2307/20045621. ISSN 0015-7120. JSTOR 20045621.
  2. ^ "gbse.com.my" (PDF). gbse.com.my. Retrieved September 9, 2023.
  3. Emily, Stacey (October 29, 2021). Contemporary Politics and Social Movements in an Isolated World: Emerging Research and Opportunities: Emerging Research and Opportunities. IGI Global. ISBN 978-1-7998-7616-8.
  4. Eriksen, Thomas Hylland; Garsten, Christina; Randeria, Shalini (October 1, 2014). Anthropology Now and Next: Essays in Honor of Ulf Hannerz. Berghahn Books. ISBN 978-1-78238-450-2.
  5. Krieger, Douglas W. (November 22, 2014). The Two Witnesses. Lulu Press, Inc. ISBN 978-1-312-67075-4.
  6. Haynes, Jeffrey (May 11, 2021). A Quarter Century of the "Clash of Civilizations". Routledge. ISBN 978-1-000-38383-6.
  7. ^ Official copy (free preview): The Clash of Civilizations?, Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993
  8. "WashingtonPost.com: The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order". The Washington Post.
  9. le problème russo-américain, et là nous revenons à l'Algérie, va être dépassé lui-même avant très peu, cela ne sera pas un choc d'empires nous assistons au choc de civilisations et nous voyons dans le monde entier les civilisations colonisées surgir peu à peu et se dresser contre les civilisations colonisatrices.

    "Page non trouvée | INA". Archived from the original on September 24, 2015. Retrieved July 14, 2015.
  10. Elst, Koenraad. ""Some recollections from my acquaintance with Sita Ram Goel", ch.6 of K. Elst, ed.: India's Only Communalist, In Commemoration of Sita Ram Goel". Retrieved October 23, 2022 – via www.academia.edu.
  11. Elst, K. India's Only Communalist: an Introduction to the Work of Sita Ram Goel, in Sharma, A. (2001). Hinduism and secularism: After Ayodhya. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
  12. Bernard Lewis: The Roots of Muslim Rage The Atlantic Monthly, September 1990
  13. Elmandjra, Mahdi (1992). Première guerre civilisationnelle (in French). Toubkal.
  14. Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations (1996), p. 246: " 'La premiere guerre civilisationnelle' the distinguished Moroccan scholar Mahdi Elmandjra called the Gulf War as it was being fought."
  15. Louis Massignon, La psychologie musulmane (1931), in Idem, Ecrits mémorables, t. I, Paris, Robert Laffont, 2009, p. 629: "Après la venue de Bonaparte au Caire, le clash of cultures entre l'ancienne Chrétienté et l'Islam prit un nouvel aspect, par invasion (sans échange) de l'échelle de valeurs occidentales dans la mentalité collective musulmane."
  16. mehbaliyev (October 30, 2010). "Civilizations, their nature and clash possibilities (c) Rashad Mehbal..."
  17. Murden S. Cultures in world affairs. In: Baylis J, Smith S, Owens P, editors. The Globalization of World Politics. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 416-426.
  18. THE WORLD OF CIVILIZATIONS: POST-1990 scanned image Archived March 12, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
  19. Walter, Natalie (June 15, 2016). "Summary of "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order"". Beyond Intractability. Retrieved October 28, 2021.
  20. ""western christianity" "western world" - Google Search". google.com. Retrieved September 9, 2017.
  21. Hungtington SP, The Clash of Civilizations? In: Lechner FJ, Boli J, editors. The globalization reader. 4th ed. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012. 37–44
  22. ^ Huntington, Samuel P. (2002) . "Chapter 9: The Global Politics of Civilizations". The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (The Free Press ed.). London: Simon $ Schuster. p. 207f. ISBN 978-0-7432-3149-7.
  23. Bağış: Fransa'nın tutumunda değişimin başladığını görüyoruz | AB ve Türkiye | EurActiv.com.tr Archived January 9, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
  24. Fox, J. (2005). Paradigm Lost: Huntington's Unfulfilled Clash of Civilizations Prediction into the 21st Century. International Politics, 42, pp. 428–457.
  25. Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Mindruta, D. (2002). Was Huntington Right? Testing Cultural Legacies and the Civilization Border. International Politics, 39(2), pp. 193 213.
  26. Henderson, E. A., & Tucker, R. (2001). Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 45, pp. 317 338.
  27. Russett, B. M.; Oneal, J. R.; Cox, M. (2000). "Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence" (PDF). Journal of Peace Research. 37 (5): 583–608. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.460.7212. doi:10.1177/0022343300037005003. S2CID 51897336.
  28. "H-Diplo/ISSF Teaching Roundtable 11-6 on The Clash of Civilizations in the IR Classroom | H-Diplo | H-Net". networks.h-net.org. Retrieved November 7, 2019.
  29. Sen A (1999). "Democracy as a Universal Value". Journal of Democracy. 10 (3): 3–17. doi:10.1353/jod.1999.0055. S2CID 54556373.
  30. Berman, Paul (2003). Terror and Liberalism. W W Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-05775-5.
  31. Timothy Garton Ash, History of the Present, Penguin, 2000, p 388-389
  32. Edward Said: The Clash of Ignorance The Nation, October 2001
  33. Said, E. W. (2004). From Oslo to Iraq and the Road Map. New York: Pantheon, 2004.
  34. TrystanCJ (March 2, 2007), Noam Chomsky on The "Clash of Civilizations", archived from the original on November 17, 2021, retrieved October 31, 2018
  35. Harari, Yuval N. (2018). 21 lessons for the 21st century (First ed.). New York. ISBN 978-0-525-51217-2. OCLC 1029771757.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  36. Robinson, Nathan J. (March 31, 2022). "The "Clash of Civilizations" Thesis Is Still Ignorant Nonsense". Current Affairs. ISSN 2471-2647. Retrieved October 15, 2024.
  37. Dimitri Kitsikis, A Comparative History of Greece and Turkey in the 20th century. In Greek, Συγκριτική Ἱστορία Ἑλλάδος καί Τουρκίας στόν 20ό αἰῶνα, Athens, Hestia, 1978. Supplemented 2nd edition: Hestia, 1990. 3rd edition: Hestia, 1998, 357 pp.. In Turkish, Yırmı Asırda Karşılaştırmalı Türk-Yunan Tarihi, İstanbul, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi, II-8, 1980.
  38. "Kulturelles Selbstverständnis und Koexistenz: Voraussetzungen für einen fundamentalen Dialog" (Cultural Identity and Co-existence: Preconditions for a Fundamental Dialogue). Public lecture delivered at the University of Innsbruck, Austria, 19 October 1972, published in: Philosophie und Politik. Dokumentation eines interdisziplinären Seminars. (Publications of the Working Group for Science and Politics at the University of Innsbruck, Vol. IV.) Innsbruck: Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Wissenschaft und Politik, 1973, pp. 75-78.
  39. Letter dated 26 September 1972, addressed to the Division of Philosophy of UNESCO.
  40. Dialogue 2001 Archived February 16, 2003, at the Wayback Machine Unesco.org Retrieved on 05-24-07
  41. About Dialoguecentre.org Retrieved 05-24-07
  42. "Dialogue Among Civilizations | United Nations University". archive.unu.edu. Retrieved October 23, 2022.

Bibliography

Further reading

External links

Media related to Clash of civilizations at Wikimedia Commons

Samuel P. Huntington
Works
RelatedForeign Policy (co-founder)
War on terror
Participants
Operational
Targets
Individuals
Factions
Conflicts
Operation
Enduring Freedom
Other
Policies
Related
Political philosophy
Terms
Government
Ideologies
Concepts
Philosophers
Antiquity
Middle Ages
Early modern
period
18th and 19th
centuries
20th and 21st
centuries
Works
Related
Categories: