Civilisation and Conflict

Name
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Civilisation and Conflict
Introduction
Conflict has changed since the early days where clashes were observed between the kings and various kingdoms. In the world today three major sources of conflict are identified, the cultural, socio-psychological and material conflict. Therefore, the essential goods that are at stake are vales, the status and the scarce resources. Rather, the cultural conflict will emerge from clash in the values, socio-psychological from a clash in the status and material conflict from the struggle of the resources (Smuts 2010, P. 45).
The end of the Cold War led Americans to focus more on international relations. Additionally, the collapse of the Soviet Union crushed many of the fundamental assumptions many Americans had on the way the world works and initiated a far- reaching debate that is still ongoing to date. Marxists ideas for instance passed in China and Soviet Union without a remarkable incorporation in the country’s working systems, translating to the death of an ideology of world historical significance (Smuts 2010, P. 49). The death of an ideology means the growth of a common marketisation of international relations and further the likelihood of a bigger conflict than previously witnessed in the cold war between various states (Fukuyama 1989, P. 31).
Further, the adoption of a common ideology, such as that of free trade, does not translate to an end of international conflict, but a more larger-scale conflict involving larger states (Fukuyama 1989, P. 33). Various scholars argue that the period represents very sad time in history as various states struggle for recognition and the willingness to risk their resources for the achievement of a single goal, the worldwide recognition of an ideology that calls for courage, imagination and idealism. The period will be characterized with environmental concerns, solving of many technical problems and the satisfaction of many consumer demands (Fukuyama 1989, P. 34). As noted by Nye (1990), the mix of resources that produce international power is slowly shifting. What many people regarded as the cycle of supremacy conflict will not repeat its self as the United States is said to retain more traditional hard power resources than any other country in the continent (Nye 1990, P.57). Additionally, the country has the soft ideological and institutional resources to retain its leading place in the new domains of transnational interdependence.
Thus, the problem for U.S. power in the 21st century will not be new challenges for supremacy but rather the new challenges of transnational interdependence. The critical issue is whether the United States will have the political leadership and strategic vision to convert its power resources into real influence in a transitional period of world politics. The implications for stability in the nuclear era are enormous. A strategy needs to be developed that will oversee the management of the transition to period of in an open attitude to the rest of the world, in the development of new international institutions, and in major reforms to restore the domestic sources of US strength (Nye 1990, P.61). The two most difficult dangers that the Unites States face are the desire to remain compliant to the domestic agenda and the unwillingness to invest in order to maintain confidence in its capacity for international leadership (Nye 1990, P.63). According to Huntington, civilizations are the “ultimate human tribes.”  Thus, a clash between civilisations is tribal conflict on a global scale. Huntington argues that there is little if any inter-civilization cooperation. Instead, he believes these relations will, be distant worse and extremely, violent (Nye 1990, P. 69). Rather conflict will be a common feature and trust will be rare despite the signing of many treaties witnessed in the recent past and the merging of regions and continents. Huntington postulates that inter-civilisation conflict will take two forms. At the more local levels, conflicts will occur along fault lines where neighbouring states from different civilisations border each other. Nyer (1990) adds that in the second case, “core-state wars” could start over the balance or power among civilisations, trust will undoubtedly be are case (P. 73).
Huntington notes that the world is divided into eight or nine civilisations which are all based on cultural differences that have been dominating over the centuries. Therefore, he argues that future conflicts will occur along these culture fault lines separating the civilisations. These civilisations include Western, Confucian, Islamic, Japanese, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and African Civilisation. The civilisations he adds were shaped were shaped by religious traditions still powerful today (Huntington & Harrison 2001, P.81). The differences between civilisations are basic as civilizations are differentiated from each other by history, language, culture, tradition and the most important of all religion. People of different civilisations have different views on relations between God and man, the individual and the group, the citizen and the state, parents and children and most importantly they have differing views on the importance of human rights and responsibilities, equality and hierarchy and rights and responsibilities. The differences are the foundation of conflict that have been present in the past centuries and have generated the most stretched conflicts.
Additionally the world is slowly becoming a smaller place especially with the effects of globalisation such that the interaction between various people form different continents is increasingly becoming easier. The interactions simplify the civilisation consciousness and awareness of differences. For instance many Americans react more aggressively to Japanese investments than to other investments from Canada or other European countries (Harrison & Huntington 2000, P. 87). Thus civilisations bring a lot of civilisation consciousness that animates animosities that extend to history.
Many modernisation theorists note that the world is changing in ways that seem to erode the traditional values. Economic developments for example have brought about religion decline and many cultural differences. Data from the World values Survey indicates that 65 societies containing the 75% of the world population indicate that economic developments indicate changes in absolute social norms towards increasing rational, tolerant, and post modern values (Barber, 1993). Economic modernizations bring about social, change which withdraws people from their cultural identities. Barber (1990) argues that the changes weaken a nation state from their sources of identity creating a space for religion which in turn get in to fill the gaps in forms of movements that are branded “fundamentalists”. Many movements brought about by religion are found in Western Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism as well as Islam. Most fundamentalists in many countries are the young, college-educated people, professionals and business persons. Religion thus provides a basic foundation for the identity and commitment that goes beyond the national boundaries and unites civilisations (Barber, 1990).
Economic regionalism is factor that has been witnessed in many countries of the world. It reinforces civilisation consciousness, however it can only succeed when rooted in common civilisations. Barber (1990) notes that that is the reason why today there integration in almost every continent of the globe such as the European Union, the African Union, The commonwealth and COMESA, all of which have an identifying characteristic. However, future integrations will not based on such characteristic, such as the former colonies of the Britons, or the idea of having originated from the same region but entirely on similar ideologies.
Fault Lines
Fault lines between civilisations will be the causes of future conflicts as they are going to replace the political and ideological divisions witnessed in the past. Once ideological divisions have faded a new cultural division between western Christianity on one hand and Islam on the other will emerge drawing a line between the west and the rest (Shapiro 2004, P. 85). As the ideological differences faded at the end of the Cold War, cultural differences of the west emerged. In regards to religion, the West is seen as the Protestants and Catholics, people who have common experiences of Renaissance, the Enlightenment, French revolution and industrial revolution. Economically, western civilisations are seen as more developed than others on the opposite side of the fault line. Their economic prosperity presents a brighter future characterised by increased European economic integration and political consolidation (Shapiro 2004, P. 87). However, the Muslims and orthodox Christians found on the other part of the fault line are from different kingdoms in the especially their original populations and did not participate in the modernisation process of the west. Economically, their civilisations are in a weaker position than the west and despite the many grants and loans awarded to them, the possibility of achieving a strong economic system is very low (Shapiro 2004, P. 91). This is attributed to the nature of their political systems as peace building activities and liberalism often came about after intensive force had been applied. The use of force however has its disadvantages as it fosters unstable political systems witnessed in civilizations opposite the West fault line.
The fault line can be illust...