The Clash of Civilizations and the Coming of the New World Order - Essay Example

Critical book review of Samuel P. Huntington’s The Clash of Civilizations and the Coming of the New World Order Synopsis Samuel Huntington wrote his book during the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR in 1991. I think this point should be noted strongly because it was a post Cold War period in which America suddenly became the sole world superpower and there was a search for new ‘enemy’ from America’s perspective. A new ‘challenge’ was sought to reflect the changed geopolitical landscape and international relations referred to as the new world order. Knowing this context within which the book was written helps to understand Samuel Huntington’s ideas better and the motives behind his thesis. I believe that some of his ideas are a stark reflection of the underlying reality and can offer some insight into present religious/cultural relations. That is, there is actually a tension of sorts between identifiable groups of humanity in the present day. However, Samuel Huntington makes a gross oversimplification of things without an in-depth understanding of the nature of present-day conflicts and the complex characteristics of cultures. So, there is no ‘clash of civilizations’ as such. Significantly, his theory fails to satisfactorily explain the post September 11th world. Samuel Huntington outlines a future where the “great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural” (Huntington 1993:22) and on this basis divides the world into seven civilizations. I agree with his broad idea of the significance of culture and that this is the basis upon which humankind can be differentiated. But, his differentiation is largely based on religion with some exceptions and the fact that he has ignored Buddhism altogether. Also, he puts Israel together with the West, thereby combining Jews with Christians, which is strange if we look at history. He does correctly identify nation-states as a relatively new phenomenon, and that economic and military power drives conflicts. He is also correct in saying that the concept of a global or universal culture is a relatively recent on originating in the West and that the West considers its own policies as positive for the rest of the world and therefore to be imposed upon it. As far as human rights is concerned this does not hold water because Islam conferred human rights over a thousand years ago, so this is more a reflection of the changed times rather than differences. Also, we could give examples of the not too distant past when for example inter-racial problems were severe, civil and women’s rights was obtained. So, America has no strong foundations therefore to boast about being a civilizing influence on the world. It is ideas of liberal democracy that the West is propounding that are uniquely characteristic of Western culture but that too is seriously flawed and under threat. Furthermore, it is not true that our world history is dominated by conflicts between civilizations. We only need to look at the many inter-civilizational conflicts to see how misleading this viewpoint is. As an example, Europe was plagued by conflicts within the Western civilization prior to an including World War II. Analysis Professor Huntington’s thesis concerning the clash of civilizations is built upon his division of the world into seven civilizations: Confucian, Hindu, Islamic, Japanese, Latin American, Slavic-Orthodox, and Western (Huntington 1993:26). He perceives Africa as only a possible rather than an existent civilization. To support this division and illustrate his concept of clashes of civilizations, the partitioning of India and Pakistan is a prime example (clash between Hindu and Islamic civilization), and the breakup of Yugoslavia. If we apply this perspective to the current US involvement in Iraq, then he identifies a clash between the Western and Islamic civilizations. Both are represented by a multitude of countries. This division is based on the classical view of civilizations in which civilizations continually wage war against each other. However, although the West is dominated by the US, Iraq is by no means the leader of the Islamic civilization. Currently, the West dominates the world through its economic and especially military might. So it begs the question, why a clash is perceived. In fact, along with China, the Islamic world is considered to be a major threat to the West. The main reason is the incompatibility of both cultures and ideologies in that other cultures have deep roots that cannot simply be washed away by Western hegemony. As Huntington predicted, “the most serious challenge to the West’s hegemony would come from Islam and China.” (Alam, Shahid, 2003) Actually, the Islamic civilization is currently experiencing a reawakening perceived as a resurgence of militant Islam. Huntington believes the massive population explosion in the Muslim world is also fueling the clash. And, that this Islamic-Western clash would result in very bloody conflicts in the 21st century. Some would like to believe the US invasion of Iraq is an example of this clash. Islam, or more correctly, the Muslim world has ‘bloody borders’ as described by Huntington because a great number of conflicts are presently taking place in Muslim countries, for example, in such nations as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Pakistan. But this is a highly controversial statement by him. This idea goes back to the Islamic incursions into Europe, the Spanish re-conquest, the crusades, and European imperialism, but I think he is implying the current state of affairs when talking about ‘bloody borders’. If we absorb the western media as a source of information, any naïve person would think that Islam is involved in many fault line wars today and is therefore the cause of so many world problems. But to know the dynamics of these numerous wars and conflicts, we need to consider why this is happening. Is the Islamic civilization to blame, which is the image the West would like to portray? Or is there a sinister ploy in these events given that it is not the Muslim countries per se, but there is a direct US involvement in all of these conflicts. We need therefore to examine the nature of this involvement and what the West seeks in its strategic relationship to the Muslim world. If the Muslim world is perceived as engaged in terrorist activities it is only a distorted viewpoint. The West is equally perceived if not more so as the greatest troublemaker in the world and the initiator of violence around the world. There is a real need to understand from each other’s perspectives. The book enhances our understanding of the current world affairs only in so far as loosely identifying the opposing cultures in conflict rather than giving insight into the nature of the conflict itself. We can see who the main players involved are in the Middle East, but to get to the heart of the matter, we need to examine the background and the purpose behind these conflicts. I don’t believe it is simply a matter of a cultural clash either. If we had to put it simplistically it is the desire to military dominate although supported by the cultural framework. If we are to live up to being part of global community and pull through to becoming a united world, what the world really needs is not talk of a clash of civilizations but a better understanding of each other’s cultures and explore avenues to build bridges. In this regard, Huntington does a great disservice by taking us back to the classical view. Terming the US invasion of Iraq as Operation Iraqi Freedom is offensive. The country is no freer, safer or stable than it was when Saddam Hussein was in power. Nor have any weapons of mass destruction materialized, which was the pretext for the war. Even Huntington himself is opposed to the US going into Iraq (Martha, 2006). Instead this is a prime example we could use to illustrate how it is not so much Islam’s bloody borders but US strategic interests that are to blame for the present day global conflicts. It is in the interests of the West to see a torn Iraq and subdued other Muslim countries. I believe the oil supplies in Iraq was the prime motivator along with the wish to gain a foothold in the Muslim world and build permanent bases. Moreover, this is not a clash of civilizations if we consider how many western people oppose the war. So, Huntington’s thesis fails on this account because the US government and military may be at war but it is not a war between the cultures of the two civilizations. There are hidden forces, economic and state interests, and military strategic interests at play, not conflicts between cultures. “"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do." (Huntington, Samuel) The attack by the West on Islam is contrary to how the situation was the other way round when Europe was in the dark ages and the Islamic civilization was at its peak. The West is built on the classical civilizations of the Greeks and Romans but it is through Islam that the knowledge was transmitted. The West owes a lot to the Islamic civilization, its very existence in fact, but is repaying this in creating these bloody borders and bloody rivers. I believe that the saying of Anwar Sadat below should be reflected on by both the Western and Islamic civilizations. The former needs to appreciate its roots, stop thinking its culture is universal and appreciate Islamic values better, and the latter must ponder how it came to be in the appalling conditions it is in today and help itself to revive. “Western civilization and its heritage for which Europe and America so much fear, live only on the debris of the East and would not flourish if they had not sucked its blood.” (Anwar Sadat) Huntington agrees in the later parts of his book that the universalist pretensions of the West bring it into conflict with others. As mentioned earlier, both Islam and China have rich traditions and it is an insult when the West claims it has a higher moral ground. As there is a multitude of peoples, so there is also a multitude of cultures that must learn to tolerate each other. I think what we should be striving for is a supercivilization that is capable of accommodating a range of cultures and beliefs. The West-Islam tension rather than clash, is a unique one. Beyond the Iraq invasion and the current misadventures of the West in Afghanistan and eying Iran and Pakistan, both civilizations I believe will need to adapt to live with each other for their own sake. The way forward is an appreciation of other cultures and flexibility not rigidity of approach. No doubt, the Iraqi people have lost a great deal due to the US invasion of its country. Their whole country has been destroyed and their culture looted. But the outcome is a loss for the killing nation i.e. America too. The American people have been burdened with debt as a result of the war and many of its soldiers killed. There is a big lesson to be learnt for the US from the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union. If we look at history, civilizations come and go. The US needs to be aware that military might alone does not achieve everything. The only legacy that lasts is a rich culture. Civilizations do not expand by force but by a strong and vibrant culture. References Alam, Shahid. (2003). Is This a Clash of Civilizations? Counter Punch magazine. February 28, 2003. Foreign Affairs. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations. The next pattern of conflict. Samuel P. Huntington. Retrieved December 1, 2008 from: http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19930601faessay5188/samuel-p-huntington/the-clash-of-civilizations.html Huntington, Samuel, P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 13: 978-0-684-84441-1 Huntington, Samuel. (n.d.). Quoted on 1100 American soldiers killed. Retrieved from: http://www.malu-aina.org/Iraq.htm Martha. (2006). Five Years After 9/11, The Clash of Civilizations Revisited. August 18, 2006. The PEW Forum on Religion and Public Life Transcripts. Retrieved December 1, 2008 from: http://pewforum.org/events/index.php?EventID=125 Read More