The Clash Of Civilizations

From Foreign Affairs:

Clash of Civilizations?By Samuel P. Huntington


Summer 1993

PrintSend to friend Decrease font sizeTextIncrease font size Summary: World politics is entering a new phase, in which the great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of international conflict will be cultural. Civilizations-the highest cultural groupings of people-are differentiated from each other by religion, history, language and tradition. These divisions are deep and increasing in importance. From Yugoslavia to the Middle East to Central Asia, the fault lines of civilizations are the battle lines of the future. In this emerging era of cultural conflict the United States must forge alliances with similar cultures and spread its values wherever possible. With alien civilizations the West must be accommodating if possible, but confrontational if necessary. In the final analysis, however, all civilizations will have to learn to tolerate each other.



Response The Modernizing Imperative: Tradition and Change

Jeane J. Kirkpatrick

The steady drumbeat of modernity will force civilization to change. Also, responses from Albert L. Weeks and Gerard Piel.



Read

Response Do Civilizations Hold?

Albert L. Weeks

The steady drumbeat of modernity will force civilization to change. Also, responses from Albert L. Weeks and Gerard Piel.



Read

Response The West Is Best

Gerard Piel

The steady drumbeat of modernity will force civilization to change. Also, responses from Albert L. Weeks and Gerard Piel.



Read

Response If Not Civilizations, What? Samuel Huntington Responds to His Critics

Samuel P. Huntington

It's all very well to point to scattered events that the "civilizations" paradigm does not explain. But there is still no better framework with which to understand the post-Cold War world.



Read

Would you like to leave a comment?



3CommentsJoin



Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.

Discussion Questions

Clash of Civilizations THE NEXT PATTERN OF CONFLICT



World politics is entering a new phase, and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of what it will be-the end of history, the return of traditional rivalries between nation states, and the decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others. Each of these visions catches aspects of the emerging reality. Yet they all miss a crucial, indeed a central, aspect of what global politics is likely to be in the coming years.



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.



Conflict between civilizations will be the latest phase in the evolution of conflict in the modern world. For a century and a half after the emergence of the modern international system with the Peace of Westphalia, the conflicts of the Western world were largely among princes-emperors, absolute monarchs and constitutional monarchs attempting to expand their bureaucracies, their armies, their mercantilist economic strength and, most important, the territory they ruled. In the process they created nation states, and beginning with the French Revolution the principal lines of conflict were between nations rather than princes. In 1793, as R. R. Palmer put it, "The wars of kings were over; the wars of peoples had begun." This nineteenth-century pattern lasted until the end of World War I. Then, as a result of the Russian Revolution and the reaction against it, the conflict of nations yielded to the conflict of ideologies, first among communism, fascism-Nazism and liberal democracy, and then between communism and liberal democracy. During the Cold War, this latter conflict became embodied in the struggle between the two superpowers, neither of which was a nation state in the classical European sense and each of which defined its identity in terms of its ideology.