1

BOOK SUMMARY OF THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER BY SAMUEL P. HUNTINGTON
Citation: Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 1996. This Book Summar written ! : Hollie Hendrikson, "on#lict $esearch "onsortium The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order is an e%&ansion o# the 199' Foreign Affairs article written ! Samuel Huntington that h &othesi(ed a new &ost)"old *ar world order. Prior to the end o# the "old *ar, societies were di+ided ! ideological di##erences, such as the struggle !etween democrac and communism. Huntington,s main thesis argues, -The most im&ortant distinctions among &eo&les are .no longer/ ideological, &olitical, or economic. The are cultural- 0112. New &atterns o# con#lict will occur along the !oundaries o# di##erent cultures and &atterns o# cohesion will !e #ound within the cultural !oundaries. Part One: A World of Civilization To !egin his argument, Huntington re#utes &ast &aradigms that ha+e !een ine##ecti+e in e%&laining or &redicting the realit o# the glo!al &olitical order. -*e need a ma&,- Huntington sa s, -that !oth &ortra s realit and sim&li#ies realit in a wa that !est ser+es our &ur&oses- 0'12. Huntington de+elo&s a new -"i+ili(ation &aradigm- to create a new understanding o# the &ost)"old *ar order, and to #ill the ga&s o# the alread e%isting &aradigms. To !egin with, Huntington di+ides the world into eight -ma3or- ci+ili(ations: 1. Sinic: the common culture o# "hina and "hinese communities in Southeast 4sia. 5ncludes 6ietnam and 7orea. 2. Japanese: 8a&anese culture as distincti+el di##erent #rom the rest o# 4sia. 3. Hind : identi#ied as the core 5ndian ci+ili(ation. 4. !slamic: 9riginating on the 4ra!ian Peninsula, s&read across North 4#rica, 5!erian Peninsula and "entral 4sia. 4ra!, Turkic, Persian and :ala are among the man distinct su!di+isions within 5slam. 5. Orthodo": centered in $ussia. Se&arate #rom *estern "hristendom. 6. Western: centered in ;uro&e and North 4merica. 7. #atin American: "entral and South 4merican countries with a &ast o# a cor&oratist, authoritarian culture. :a3orit o# countries are o# a "atholic ma3orit . 8. Africa: while the continent lacks a sense o# a &an)4#rican identit , Huntington claims that 4#ricans are also increasingl de+elo&ing a sense o# 4#rican 5dentit .

2 <ollowing the e%&lanations o# the se&arate ci+ili(ations in the new &aradigm, Huntington descri!es the relations among ci+ili(ations. Be#ore 1=>> 4.?., ci+ili(ations were se&arated geogra&hicall and the s&read o# ideas and technolog took centuries. Huntington argues that research and technolog are the catal st #or ci+ili(ation creation and de+elo&ment. B 1=>> 4.?., e+olution in ocean na+igation ! *estern cultures led to ra&id e%&ansion and e+entual domination o# ideas, +alues, and religion. Twentieth centur relations among ci+ili(ations ha+e mo+ed !e ond the unidirectional in#luence o# the west on the rest. 5nstead, -multidirectional interactions among all ci+ili(ation- has !een maintained 0='2. 5n other words, cultural in#luence is interde&endent@ western ci+ili(ations in#luence and are in#luenced ! smaller, less &ower#ul ci+ili(ations around the world. Huntington then re#utes the idea o# a *estern cultural hegemon and the conce&t o# an esta!lished uni+ersal ci+ili(ation. He states that -glo!al communications are dominated ! the *est- and is -a ma3or source o# the resentment and hostilit o# non)*estern &eo&les against the *est- 0=92. The notion o# a single, uni+ersal culture is not hel&#ul creating an e%&lanation or a descri&tion o# glo!al &olitical order. Howe+er, Huntington also argues that as moderni(ation increases cross)cultural communication, the similarities among cultures also increase. The ke to this cha&ter is Huntington,s se+erance o# moderni(ation #rom *esterni(ation. *hile the world is !ecoming more modern, it is simultaneousl !ecoming less *estern, an idea he e%&ands u&on in &art two o# the !ook. Part Two: T!" S!iftin# $alan%" of Civilization Huntington starts this section ! arguing that *estern &ower and in#luence is #ading. There are contrasting +iews on the *est,s hold on &ower. 9ne side argues that the *est sill has a mono&ol on technological research and de+elo&ment, militar strength, and economic consum&tion. The other side argues that the relati+e &ower and in#luence o# *estern countries is declining. Huntington ado&ts the latter +iew and descri!es three characteristics o# the *estern decline: 1. The current *estern decline is a +er slow &rocess and is not an immediate threat to *orld &owers toda . 1. ?ecline o# &ower does not occur in a straight line@ it ma re+erse, s&eed u&, or &ause. '. The &ower o# a state is controlled and in#luenced ! the !eha+ior and decisions o# those holding &ower. 4lso in this section, Huntington asserts the increased role and im&ortance o# religion in world &olitics. $eligion is the societal #actor that has #illed the +acuum created ! a loss o# &olitical ideolog . :a3or religions around the world

3 -e%&erienced new surges in commitment, rele+ance and &ractice ! erstwhile casual !elie+ers- 0962. Huntington goes on to sa that re&lacing &olitics with religion was also the result o# increased communication among societies and cultures. Peo&le -need new sources o# identit , new #orms o# sta!le communit , and new sets o# moral &rece&ts to &ro+ide them with a sense o# meaning and &ur&ose- 09A2. $eligion is a!le to meet these needs. "ha&ter #i+e, $conomics% &emograph' and the Challenger Civilizations, discusses the relati+e rise in &ower and in#luence o# non)*estern countries. Huntington s&eci#icall #ocuses on 8a&an, the <our Tigers 0Hong 7ong, Taiwan, South 7orea, Singa&ore2, and "hina as countries, which asserted cultural rele+ance through economic successes. -4sian societies are decreasingl res&onsi+e to Bnited States demands and interests and .are/ increasingl a!le to resist &ressure #rom the B.S. or other *estern countries- 01>C2. The a!ilit o# 4sian countries to success#ull moderni(e and de+elo& economicall without ado&ting western +alues su&&orts Huntington,s assertion that the world is !ecoming more moderni(ed, !ut less *esterni(ed. :uslim societies, unlike 4sian societies, ha+e asserted cultural identit through the rea##irmation and resurgence o# religion. Huntington argues that the resurgence o# 5slam -em!odies the acce&tance o# modernit , re3ection o# *estern culture, and the recommitment to 5slam as the guide to li#e in the modern world- 011>2. $eligion is the &rimar #actor that distinguishes :uslim &olitics and societ #rom other countries. Huntington also argues that the #ailure o# state economies, the large oung &o&ulation, and the authoritarian st le o# go+ernance ha+e all contri!uted to the resurgence o# 5slam in societ . Part III: T!" E&"r#in# Ord"r of Civilization ?uring the "old *ar, the !i&olar world order ena!led countries to identi# themsel+es as either aligned or non)aligned. 5n the &ost)"old *ar world order, countries are no longer a!le to easil categori(e themsel+es and ha+e entered into an identit crisis. To co&e with this crisis, countries started -rall ing to those .cultures/ with similar ancestr , religion, language, +alues, and institutions and distance themsel+es #rom those with di##erent ones- 01162. $egional organi(ations ha+e #ormed that re#lect &olitical and economic alliances. These include 4ssociation o# Southeast 4sian Nations 04S;4N2, the ;uro&ean Bnion 0;B2 and the North 4merican <air Trade 4greement 0N4<T42. Huntington also descri!es the idea o# -torn countries,- or countries that ha+e et to entirel claim or create an identit . These countries include $ussia, Turke , :e%ico, and 4ustralia. Huntington discusses the new structure o# ci+ili(ations as centered around a small num!er o# &ower#ul core states. -"ulture commonalit legitimates the leadershi& and order)im&osing role o# the core states #or !oth mem!er state and core e%ternal &owers and institutions- 01=62. ;%am&les o# core states are <rance

4 and Derman #or the ;B. Their s&here o# in#luence ends where *estern "hristendom ends. 5n other words, ci+ili(ations are strictl !ound to religious a##iliation. Huntington argues that the 5slamic ci+ili(ation, which he identi#ied earlier in the !ook, lacks a core state and is the #actor that disallows these societies to success#ull de+elo& and moderni(e. The remainder o# this section goes into great detail to e%&lain the di##erent di+isions o# core states throughout the world. Part IV: Cla !" of Civilization Huntington &redicts and descri!es the great clashes that will occur among ci+ili(ations. <irst, he antici&ates a coalition or coo&eration !etween 5slamic and Sinic cultures to work against a common enem , the *est. Three issues that se&arate the *est #rom the rest are identi#ied ! Huntington as: 1. The *est,s a!ilit to maintain militar su&eriorit through the non&roli#eration o# emerging &owers. 1. The &romotion o# *estern &olitical +alues such as human rights and democrac . '. The $estriction o# non)*estern immigrants and re#ugees into *estern societies. Non)*estern countries see all three as&ects as the *estern countries attem&t to en#orce and maintain their status as the cultural hegemon . 5n the cha&ter The (lo)al *olitics of Civilizations, Huntington &redicts the con#lict !etween 5slam and the *est to !e a -small, #ault line war,- and the con#lict !etween the 4merica and "hina ha+ing the &otential to !e an -interci+ili(ational war o# core states- 01>A2. !slam and the West Huntington goes into a !rie# historical e%&lanation o# the con#lictual nature o# 5slam and "hristianit and then lists #i+e #actors that ha+e e%acer!ated con#lict !etween the two religions in the late twentieth centur . These #actors are:

the :uslim &o&ulation growth has generated large num!ers o# unem&lo ed and dissatis#ied outh that !ecome recruits to 5slamic causes, the recent resurgence o# 5slam has gi+en :uslims a rea##irmation o# the rele+ance o# 5slam com&ared to other religions, the *est,s attem&t to uni+ersali(e +alues and institutions, and maintain militar su&eriorit has generated intense resentment within :uslim communities, without the common threat o# communism, the *est and 5slam now &ercei+e each other as enemies, and

increased communication and interaction !etween 5slam and the *est has e%aggerated the &ercei+ed di##erences !etween the two societies 01112.

Asia% China% and America ;conomic de+elo&ment in 4sia and "hina has resulted in an antagonistic relationshi& with 4merica. 4s discussed in &re+ious sections, economic success in 4sia and "hina has created an increased sense o# cultural rele+anc . Huntington &redicts that the com!ination o# economic success o# the ;ast 4sian countries and the heightened militar &ower o# "hina could result in a ma3or world con#lict. This con#lict would !e intensi#ied e+en more ! alignments !etween 5slamic and Sinic ci+ili(ations. The end o# cha&ter nine &ro+ides a detailed diagram 0The Dlo!al Politics o# "i+ili(ations: ;merging 4lliances2 which hel&s e%&lain the com&le%it o# the &olitical relationshi&s in the &ost)"old *ar era 01C=2. Huntington de#ines the So+iet)4#ghan war and the <irst Dul# *ar as the emergence o# ci+ili(ation wars. Huntington inter&rets the 4#ghan *ar as a ci+ili(ation war !ecause it was seen as the #irst success#ul resistance to a #oreign &ower, which !oosted the sel#)con#idence, and &ower o# man #ighters in the 5slamic world. The war also -le#t !ehind an uneas coalition o# 5slamic organi(ations intent on &romoting 5slam against all non):uslim #orces- 01CA2. 5n other words, the war created a generation o# #ighters that &ercei+ed the *est to !e a ma3or threat to their wa o# li#e. The <irst Dul# *ar was a :uslim con#lict in which the *est inter+ened@ the war was widel o&&osed ! non)*esterners and widel su&&orted ! *esterners. Huntington states that -5slamic #undamentalist grou&sEFGdenounced .the war/ as a war against ,5slam and its ci+ili(ation, ! an alliance o# ,"rusaders and Hionists, and &roclaimed their !acking o# 5raI in the #ace o# ,militar and economic aggression against its &eo&le- 01C92. The war was inter&reted as a war o# us +s. them@ 5slam +. "hristianit . To !etter understand the de#inition o# the #ault line !etween ci+ili(ations, Huntington &ro+ides a descri&tion o# characteristics and d namics o# #ault line con#licts. The can !e descri!ed ! the #ollowing:

"ommunal con#licts !etween states or grou&s #rom di##erent ci+ili(ations 4lmost alwa s !etween &eo&le o# di##erent religions Prolonged duration 6iolent in nature 5dentit wars 0us +s. them2, e+entuall !reaks down to religious identit ;ncouraged and #inanced ! ?ias&ora communities 6iolence rarel ends &ermanentl Pro&ensit #or &eace is increased with third &art inter+ention

6 Part V: T!" F't'r" of Civilization 5n the concluding sections o# his !ook, Huntington discusses the challengers o# the *est, and whether or not e%ternal and internal challenges will erode the *est,s &ower. ;%ternal challenges include the emerging cultural identities in the non)*estern world. 5nternal challenges include the erosion o# &rinci&le +alues, morals, and !elie#s within *estern culture. He also contri!utes to the de!ate !etween multiculturalists and monoculturalists and states that, -4 multicultural world is una+oida!le !ecause glo!al em&ire is im&ossi!le. The &reser+ation o# the Bnited States and the *est reIuires the renewal o# *estern identit - 0'1J2. The a!ilit #or the *est to remain a glo!al &olitical &ower, it needs to ada&t to increasing &ower and in#luence o# di##erent ci+ili(ations. *ithout ada&ting, the *est is destined to decline in &ower and in#luence, or it will clash with other &ower#ul ci+ili(ations. 4ccording to Huntington, the *est clashing with another ci+ili(ation is -the greatest threat to world &eace, and an international order0'112.

IKIPE!IA SEARCH
H(NTINGTON)S THESIS OF CIVILIZATIONAL CLASH

$merging alignments as predicted )' H ntington in +,,-. Thicker lines represent more conflict al relationships. Huntington argues that the trends o# glo!al con#lict a#ter the end o# the "old *ar are increasingl a&&earing at these ci+ili(ational di+isions. *ars such as those #ollowing the !reak u& o# Yugosla+ia, in "hechn a, and !etween 5ndia and Pakistan were cited as e+idence o# inter)ci+ili(ational con#lict. Huntington also argues that the wides&read *estern !elie# in the uni+ersalit o# the *est,s +alues and &olitical s stems is naK+e and that continued insistence on democrati(ation and such -uni+ersal- norms will onl #urther antagoni(e other ci+ili(ations. Huntington sees the *est as reluctant to acce&t this !ecause it !uilt the international s stem, wrote its laws, and ga+e it su!stance in the #orm o# theBnited Nations.

9 Huntington identi#ies a ma3or shi#t o# economic, militar , and &olitical &ower #rom the *est to the other ci+ili(ations o# the world, most signi#icantl to what he identi#ies as the two -challenger ci+ili(ations-, Sinic and 5slam. 5n Huntington,s +iew, ;ast 4sian Sinic ci+ili(ation is culturall asserting itsel# and its +alues relati+e to the *est due to its ra&id economic growth. S&eci#icall , he !elie+es that "hina,s goals are to reassert itsel# as the regional hegemon, and that other countries in the region will ,!andwagon, with "hina due to the histor o# hierarchical command structures im&licit in the "on#ucian Sinic ci+ili(ation, as o&&osed to the indi+idualism and &luralism +alued in the *est. 5n other words, regional &owers such as the two 7oreas and 6ietnam will acIuiesce to "hinese demands and !ecome more su&&orti+e o# "hina rather than attem&ting to o&&ose it. Huntington there#ore !elie+es that the rise o# "hina &oses one o# the most signi#icant &ro!lems and the most &ower#ul long)term threat to the *est, as "hinese cultural assertion clashes with the 4merican desire #or the lack o# a regional hegemon in ;ast 4sia..citation needed/ Huntington argues that the 5slamic ci+ili(ation has e%&erienced a massi+e &o&ulation e%&losion which is #ueling insta!ilit !oth on the !orders o# 5slam and in its interior, where #undamentalist mo+ements are !ecoming increasingl &o&ular. :ani#estations o# what he terms the -5slamic $esurgence- include the 19A9 5ranian re+olution and the #irst Dul# *ar. Perha&s the most contro+ersial statement Huntington made in the Foreign Affairs article was that -5slam has !lood !orders-. Huntington !elie+es this to !e a real conseIuence o# se+eral #actors, including the &re+iousl mentioned :uslim outh !ulge and &o&ulation growth and 5slamic &ro%imit to man ci+ili(ations including Sinic, 9rthodo%, *estern, and 4#rican. Huntington sees 5slamic ci+ili(ation as a &otential all to "hina, !oth ha+ing more re+isionist goals and sharing common con#licts with other ci+ili(ations, es&eciall the *est. S&eci#icall , he identi#ies common "hinese and 5slamic interests in the areas o# wea&ons &roli#eration, human rights, and democrac that con#lict with those o# the *est, and #eels that these are areas in which the two ci+ili(ations will coo&erate. $ussia, 8a&an, and 5ndia are what Huntington terms ,swing ci+ili(ations, and ma #a+or either side. $ussia, #or e%am&le, clashes with the man :uslim ethnic grou&s on its southern !order 0such as "hechn a2 !utLaccording to Huntington

10 Lcoo&erates with 5ran to a+oid #urther :uslim)9rthodo% +iolence in Southern $ussia, and to hel& continue the #low o# oil. Huntington argues that a -Sino) 5slamic connection- is emerging in which "hina will coo&erate more closel with 5ran, Pakistan, and other states to augment its international &osition. Huntington also argues that ci+ili(ational con#licts are -&articularl &re+alent !etween :uslims and non):uslims-, identi# ing the -!lood !orders- !etween 5slamic and non)5slamic ci+ili(ations. This con#lict dates !ack as #ar as the initial thrust o# 5slam into ;uro&e,.citation needed/its e+entual e%&ulsion in the 5!erian reconIuest, the attacks o# the 9ttoman Turks on ;astern ;uro&e and 6ienna, and the ;uro&ean im&erial di+ision o# the 5slamic nations in the 1J>>s and 19>>s. Huntington also !elie+es that some o# the #actors contri!uting to this con#lict are that !oth "hristianit 0u&on which *estern ci+ili(ation is !ased2 and 5slam are:

:issionar religions, seeking con+ersion o# others

Bni+ersal, -all)or)nothing- religions, in the sense that it is !elie+ed ! !oth sides that onl their #aith is the correct one Teleological religions, that is, that their +alues and !elie#s re&resent the goals o# e%istence and &ur&ose in human e%istence.

:ore recent #actors contri!uting to a *estern)5slamic clash, Huntington wrote, are the 5slamic $esurgence and demogra&hic e%&losion in 5slam, cou&led with the +alues o# *estern uni+ersalism ) that is, the +iew that all ci+ili(ations should ado&t *estern +alues ) that in#uriate 5slamic #undamentalists. 4ll these historical and modern #actors com!ined, Huntington wrote !rie#l in his <oreign 4##airs article and in much more detail in his 1996 !ook, would lead to a !lood clash !etween the 5slamic and *estern ci+ili(ations. The &olitical &art Hi(!)ut)Tahrir also reiterates Huntington,s +iews in their &u!lished !ook, -The 5ne+ita!ilit o# "lash o# "i+ilisation-. .6/ Core "tate an# $a%&t &ine 'on$&i't" 5n Huntington,s +iew, interci+ili(ational con#lict mani#ests itsel# in two #orms: #ault line con#licts and core state con#licts. Fa lt line conflicts are on a local le+el and occur !etween ad3acent states !elonging to di##erent ci+ili(ations or within states that are home to &o&ulations #rom di##erent ci+ili(ations.

11 Core state conflicts are on a glo!al le+el !etween the ma3or states o# di##erent ci+ili(ations. "ore state con#licts can arise out o# #ault line con#licts when core states !ecome in+ol+ed..A/ These con#licts ma result #rom a num!er o# causes, such as: relati+e in#luence or &ower 0militar or economic2, discrimination against &eo&le #rom a di##erent ci+ili(ation, inter+ention to &rotect kinsmen in a di##erent ci+ili(ation, or di##erent +alues and culture, &articularl when one ci+ili(ation attem&ts to im&ose its +alues on &eo&le o# a di##erent ci+ili(ation..A/ Mod"rnization* +" t"rnization* and ,torn %o'ntri" , "ritics o# Huntington,s ideas o#ten to traditional cultures and internal re#ormers who ado&ting the +alues and attitudes critics./ho0/ sometimes claim that to moderni(e westerni(ed to a +er large e%tent. e%tend their criticisms wish to moderni(e without o# *estern culture. These is necessaril to !ecome

5n re&l , those./ho0/ who consider the Clash of Civilizations thesis accurate o#ten &oint to the e%am&le o# 8a&an, claiming that it is not a *estern state at its core. The argue that it ado&ted much *estern technolog 0also in+enting technolog o# its own in recent times2, &arliamentar democrac , and #ree enter&rise, !ut has remained culturall +er distinct #rom the *est..citation needed/ "hina is also cited ! some./ho0/ as a rising non)*estern econom . :an ./ho0/ also &oint out the ;ast 4sian Tigers or neigh!oring states as ha+ing ada&ted western economics, while maintaining traditional or authoritarian social go+ernment. Perha&s the ultimate e%am&le o# non)*estern moderni(ation is $ussia, the core state o# the 9rthodo% ci+ili(ation. The +ariant o# this argument that uses $ussia as an e%am&le relies on the acce&tance o# a uniIue non)*estern ci+ili(ation headed ! an 9rthodo% state such as $ussia or &erha&s an ;astern ;uro&ean countr ..citation needed/ Huntington argues that $ussia is &rimaril a non)*estern state although he seems to agree that it shares a considera!le amount o# cultural ancestr with the modern *est. $ussia was one o# the great &owers during *orld *ar 5. 5t also ha&&ened to !e a non)*estern &ower. 4ccording to Huntington, the *est is distinguished #rom 9rthodo% "hristian countries ! the e%&erience o# the $enaissance, $e#ormation, the ;nlightenment,

12 o+erseas colonialism rather than contiguous e%&ansion and colonialism, and a recent re)in#usion o# "lassical culture through $ome rather than through the continuous tra3ector o# the B (antine ;m&ire. The di##erences among the modern Sla+ic states can still !e seen toda . This issue is also linked to the -uni+ersali(ing #actor- e%hi!ited in some ci+ili(ations.clarification needed/. Huntington re#ers to countries that are seeking to a##iliate with another ci+ili(ation as -torn countries.- Turke , whose &olitical leadershi& has s stematicall tried to *esterni(e the countr since the 191>s, is his chie# e%am&le. Turke ,s histor , culture, and traditions are deri+ed #rom 5slamic ci+ili(ation, !ut Turke ,s "aucasian elite im&osed western institutions and dress, em!raced the Matin al&ha!et, 3oined N4T9, and is seeking to 3oin the ;uro&ean Bnion. :e%ico and $ussia are also considered to !e torn ! Huntington. He also gi+es the e%am&le o# 4ustralia as a countr torn !etween its *estern ci+ili(ational heritage and its growing economic engagement with 4sia. 4ccording to Huntington, a torn countr must meet three reIuirements to rede#ine its ci+ili(ational identit . 5ts &olitical and economic elite must su&&ort the mo+e. Second, the &u!lic must !e willing to acce&t the rede#inition. Third, the elites o# the ci+ili(ation that the torn countr is tr ing to 3oin must acce&t the countr . As noted in the book, to date no torn country has successfully redefined its ci ili!ational identity, this "ostly due to the elites of the #host# ci ili!ation refusin$ to acce%t the torn country, thou$h if &urkey $ained "e"bershi% of the ;uro&ean Bnion it has been noted that "any of its %eo%le 'ould su%%ort (esterni!ation)/ho0*. +f this 'ere to ha%%en it 'ould be the first to redefine its ci ili!ational identity. Criticism This article 'ontain" wea"e& wor#"( )a*%e +,ra"in* t,at o$ten a''o-+anie" .ia"e# or%n)eri$ia.&e in$or-ation. Such statements should !e clari#ied or remo+ed. 1April 23+34 4mart a Sen wrote a !ook called !dentit' and 5iolence: The ill sion of destin' in critiIue o# Huntington,s main conce&t o# an ine+ita!le clash along ci+ili(ational lines. 5n this !ook he argues that a root cause o# +iolence is when &eo&le see each other as ha+ing a singular a##iliation, i.e. Hindu or :uslim, as o&&osed to multi&le a##iliations: Hindu, woman, housewi#e, mother, artist, daughter, mem!er

13 o# a &articular socio)economic class...etc. all o# which can !e a source o# a &erson,s identit ..citation needed/ 5n his !ook Terror and #i)eralism, Paul Berman &ro&oses another criticism o# the ci+ili(ation clash h &othesis. 4ccording to Berman, distinct cultural !oundaries do not e%ist in the &resent da . He argues there is no -5slamic ci+ili(ation- or a -*estern ci+ili(ation-, and that the e+idence #or a ci+ili(ation clash is not con+incing, es&eciall when considering relationshi&s such as that !etween the Bnited States and Saudi 4ra!ia. 5n addition, he cites the #act that man 5slamic e%tremists s&ent a signi#icant amount o# time li+ing andNor stud ing in the western world. 4ccording to Berman con#lict arises !ecause o# &hiloso&hical !elie#s !etween grou&s, regardless o# cultural or religious identit ..J/ ;dward Said issued a res&onse to Huntington,s thesis in his own essa entitled -The "lash o# 5gnorance.-.9/ Said argues that Huntington,s categori(ation o# the world,s #i%ed -ci+ili(ations- omits the d namic interde&endenc and interaction o# culture. O++o"in* 'on'e+t" 4lso, in recent ears the theor o# ?ialogue 4mong "i+ili(ations, a res&onse to Huntington,s "lash o# "i+ili(ations, has !ecome the center o# some international attention. The conce&t, which was introduced ! #ormer 5ranian &resident :ohammad 7hatami, was the !asis #or Bnited Nations, resolution to name the ear 1>>1 as the Year o# ?ialogue among "i+ili(ations..1>/.11/ The 4lliance o# "i+ili(ations 049"2 initiati+e was &ro&osed at the =9th Deneral 4ssem!l o# the Bnited Nations in 1>>= ! the President o# the S&anish Do+ernment, 8osO Muis $odrPgue( Ha&atero and co)s&onsored ! the Turkish Prime :inister $ece& Ta i& ;rdoQan. The initiati+e is intended to gal+ani(e collecti+e action across di+erse societies to com!at e%tremism, to o+ercome cultural and social !arriers !etween mainl the *estern and &redominantl :uslim worlds, and to reduce the tensions and &olari(ation !etween societies which di##er in religious and cultural +alues. T,e Inter-e#iate Re*ion Huntington,s geo&olitical model, es&eciall the structures #or North 4#rica and ;urasia, is largel deri+ed #rom the -5ntermediate $egion- geo&olitical model #irst #ormulated ! ?imitri 7itsikis and &u!lished in 19AJ..11/ The 5ntermediate $egion,

14 which s&ans the 4driatic Sea and the 5ndus $i+er, is neither western nor eastern 0at least, with res&ect to the <ar ;ast2 !ut is considered distinct. "oncerning this region, Huntington de&arts #rom 7itsikis contending that a ci+ili(ational #ault line e%ists !etween the two dominant et di##ering religions 09rthodo% "hristianit and Sunni 5slam2, hence a d namic o# e%ternal con#lict. Howe+er, 7itsikis esta!lishes an integrated ci+ili(ation com&rising these two &eo&les along with those !elonging to the less dominant religions o# Shiite 5slam, 4le+ism and 8udaism. The ha+e a set o# mutual cultural, social, economic and &olitical +iews and norms which radicall di##er #rom those in the *est and the <ar ;ast. 5n the 5ntermediate $egion, there#ore, one cannot s&eak o# a ci+iliational clash or e%ternal con#lict, !ut rather an internal con#lict, not #or cultural domination, !ut #or &olitical succession. This has !een success#ull demonstrated ! documenting the rise o# "hristianit #rom the helleni(ed $oman ;m&ire, the rise o# the 5slamic cali&hates #rom the "hristiani(ed $oman ;m&ire and the rise o# 9ttoman rule #rom the5slamic cali&hates and the "hristiani(ed $oman ;m&ire.