The American public was given two reports in April on what went wrong during the chaotic withdrawal of Afghanistan from 20 months ago. The White House blamed previous administrations for the disaster. John F. Sopko , the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan was circumspect. He identified systemic factors which were summarized in a single sentence: “the tragic incidents of August 2021
The number of decades can be either one or two, depending on whether you think the presidents of the 44th or the 45th are better. The correct answer is 3.
Francis Fukuyama in 1989 asked if the End of History was upon us; in 1992 he responded affirmatively. Fukuyama argued that the fall of the Soviet Union had confirmed liberal democracy as a concept that “couldn’t be improved.” The End of History thesis was a philosophical justification of Western triumphalism, and it seemed to validate Western civilization as an “universal civilisation.”
In 1993, four years after the Clash of Civilizations, Samuel Huntington asked if the world was headed for one. In 1996, he too replied affirmatively. Huntington argued that the basis of conflict would shift away from ideologies to civilizations. The Clash of Civilizations theory warned that the West was on its way down and that its hubristic claims of an “universal civilisation” would lead to confrontation with a rising Sinic civilization, and a
The thirty-year anniversary of Huntington’s essay this summer raises two questions. What would the last three decades in American foreign policy have been like if Fukuyama had won over decision-makers to adopt Huntington’s view of the world? Does his thesis still hold true today?
The End of History inspired American thinkers and leaders to make a series of bold foreign policy statements, from “a world order”, “the unipolar period”, “the indispensable nation”, to “the war on terror” and Huntington, meanwhile, predicted an “old order”. Huntington’s view of the world was dominated by centuries-old civilizations that were the summation of shared cultures, histories, and religions. Huntington believed that instead of multilateral institutions unifying the world, “fault lines” would define the next era in conflict.
Huntington’s future, from a civilizational perspective, was multipolar. Huntington acknowledged that the West was dominant in the last decade, but argued at the same time that the once dominant civilization is in decline. While the West was claiming to be the dominant civilization, other cultures such as the Sinics in East Asia or the Islamics in North Africa and Southwest Asia were defiantly refusing this premise. Western decline and Sinic ascent exposed the notion of unavoidability.
China established its own regional institutions, and negotiated normalization between Saudi Arabia, and Iran. The American invasion of Iraq and its global war against terrorism enraged Muslims who were already angry at the West and modernization. The Afghan Republic was overthrown by the Taliban in a matter of days. Royal absolutism endured through the Arab Spring. And “spin dictatorships”, Tyranny will persist, regardless of the time period or civilizational circumstance.
By the end of the Obama administration, American power had been reduced to declaring pastel “a href=”https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/politics/o The American government had reduced its power to a few declarations of ” Red Lines,” Inaction, and ” Leading from Behind” by
The past 30 years of history could have been very different.
Huntington’s thesis has been confirmed by history. In fact, the United States and China are now global competitors. Each of them believes that their respective governments and governing systems are superior and should be emulated. In the alliance , China is aligned with Iran. The civilization cycle is nearing an end. When and how will it end?
Huntington’s biggest fear was America’s insistence on the West as a “universal civilisation” that should be emulated or, if necessary, forced. Such hubris would leave the West isolated–a “West versus the Rest.” This fear has been realized in the form of the Chinese-Iranian-Russian alignment in opposition to the U.S. Should this configuration become entrenched, the multi-sided clash of civilization will devolve into a geo-economic duel between democratic capitalism and authoritarian mercantilism.
The first step is the impetus for to decouple American and Chinese economies. The divisions between the West, and the Rest in regards to the imposition of sanction against Russia are a testament to its global scope. Its persistence in the short term complicates rebuilding the supply chain that was destroyed by the pandemic. The next phase is marked by America’s industrial policies, and China’s attempts to de-dollarize its economy. It is true that industrial policies are popular in the United States, but they have a low success rate and can anger American allies. Even if the de-dollarization was incremental, it could hurt an already-debilitating US debt to GDP ratio and entitlement programs.
In order to reduce these risks, it is possible to make one final civilizational gamble.
Huntington remarked that Russia was “torn”, oscillating between Eurasian roots and Western aspirations. Early post-Soviet Russians wanted greater integration with the West, both for economic and security purposes. China played a part in the latter. After 9/11, Russia indicated that it was ready to work with the United States against Islamic extremism.
China and Russia share the Eurasian continent and Russia has always been afraid of encirclement. Therefore, they should not be close allies. aligning with each other is not a matter of values, but rather a result of similar interests. By 2050, Russia’s demographics will be encircled, by a China that is assertive to the west and Islam to the south. Both have a bloody history. The encirclement would be completed by a ” Eurabia to its West. It is no wonder that Russia supports anti-immigration groups in the West.
The decision makers in the United States, who were aware of the current civilizational conditions, should have taken advantage of the rebirth and death of the Soviet Union to create a Western-Orthodox alliance to counter the emerging China-Islamic coalition. Western leaders, enticed by the End of History, drove Russia away. But the road to detente is through Kiev.
Russia is a reluctant partner of China. Before it becomes a complete subordinate, the West must act quickly to end the conflict in Ukraine – before China does – and exploit any possible crack between the two countries. In 1914, interdependence was not enough to save a multipolar Europe. However, segregated blocks did provide a useful and effective division. Each superpower governed its own sphere, and took steps to avoid minor crises escalating into war.
The triumphalism of the West blinded America from the ongoing clash of civilizations. Thirty-years later, those with a respect for history and the human condition can only regret their folly. Revisiting Huntington after 30 years is a positive step towards repair.
The number of decades can be either one or two, depending on whether you think the presidents of the 44th or the 45th are better. The correct answer is 3.
Francis Fukuyama in 1989 asked if the world was witnessing the End of History. In 1992, he responded affirmatively. Fukuyama argued that the fall of the Soviet Union had confirmed liberal democracy as a concept that “couldn’t be improved.” The End of History thesis was a philosophical justification of Western triumphalism, and it seemed to validate Western civilization as an “universal civilisation.”
In 1993, four years after the Clash of Civilizations, Samuel Huntington instead posed the question. He also responded affirmatively in 1996. Huntington argued that the basis of conflict would shift away from ideologies to civilizations. The Clash of Civilizations theory warned that the West was on its way down and that its hubris in claiming a “universal civilisation” would lead to confrontation with a rising Sinic civilization
The thirty-year anniversary of Huntington’s essay this summer raises two questions. What would the last three decades in American foreign policy have been like if Fukuyama had won over decision-makers to adopt Huntington’s view of the world? Does his thesis still hold true today?
The End of History prompted American leaders to make a series of bold foreign policy statements, including “a new order,” “the unipolar period,” “the indispensable country,” and “the global fight against terrorism Huntington, meanwhile, predicted an “old order”. Huntington’s view of the world was dominated by centuries-old civilizations that were the summation of shared cultures, histories, and religions. Huntington believed that instead of multilateral institutions unifying the world, “fault lines” would define the next era in conflict.
Huntington’s future, from a civilizational perspective, was multipolar. Huntington acknowledged that the West was dominant in the last decade, but argued at the same time that the once-dominant civilisation is in decline. While the West was claiming to be the dominant civilization, other cultures such as the Sinics in East Asia or the Islamics in North Africa and Southwest Asia were defiantly refusing this premise. Western decline and Sinic ascent exposed the notion of unavoidability.
China established its own regional institutions, and negotiated normalization between Saudi Arabia, and Iran. The American invasion of Iraq and its global war against terrorism enraged Muslims who were already angry at the West and modernization. The Afghan Republic was overthrown by the Taliban in a matter of days. Royal absolutism survived during the Arab Spring. And “spin dictatorships”, HTML2 Tyranny will persist, regardless of eras or civilizational circumstances.
By the end of the Obama administration, American power had been reduced to declaring pastel “a href=”https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/politics The American government had reduced its power to a few declarations of ” Red Lines,” Inaction, and ” Leading from Behind
The past 30 years of history could have been very different.
Huntington’s thesis has been confirmed by history. In fact, the United States and China are now global competitors. Each of them believes that their respective governments and governing systems are superior and should be emulated. In the alliance , China has allied with Iran. The civilization cycle is nearing an end. When and how will it end?
Huntington’s biggest fear was America’s insistence on the West as a “universal civilisation” that should be emulated or, if necessary, forced. Such hubris would leave the West isolated–a “West versus the Rest.” This fear has been realized in the form of the Chinese-Iranian-Russian alignment in opposition to the U.S. Should this configuration become entrenched, the multi-sided clash of civilization will devolve into a geo-economic duel between democratic capitalism and authoritarian mercantilism.
The first step is the impetus for to decouple American and Chinese economies. The divisions between the West, and the Rest in regards to the imposition of sanction against Russia are a testament to its global scope. Its persistence will make it difficult to rebuild the supply chain that was destroyed by the pandemic. The next phase is the implementation of high-technology Industrial Policy by the United States and China’s efforts to De-dollarize their economies. It is true that industrial policies are popular in the United States, but they have a low success rate and can anger American allies. Even if the de-dollarization was incremental, it could hurt an already-debilitating US debt to GDP ratio and entitlement programs.
In order to reduce these risks, we could take one final step in the direction of civilization.
Huntington remarked that Russia was “torn”, oscillating between Eurasian roots and Western aspirations. Early post-Soviet Russians wanted greater integration with the West, both for economic and security purposes. China played a part in the latter. After 9/11, Russia indicated that it was ready to work with the United States against Islamic extremism.
China and Russia share the Eurasian continent and Russia has always been afraid of encirclement. Therefore, they should not be allies. The alignment is a result of coincident interests, and not values. By 2050, Russia’s demographics will be encircled, by an assertive China on its western border and an Islam in its southern border, with whom it shares a bloody history. The encirclement would be completed by a ” Eurabia to its West. It is no wonder that Russia supports anti-immigration groups in the West.
Subscribe Now
Receive weekly emails to your inbox
The decision makers in the United States, who were aware of the current civilizational conditions, should have taken advantage of the opportunity after the fall of the Soviet Union to create a Western-Orthodox alliance to counter the emerging China-Islamic alliance. Western leaders, enticed by the End of History, drove Russia away. But the road to detente is through Kiev.
Russia is a reluctant partner of China. Before it becomes a complete subordinate, the West must act quickly to end the conflict in Ukraine – before China does – and exploit any possible crack between the two countries. In 1914, interdependence was not enough to save a multipolar Europe. However, segregated blocks did provide a useful and effective division. Each superpower regulated its own sphere, and took steps to avoid minor crises escalating into major conflicts.
The triumphalism of the West blinded America from the ongoing clash of civilizations. Thirty-years later, those with a respect for history and the human condition can only regret their folly. Revisiting Huntington after 30 years is a positive step towards repair.
