USA: +1 415 256 4347 
Sign in
Question
For the Unit 9 Assignment, you will compose a 5550 word essay comparing Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilizations?’ article with one other political scientist and/or academic who has written a response to Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilizations?’ article.
Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilizations?’ article is accessible here: bev.berkeley.edu/Ethnic%20Religious%20Conflict/Ethnic%20and%20Religious%20Conflict/20045621%20(1).pdf
Note: We avoid AI-generated writing at all cost.
Within the introduction to Harvard Professor Samuel P. Huntington’s 1993, seminal political science article, ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’, the author noted as follows:
World politics is entering a new phase and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of what it will be, the end of history, the return of traditional rivalries between nation states, and the decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others. Each of these visions catches aspects of the emerging reality. Yet they all miss a crucial, indeed a central, aspect of what global politics is likely to be in the coming years.
It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future. (Huntington, 1993)
Huntington’s full article can be found in the link above. Since Huntington’s article was published in 1993, many political scientists and/or academic have written in response to Huntington’s thesis – either agreeing or disagreeing with the Harvard professor’s ideas.
However, since the September 11, 2001 attacks on U.S. soil, Huntington’s thesis has renewed academic discourse.
Reference
Huntington, S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations?. Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22.
Within a 550 word essay please include:
1. An introduction.
Provide a brief summary of Huntington’s thesis.
2. Compare and contrast Huntington’s arguments with one other political scientist and/or academic.
You will find a voluminous list of academic articles within Kaplan online library. A keyword search for ‘clash of civilizations’ is an excellent starting place.
3. Support your answer(s) with information obtained from the text and with Huntington’s and the other political scientist and/or academic’s articles.
4. How do you understand these two, competing or aligned articles within America’s war on terror?
5. A conclusion.
6. Please write in correct grammar and syntax and in APA Format.
The Assignment should be at least 550 words, and must use and cite the text and primary documents as sources. Cite the work internally and in full reference at the end, following APA style guidelines. Citation is important to build the definitions, demonstrate your research, and to make it clear which ideas are yours and which are from the source. Check with the KU Writing Center for APA style tips and assistance.
https://kucampus.kaplan.edu/MyStudies/AcademicSupportCenter/ WritingCenter/WritingReferenceLibrary/ResearchCitationAndPlagiarism/Index.aspx
I suggest you compare the above article with this one: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Errol_Henderson/publication/227503914_Clear_and_Present_Strangers_The_Clash_of_Civilizations_and_International_Conflict/links/56f0d9fc08ae70bdd6c95670.pdf
But you can choose another one as long as it reviews Huntington’s article “The Clash of Civilizations?”
Answer
Comparison BetweenHuntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” and Henderson and Tucker’s“Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict”
Henderson and Tucker’s (2001) article challenges Huntington’s thesisas well as some of his arguments. To begin with, Huntington (1993) acknowledges, in his thesis, that states that hail from diverse civilizations are highly probable to get involved with wars with one another. The validity of this statement is tested by Henderson and Tucker and they concur with it to some extent. Henderson and Tucker (2001) came to this conclusion after they conducted a thorough analysis of the wars between 1816 and 1992. They examined the correlation between civilization membership and interstate wars and found out that the former was not significantly linked to the inception of the interstate wars during the Cold War era of 1946-1988. This discovery strongly concurs with Huntington’s (1993) earlier assertion in his thesis that the governing source of conflict will be culture. Moreover, Huntington (1993) presents an undisputable fact in his article that the “kin-country syndrome” is slowly replacing the different political ideologies and the balance of power and is actually being used as a solid framework for cooperation and partnership. This arises from the principle that; when states belonging to a similar civilization go to war with people from different cultures, they will amass support from their members on the foundation of civilization cohesion.
However, Henderson and Tucker (2001)also found out that states of similar civilization during the pre-Cold war period were more likely to go into war with one another unlike those from different civilizations. This result contradicts with Huntington’s thesis. Furthermore, the analysis of the post-Cold war era reveals that civilization was not associated with the likelihood of interstate wars as Huntington states in his thesis.
From a practical standpoint, Huntington’s article has two primary weaknesses that provide grounds for challenging the ideas presented, especially with regard to the future of world politics and conflict. First, the article brings about some sense of confusion for the reader simply because it borrows concepts from different disciplines to constitute its conclusion. For instance, conflict is drawn from political science, identity from Social Psychology and civilization is out rightly derived from Anthropology. Thus, the lack of consistency and adherence to one discipline delineates confusion.
Secondly, the underlying relationship between the propositions (civilization and future conflicts) needs to be re-examined. Ashraf (2012) states that the correlation established by Huntington is drawn from the case studies of Bosnia and the Persian Gulf War, all of which are not sufficient to merit such a conclusion. Evidently, all these cases are entirely different in terms of location, the background of conflicts and the key players involved (Ashraf, 2012).Furthermore, it was determined that the major cause of conflict in these case studies was national interest and not civilizational differences (Ashraf, 2012)!
Overall, despite making contrasting arguments both these articles help to shed some light of the subject of American’s war on terror. It is crystal clear that the key point being advanced by both articles is that a new dawn of harmony and co-existence will take center stage. The politics of civilization and the governments of the non-western civilizations will not be targets of colonialism but will instead join the West and work together to shape history as seen in the case of Saudi Arabia and the USA (Ashraf, 2012).
References
Ashraf, M. M. T. (2012). The clash of civilizations? A critique. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS), 32(2), 521-527.
Henderson, E. A., & Tucker, R. (2001). Clear and present strangers: The clash of civilizations and international conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 45(2), 317-338.
Huntington, S. P. (1993). The clash of civilizations?. Foreign affairs,9, 22-49.
