THE "CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS" PARADIGM AND ITS CRITICS: A FINAL APPRAISAL
by Professor Michael C. Geokas
April 1, 1995 [PUBLISHED IN: Balkan News
(Athens) May7-13, 1995]
From Samuel Huntington, one of the most distinguished and well-known authorities on the
State and its interests, we have seen "The Clash of Civilizations," an elaborate
post-Cold War paradigm. Huntington asserts
that civilizations (defined by language, history, religion, customs, institutions and by
the self identification of people), are both real and important, and that the differences
among them, which have been solidified through the centuries, are more fundamental and
enduring, than ideological or economic differences, as causes of future conflict. Thus,
civilizational conflict he states, is destined to be the latest and inescapable phase of
conflict in the modern world.
Additionally, whereas nation states, will continue to be powerful actors in the affairs of
the world, the clash between civilizations will in effect dominate global politics and the
(cultural) fault lines between them, will constitute the battle lines of the future. Some of Huntington's critics (the magnificent
seven) have been vigorous in their attempts to discredit the civilization paradigm, by
insisting that the pervasive power of modernity and the inherent weakness and inevitable
erosion of tradition, will soon culminate into a universal civilization, as the final and
dominant determining factor in global affairs. Professor
Fouad Ajami has offered the most brilliant, most eloquent and the most compelling
"scalpel dissection" of Huntington's paradigm.
For this writer, Huntington's civilizational paradigm is an ambitious construct. However, it contains at least two very significant
classification errors, as well as the intriguing omission of a monumental factor which
promises to be overwhelming ingredient in determining the future course in world affairs
well into the 21st century and beyond: the population explosion in Asia, Africa and Latin
America. Most importantly, Huntington's
paradigm cannot serve as a model or guide to help us comprehend post-Cold War global
political events.
ERRATA
First, Huntington
failed to realize and properly record that a "Clash of Civilizations" has
already been inaugurated by the conflict between the Confucian and the Japanese
civilizations, in the 'China Incident," and between the Japanese, and Confucian plus
Western Civilizations, in the "Pacific Rim," as part of World War II. As expected from a civilizational conflict,
involving sharply defined cultural fault lines, the latter clash started with spectacular
fury, with an abrupt, surreal, unprovoked and devastating attack from the air, at Pearl
Harbor. This conflict was subsequently fought
with electrifying and ferocious naval and air battles, which included the spectacle of the
notorious kamikaze attacks, unique in the annals of modern warfare. It included dogfights with Japanese pilots wearing
no parachutes, because it was considered disgraceful for them to be captured alive by the
enemy. The conflict was also fought with
enormous ferocity from island to island in the Pacific, with the Japanese garrisons
fighting against all odds, until the bitter end, with very few survivors each time.
Even the
Japanese civilian non-combatants, refused to surrender and fell to their deaths from
seaside elevations. Finally, when the end
came, it was from the air and was "unimaginable, irresistible, [and] mushroom
shaped." Thus, the "Pacific
Rim" conflicts before and during the World War II, involved the clash of three
civilizations, the Confucian, Japanese and Western, especially its North American
subdivision. Even "the China
Incident" was fought with great ferocity (rape of Nanking and the indiscriminate
bombardment of civilians) as befitting to civilizational clash of arms. However, despite the fact that the "Pacific
Rim" conflicts fit Samuel Huntington's paradigm as the "right key in a door
lock," both of them were in effect wars between nation states, that happened to
belong to different civilizations and not the other way around. These nation states fought for their calculated
crude interests.
The second significant error of Samuel Huntington's is found in his classification of
contemporary civilizations, when he contradicts his own obligatory definition. If indeed a civilization is defined by common
objective elements such as: language, history, religion, customs, and institutions and
subjectively, by the people's self-identification, then especially the Greeks, do not
belong to the Slavic-Orthodox-Moslem, civilization.
Orthodox-Christians they are, but Slavic people, they are definitely not, and their
differences from Islam, are too blatantly obvious to deserve mentioning. But even the line of demarcation between Western
and Orthodox Christianity plus Islam, as suggested by William Wallace (Map I), is
fallacious, artificial and unsupported by the facts.
This line is also prejudicial, because it is based on the unresolved Schism of
Christianity, less than a millennium ago. On
this issue Jeanne Kirkpatrick is right on target. To
exclude Russia and other Orthodox Christians from Western Culture and to lump them
together with Islam, is to fly in the face of reality.
Thus, instead of being perpendicular, this demarcation line should be almost
horizontal (Map II), extending from the Black Sea to North Korea, separating Christian
people (including the Armenians) from those of the Islamic and Confucian Civilizations.
THE GREEK CONNECTION
History has already
classified Greece as a Western subcivilization, albeit with a special twist, due to her
exotic language, the non-Catholic branch of its Church and other striking elements. Greece is in effect an outpost of Western Europe,
closely adjacent to the World's most notorious cultural fault line, that between Europe
and Islam. In addition, Greece is the
acclaimed birthplace of Western democracy. Only
in the city state of ancient Athens and in the United States so far, has democracy lasted
for as much as two hundred years. With a
population of about 250,000, Athens produced works of literature, sculpture and
architecture that stand as models, inspiration and wonder to this day. There is a superbly valid reason, why the torch
for the Olympic games originates in Olympia in the Peloponessus and why the Greek Olympic
team, holding that striking blue and white flag, is always the first to enter the stadium,
for the Olympic opening ceremonies.
The fall of Constantinople in 1453 followed by almost 400 years of Ottoman rule, eclipsed
the normal evolution of a nation state. With
the revolution of 1821, promulgated mainly by Greeks of diaspora living in Europe, a
nation state was born about 170 years ago and has been under parliamentary rule for 140
years of its existence, in very sharp contrast to its neighbors to the east of the fault
line.
During the "Western Civil Wars," World War I and II and the Cold War, Greece
sided persistently and unequivocally with the victorious members of the Western family of
nations. Specifically, the Greeks were celebrated participants in World War II, who fought
in Greece, in El Alamein, and in Italy. They
enjoy the enviable distinction of having defeated one of the fascist partners in 1940, of
contributing to the defeat of the second and of having defeated the Communists as well,
under the Truman doctrine, which was highly symbolic for the Birthplace of Democracy.
Linguistically, the Greeks are unique indeed because their language has only enriched
other European languages. Thus, a cornucopia
of nomenclature of Greek derivation is found in Western dictionaries and at least 68 per
cent of the terms in Medicine are of Greek derivation. The exotic nature of the Greek
language is the reason for the phrase, "its all Greek to me."
There has never been a "kin country" syndrome among the Greeks, because religion
alone is not enough of a factor of kinship. The
Greek Orthodox Patriarchate is not the "Vatican" of Orthodox Christendom. As the Turks have found to their sharp
disappointment with the 150 million fellow Muslim Turkic-speakers beyond their northern
border, they could not be their cultural Mecca, and they even failed to be their
"privileged partners."
Most importantly, in complete alignment with the rest of Europe, Greece has made the
second demographic transition, with a low fertility rate (1.4) and low natural increase of
her population (0.1% annually), and has embraced similar family planning methods, again in
contrast, to her Middle-Eastern neighbors on the other site of the fault line. Turkey and other nations of the Middle East, have
high fertility rates, from 2.9 to 7.9,and natural increase from 1.5 to 5.0.
The Western character and strong subjective identification of the Greeks is aptly
illustrated by the Greek origin people in diaspora (about 4 million), who voting with
their feet, have settled mainly in the West (US, Canada, Australia, European Continent). They are known to adjust splendidly and to blend
easily into the Western environment.
The Greek people have been adherents to the Orthodox Church since the split of
Christianity into its two main branches. The
Greeks spread Orthodoxy to the Slavic people. Religion
is the only similarity between them. All
other objective elements such as language, history, customs, institutions, culture,
traditions are completely different. Thus, it
is absurd and inappropriate, to classify the Greeks into the Slavic-Orthodox civilization
just because they are not Catholics, or Protestants.
It is as absurd as classifying Suni and Shiite Moslems, into separate
Civilizations.
Thus, Greece is a part of Western civilization albeit with a special twist: that of a
magnificent language system, (for those who
can read the Iliad as well as Nikos Kazantzakis), a fierce individuality of its people,
and a great political and cultural heritage, which is distinctly separate from that of the
Slavic and Islamic peoples. Greece it not
even a "Torn Country." It is a
Western nation and a European outpost at that.
THE DEMOGRAPHIC IMPERATIVE
However, the most
stupendous omission of Samuel Huntington's and of his critics (except Kishore Mahbubani),
concerns the overwhelming role that the demographic changes of the world population,
(projected for the 21st century), will undoubtedly have on future world affairs.
The population explosion (vide infra) and brisk urbanization will further erode tradition,
and will boost modernity and the power of the nation state.
By 2015 nearly 56 per cent of the global population will be urban, and there will
be by 2010, 26 mega-cities with more than 10 million, most of them in developing
countries. This significant omission is
understandable. We live in a world of intense
and pervasive specialization in science, and political scientists and professors of
government are no exception, in having difficulties to handle an issue that necessitates a
genuine multidisciplinary approach. Thus,
with one exception, the entire group of discussants, have neglected the most crucial
factor, that will determine to a significant degree, the course of world affairs, in the
next century. Huntington refers to
demographic changes only in passing and does not seem to grasp their overwhelming impact
on any post-cold War paradigm, including his own.
POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND CONSEQUENCES.
Europe's
population (minus the previous USSR) will grow very little by 2025, from 513 (1993) to 524
million (2025) and 18.4 of that population will be over 65.
The population of the Middle Eastern countries and territories (Gaza and West Bank) of
264,715 million in 1993, is projected to be about 576,426
million in 2025 (high estimate).
The Islamic nations included 980 million people in 1989 and are expected to nearly double
to 1.9 billion by 2020, accounting for 23 per cent of the world's total.
The population of Africa was 677 million in 1993 and is projected to be 1,552 million at
2025.
Asia's population of 3,257 million in 1993 is projected to reach 4,946 million in 2025. China alone with 1,178.5 in 1993, is projected at
1,546.3 million for 2025.
North America's (US and Canada) population of 287 million in 1993 is projected at 371
million at 2025.
Latin America's population of 460 million in 1993,is projected to be 682 million at 2025.
Former USSR's population was 285 in 1993 and is projected at 321 million, at 2025.
Oceania's 28 million people in 1993 are projected at 39 million at 2025.
Thus the Western countries (Europe and North America) are projected to have about 887
million people by 2025, (20 per cent of them over 65) whereas Africa, Asia and Latin
America combined, are projected to have 7,761 million, and a much younger population at
that. This enormous population imbalance
between Western and non-Western nations, will impart fundamental changes in the world
arena.
The demographic forces now in motion will yield a world where the US and other Western
nations will no longer be able to shape the political agenda, the culture or the direction
of the global community. Inescapably, the
center of political, economic and military power will move to a new non-Western area,
bringing with it an assertiveness of wide scope and significance. The mammoth differences in demographic power will
have serious consequences for Western countries. Moreover,
this population imbalance coupled with differences in religion, culture, history, and
traditions, will provide the stage for a possible conflict between nation states or groups
of states, of the same or different civilizations.
The potentially controlling role of the demographic forces has been appreciated by Kishore
Mahbubani, who states that "simple arithmetic demonstrates Western folly.” The West has 800 million people, and the rest make
up 4.7 billion.
In the national arena no Western society would accept a situation where 15 per cent of its
population legislated for the remaining 85 per cent.
But this is what the West is trying to do globally." Kishore Mahbubani's population arithmetic adjusted
for the year 2025, will be even more compelling for the emerging power of the non-Western
civilizations.
There can be no amount of exclusive technology or alliance that will help a static and
aging Western society, with 20 per cent of its population over 65, (with its enormous
expenses for health care and other demands of its welfare policies), that will compensate
for such remarkable differences in sheer numbers and vitality of populations. It is the demographic imperative, of population
explosion and urbanization (in addition to the modernizing imperative of Jeane J.
Kirkpatrick), coupled with the steady weakening of the Western Societies through their own
folly, that will facilitate conflict.
The West is caught into a self-made web of: low fertility rates, excessive egalitarianism
and radical interpretation of democracy, an overwhelming emphasis on individualism, which
translates into profound selfishness (and away from altruism and childbearing), and
palpable arrogance, (even among intelligentsias); excessive liberalism and permissiveness
with almost total lack of discipline, especially among the young, (who receive an
abundance of contradictory signals from their societies), a rigid and inflexible
constitutionalism, flagrant consumerism and hedonism and drug abuse; an incessant hollow
call for respect of human rights despite its miserable failure to protect its own citizens
from criminals and from other elements of social decay.
Whereas the "Western Ideas," in Samuel Huntington's litany of
"individualism, liberalism, constitutionalism, human rights, equality, liberty, the
rule of law, democracy, free markets," sound magnificent, the demographic forces now
at work and on track and their predictable consequences, will make the West less and less
relevant, by sheer population volume, by the global redistribution of economic power, and
by technology transfer. For instance, the
rapidly increasing economic power of the East Asian States, including China, and their
huge populations and internal markets, will eventually lead to enhanced military power
(including an atomic arsenal and the means to deliver it), to cultural assertiveness and
to profound political influence. The only partial exception to this scenario will most
probably be the United States, due to strong credentials as part of the Pacific Rim family
of nations and due to the volume and high quality of brain power and high technological
standing.
ISLAM
From all
civilizations, Islam represents a special case and stands out alone. Islam is much more than a religion. Indeed, it is a complete way of life. The Sharia governs virtually every aspect of human
life and Moslems believe that the word of God was given word by word to Muhammad 1400
years ago, who in turn copied it in the Koran. Furthermore,
Islam is an expanding faith and the maintenance of a worldwide Muslim community is one of
the goals of Islamic life. A specific example
of this is the pilgrimage to Mecca, which serves to demonstrate to each pilgrim the vast
reach of Islam and the communality of its adherents.
Many Westerners believe that Islam represents the only veritable ideological
competitor of the West at the end of the 20th century and beyond. Here again the demographic imperative appears to
be controlling, especially in the southern and eastern perimeter of Europe, where the
Europeans sense [the] Islamic ideology on the march, in what is called Islamic
fundamentalism.
The seven countries of North Africa including Egypt, had 155 million people in 1993 and
are projected at 280 million at 2025, with a doubling population time of 28 years. Moreover, the 15 countries of the Middle East
(including Egypt and Israel) will surpass an aging Europe, with their youthful population.
Thus, the fear of population decline in "Fortress Europe," which has been
debated in France for decades is now coming into a sharp focus. Many Europeans have justified fear that migration
from developing countries, including North Africa and the Middle East, will increase to
unacceptable levels.
It seems that population, like nature abhors a vacuum and is compelled to move from
high-growth to low-growth areas, especially if there is a pull factor of economic
advantage. At the G-7 meeting in Tokyo in
1993, it was stated that uncontrolled migration may be more threatening and destabilizing than terrorism or the spread of nuclear weapons. Whereas nobody would anticipate a holy war of
Muslim countries from North Africa and Middle East, as a crusade in reverse, this time by
the Muslim crescent, the potential for great upheaval and disorder at Europe's interface
with Islam is real.
HAVE A BETTER IDEA? YES I DO.
The "Clash of
Civilizations" post-cold War paradigm cannot serve as the model to help us understand
central developments in the future of world politics.
Instead, the nation states, old and new, will continue to be the main actors in
world affairs, with their "acting" having at times, a civilizational component.
Conflict between (and within) nation states of the same or of different civilizations will
continue to occur as a result of various factors acting alone or in combination such as: ubiquitous nationalism, simmering land disputes,
competition for scarce water and energy resources, age-old tribal frictions, religious
fundamentalism, regional and international terrorism, attempts for regional hegemony,
pressures from refugee populations and from large waves of migrants towards developed
countries.
However, the most powerful, all pervasive underlying factor for future conflict, will be
the demographic forces of population growth and urbanization. This will bring the gradual,
inexorable translocation of economic, political and military power (and the ability to
risk military conflict and to tolerate combat losses), away from Western societies and
toward the nation states of the Islamic, Hindu and Confucian civilizations. The aging populations of the Western powers, and
their inability to accept large combat losses in serious conflict, (except in dire need of
self-defense), will be in sharp contrast with the exploding and youthful people of other
civilizations.
Edward Luttwak has recently provided us with a brilliant analysis on the existing
impotence of the great Western powers to influence the course of world events through
intimidation, backed up with military action if necessary, due to the demographic
imperative of one, two and three child families. He
discusses "the War of all Mothers" and the Italian "mamismo"
(mothering) and their political consequences, in the form of a powerful constraint in the
use of force, by the low fertility Western powers.
He emphasizes that in the future, only nation states with a high fertility rate and large
families will be able to initiate and to sustain conflict and to tolerate significant
combat losses. The West he says, will have to
rely more and more on volunteer armies and on robotic weapons and will delay and avoid
conflict, as much as possible, because of the new family demography.
On the other hand, atomic weapons (and the means of delivering them) are expected to
proliferate among some high fertility rate nation states and their deterrent effect will
be lost for the West. Thus, the emerging
picture for the future of world politics is complicated
and largely unpredictable, due to a mosaic of labile factors, but specifically because of
the looming consequences of population explosion and urbanization, coupled with the
information explosion, in Asia, Latin America and Africa.
In my view, an all-embracing post-Cold War guiding paradigm based on civilizational fault
lines, is unrealistic. Instead, the "tug
of war" between tradition and modernity will continue inexorably, in a large number
of global locations. The nation states shall remain the key actors in world affairs,
albeit in a new order dictated by demographic forces.
Finally, the International Conference on Population and Development, in Cairo, last year,
was indeed a valiant attempt to slow down the projected population explosion within the
21st century, through family planning and other measures, from 5.67 billion today, to a
sustainable 7.27 billion by 2015. Most
probably however, the long-term outcomes of this effort, will be modest at best, due to
the fact that Western countries have long completed their second demographic transition,
whereas nation states of Islamic and some of the other non-Western civilizations, have a
long way to go, in achieving their own demographic transition and population control.
Michael C.
Geokas, M. D., M. Sc., Ph.D.(McGill),
Emeritus Professor of Medicine and
Biological Chemistry, University of California, Davis.
SOURCES:
1. Huntington S.P. The Clash of
Civilizations. Foreign Affairs, 72(3):22,
1993;
2. Huntington S. P.
If not Civilizations What? Foreign Affairs 72(5):186, 1993;
3. Ajami Fouad.
The Summoning, But they Said, We Will not Hearken. Foreign Affairs 72(4): 2, 1993;
4. Kirkpatrick Jeane J. and others. The Modernizing
Imperative, Tradition and Change. Foreign
Affairs 72(4):22, 1993;
5. Mabbubani K. The Dangers of Decadence, What
the Rest Can Teach the West, Foreign
6. Kagan D. Pericles of Athens and the Birth of
Democracy, New York: Free Press, 1991;
7. Rouleau E. Challenges to Turkey. Foreign Affairs 72(5):110, 1993; 8. 1993, World
Population Data Sheet, Population Reference Bureau, Inc. Washington D.C.;
9. Beedham B. Islam and the West, Economist,
332(7875), August 6, 1994:44.
10. Luttwak E. Where
are the Great Powers? Home With the Kids. Foreign
Affairs, 73(4):23, 1994;
11. Inoguchi T. The Coming Pacific Century? Current
History 93(579):25, 1995;
12. Conelly M. and Kennedy P. Must It Be the Rest
against the West? The Atlantic Monthly, 274(6): 61-91,December 1994.