Editing Clash of Civilizations (section)

==Criticism==
The book has been criticized by various academic writers, who have empirically, historically, logically, or ideologically challenged its claims.<ref>Fox, J. (2005). Paradigm Lost: Huntington's Unfulfilled Clash of Civilizations Prediction into the 21st Century. International Politics, 42, pp. 428–457.</ref><ref>Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Mindruta, D. (2002). Was Huntington Right? Testing Cultural Legacies and the Civilization Border. International Politics, 39(2), pp. 193 213.</ref><ref>Henderson, E. A., & Tucker, R. (2001). Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 45, pp. 317 338.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Russett | first1 = B. M. | last2 = Oneal | first2 = J. R. | last3 = Cox | first3 = M. | year = 2000 | title = Clash of Civilizations, or Realism and Liberalism Déjà Vu? Some Evidence | url = http://www.svt.ntnu.no/iss/indra.de.soysa/pol2003h05/russet_oneal_cox_jpr.pdf| journal = Journal of Peace Research | volume = 37 | issue = 5| pages = 583–608 | doi=10.1177/0022343300037005003| citeseerx = 10.1.1.460.7212 | s2cid = 51897336 }}</ref> Political scientist Paul Musgrave writes that ''Clash of Civilization'' "enjoys great cachet among the sort of policymaker who enjoys name-dropping [[Sun Tzu]], but few specialists in international relations rely on it or even cite it approvingly. Bluntly, ''Clash'' has not proven to be a useful or accurate guide to understanding the world."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/discussions/5273269/h-diploissf-teaching-roundtable-11-6-clash-civilizations-ir|title=H-Diplo/ISSF Teaching Roundtable 11-6 on The Clash of Civilizations in the IR Classroom {{!}} H-Diplo {{!}} H-Net|website=networks.h-net.org|language=en|access-date=2019-11-07}}</ref>
<!-- Other books, written for the general public, similarly challenge Huntington's contentious claims. For example, in his work ''Identity and Violence: The illusion of destiny'', The Nobel Laureate [[Amartya Sen]] advances several critiques of Huntington's main concept of an inevitable clash along civilizational lines. He argues that violence occurs when individuals see each other as having a singular affiliation (e.g., Hindu, Muslim, Christian), as opposed to multiple affiliations: e.g., Hindu, woman, housewife, mother, artist, daughter, member of a particular socio-economic class etc. In this sense, and to the detriment of civilization distinctiveness, it is argued that all of these dimensions can, and should be a source of a personal identity.<ref> Sen, Amartya (2006). Identity and  Violence. New York: W.W. Norton. </ref> -->

In an article explicitly referring to Huntington, scholar <!--the same -->[[Amartya Sen]] (1999) argues that "diversity is a feature of most cultures in the world. Western civilization is no exception. The practice of democracy that has won out in the modern West is largely a result of a consensus that has emerged since the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] and the [[Industrial Revolution]], and particularly in the last century or so. To read in this a historical commitment of the West—over the millennia—to democracy, and then to contrast it with non-Western traditions (treating each as monolithic) would be a great mistake."<ref>{{cite journal |author=Sen A |year=1999 |title=Democracy as a Universal Value |journal=Journal of Democracy |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=3–17 |doi=10.1353/jod.1999.0055|s2cid=54556373 }}</ref>{{Rp|16}}

In his 2003 book ''[[Terror and Liberalism]]'', [[Paul Berman]] argues that distinct cultural boundaries do not exist in the present day. He argues there is no "Islamic civilization" nor a "Western civilization", and that the evidence for a civilization clash is not convincing, especially when considering relationships such as that between the [[Saudi Arabia–United States relations|United States and Saudi Arabia]]. In addition, he cites the fact that many Islamic extremists spent a significant amount of time living or studying in the Western world. According to Berman, conflict arises because of [[Philosophy|philosophical]] beliefs various groups share (or do not share), regardless of cultural or religious identity.<ref>Berman, Paul (2003). Terror and Liberalism. W W Norton & Company. {{ISBN|0-393-05775-5}}.</ref>

[[Timothy Garton Ash]] objects to the 'extreme cultural determinism... crude to the point of parody' of Huntington's idea that Catholic and Protestant Europe is headed for democracy, but that Orthodox Christian and Islamic Europe must accept dictatorship.<ref>[[Timothy Garton Ash]], ''History of the Present'', Penguin, 2000, p 388-389</ref>

[[Edward Said]] issued a response to Huntington's thesis in his 2001 article, "The Clash of Ignorance".<ref>Edward Said: [https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/clash-ignorance/ The Clash of Ignorance] The Nation, October 2001</ref> Said argues that Huntington's categorization of the world's fixed "civilizations" omits the dynamic interdependency and interaction of culture. A longtime critic of the Huntingtonian paradigm, and an outspoken proponent of Arab issues, Said (2004) also argues that the clash of civilizations thesis is an example of "the purest invidious racism, a sort of parody of Hitlerian science directed today against Arabs and Muslims" (p.&nbsp;293).<ref>Said, E. W. (2004). From Oslo to Iraq and the Road Map. New York: Pantheon, 2004.</ref>

[[Noam Chomsky]] has criticized the concept of the clash of civilizations as just being a new justification for the United States "for any atrocities that they wanted to carry out", which was required after the [[Cold War]] as the [[Soviet Union]] was no longer a viable threat.<ref>{{Citation|last=TrystanCJ|title=Noam Chomsky on The "Clash of Civilizations"|date=2007-03-02|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT64TNho59I| archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211117/qT64TNho59I| archive-date=2021-11-17 | url-status=live|access-date=2018-10-31}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

In ''[[21 Lessons for the 21st Century]]'', [[Yuval Noah Harari]] called the clash of civilizations a misleading thesis. He wrote that Islamic fundamentalism is more of a threat to a global civilization, rather than a confrontation with the West. He also argued that talking about civilizations using analogies from evolutionary biology is wrong.<ref>{{Cite book|title=21 lessons for the 21st century|last=Harari, Yuval N.|isbn=978-0-525-51217-2|edition=First|location=New York|oclc=1029771757|year = 2018}}</ref>

[[Nathan J. Robinson]] criticizes Huntington's thesis as inconsistent. He notes that according to Huntington, "Spanish-speaking Catholic-majority Spain is West, while Spanish-speaking Catholic-majority Mexico is not part of Western civilization, and instead belongs with Brazil as part of Latin American civilization." Robinson concludes, "If you look at the map and think these divisions make sense, which you might, it is because what you are mostly seeing here is a map of prejudices. [Huntington] indeed shows how a lot of people think of the world, especially in America."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Robinson |first=Nathan J. |date=2022-03-31 |title=The "Clash of Civilizations" Thesis Is Still Ignorant Nonsense |url=https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2022/03/the-clash-of-civilizations-thesis-is-still-ignorant-nonsense |access-date=2024-10-15 |work=Current Affairs |language=en |issn=2471-2647}}</ref>

===Intermediate Region===
Huntington's geopolitical model, especially the structures for North Africa and Eurasia, is largely derived from the "[[Intermediate Region]]" geopolitical model first formulated by [[Dimitri Kitsikis]] and published in 1978.<ref>Dimitri Kitsikis, ''A Comparative History of Greece and Turkey in the 20th century''. In Greek, ''Συγκριτική Ἱστορία Ἑλλάδος καί Τουρκίας στόν 20ό αἰῶνα'', Athens, Hestia, 1978. Supplemented 2nd edition: Hestia, 1990. 3rd edition: Hestia, 1998, 357 pp.. In Turkish, ''Yırmı Asırda Karşılaştırmalı Türk-Yunan Tarihi'', İstanbul, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Dergisi, II-8, 1980.</ref> The Intermediate Region, which spans the [[Adriatic Sea]] and the [[Indus River]], is neither Western nor Eastern (at least, with respect to the Far East) but is considered distinct. Concerning this region, Huntington departs from Kitsikis contending that a civilizational fault line exists between the two dominant yet differing religions ([[Eastern Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodoxy]] and [[Sunni Islam]]), hence a dynamic of external conflict. However, Kitsikis establishes an integrated civilization comprising these two peoples along with those belonging to the less dominant religions of [[Shia Islam]], [[Alevism]], and [[Judaism]]. They have a set of mutual cultural, social, economic and political views and norms which radically differ from those in the West and the Far East. In the Intermediate Region, therefore, one cannot speak of a civilizational clash or external conflict, but rather an internal conflict, not for cultural domination, but for political succession. This has been successfully demonstrated by documenting the rise of Christianity from the [[Hellenized]] [[Roman Empire]], the rise of the [[Caliphate|Islamic caliphates]] from the [[Byzantine Empire|Christianized Roman Empire]] and the rise of [[Ottoman Empire|Ottoman]] rule from the Islamic caliphates and the Christianized Roman Empire.
 	
[[File:World Economic Forum Annual Meeting Davos 2007.jpg|thumb|left|upright|[[Mohammad Khatami]], [[Iranian Reformists|reformist]] president of [[Iran]] (in office 1997–2005), introduced the theory of ''Dialogue Among Civilizations'' as a response to Huntington's theory.]]

===Opposing concepts===
In recent years, the theory of [[Dialogue Among Civilizations]], a response to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations, has become the center of some international attention. The concept was originally coined by Austrian philosopher [[Hans Köchler]] in an essay on cultural identity (1972).<ref>"Kulturelles Selbstverständnis und Koexistenz: Voraussetzungen für einen fundamentalen Dialog" (Cultural Identity and Co-existence: Preconditions for a Fundamental Dialogue). Public lecture delivered at the University of Innsbruck, Austria, 19 October 1972, published in: ''Philosophie und Politik. Dokumentation eines interdisziplinären Seminars''. (Publications of the Working Group for Science and Politics at the University of Innsbruck, Vol. IV.) Innsbruck: Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Wissenschaft und Politik, 1973, pp. 75-78.</ref> In a letter to [[UNESCO]], Köchler had earlier proposed that the cultural organization of the United Nations should take up the issue of a "dialogue between different civilizations" (''dialogue entre les différentes civilisations'').<ref>[http://i-p-o.org/Koechler-letter-UNESCO-26Sep1972.jpg Letter dated 26 September 1972], addressed to the Division of Philosophy of UNESCO.</ref> In 2001, Iranian president [[Mohammad Khatami]] introduced the concept at the global level. At his initiative, the United Nations proclaimed the year 2001 as the "United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations".<ref>[http://www.unesco.org/dialogue2001/en/khatami.htm Dialogue 2001] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030216050648/http://www.unesco.org/dialogue2001/en/khatami.htm|date=February 16, 2003}} ''Unesco.org'' Retrieved on 05-24-07</ref><ref>[http://www.dialoguecentre.org/about.html About] ''Dialoguecentre.org'' Retrieved 05-24-07</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://archive.unu.edu/dialogue/|title=Dialogue Among Civilizations &#124; United Nations University|website=archive.unu.edu|access-date=Oct 23, 2022}}</ref>

The [[Alliance of Civilizations]] (AOC) initiative was proposed at the 59th [[United Nations General Assembly|General Assembly of the United Nations]] in 2005 by the Spanish Prime Minister, [[José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero]] and co-sponsored by the Turkish Prime Minister [[Recep Tayyip Erdoğan]]. The initiative is intended to galvanize collective action across diverse societies to combat [[extremism]], to overcome cultural and social barriers between mainly the Western and predominantly Muslim worlds, and to reduce the tensions and polarization between societies which differ in religious and cultural values.