They are bound to coexist, contributing to the interdependence of faiths and civilizations, the breakdown of which may result in the total destruction of “global civilization.” It is thus a must to understand the risks in an approach of conflict and to question the myths of conflict. The politics of confrontation has already given rise to the “securitization” of the public domain, which, both in the West and the Islamic countries, threatens open society, pluralism and difference. A clash of civilizations perspective builds a particular mindset that weakens the elements of toleration, cooperation and dialogue between the sides.
As sharp ideological competitions faded away by the end of the Cold War, we were told to face tensions along civilizationcultural lines. Islam and the West, given their centuries-old history of competition and confrontation, are cast as the most likely candidates to conflict. September 11 and ensuing developments have contributed to the expectation of conflict between Islam and the West.
Yet global peace depends on our ability to develop policies that would reduce the likelihood of a clash of cultures. Just like at national level, at the global level too: Pluralities, respect for the different, tolerance and dialogue have to be cemented so as to build social harmony and peace.
In fact, a clash of cultures is more dangerous than any kind of political-military confrontation involving nation-states, since each individual within same political unit, yet with different cultural-civilization affiliations, would be the subject of this global war. It would not only be a global war of states but also a war within states. No single person can escape from this which involves a war of “all against all.”
A recent BBC poll, conducted in 27 countries on 25,000 people on the “clash of civilizations” produced some relieving results. A majority of the people (56 percent) interviewed think a common ground can be found to avert conflict between Islam and the West, whereas 28 percent feel that conflict is inevitable. A majority of the people point to power struggle as the source of tension, which confirms the views of a recent report published by the UN secretary-general on the “alliance of civilization project.” People across the globe think that it is politics not religion that causes conflict.
There are some interesting data, too, emerging from the BBC poll. Muslims who think conflict is inevitable are relatively higher in number compared to other religious communities (35 percent amongst Muslims as opposed to 28 percent in other communities). This indicates the distress that Muslims have been going through in recent years. Just remember: The blame for 9-11 was squarely put on them. It was the Muslims who suffered from the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it was Muslims who have been subjected to the aggression of Israel. Before it is too late, it would be better to let the pressure off the Muslims.
The respondents who expect that a common ground can be found between the sides are highest in number in countries like Italy, the UK, France, Canada and even the US. This may be a sign of hope that cultural approach has not dominated the minds and hearts of Western people as a whole.
Somehow the international community has to find a ground for dialogue and coexistence among diverse cultures, civilizations and religions. It would be wrong to assume that cultures and civilizations are separable units. They are not geographically distant entities but intermingle to a great degree within same political units. If we fail to take the prospect of a clash of civilizations seriously and address the underlying issues, we will all pay the price. The loser will not only be the underdog, but the West, too. It is time for the West to realize how its welfare and democracy depend on its ability to avoid the clash of civilizations because it would mean a civil war in the West as well.
