The Clash of Civilizations & Ethnic Conflict
Components of API413
Institutions
Lijphart
Ethnic
conflict
Huntington
Culture
Inglehart
Democracy
Economic
development
Przeworski
Participation
Norris
Social capital
Putnam
Structure
I.
Huntington’s ‘clash of civilizations’ thesis
•
•
•
11 key points in theory
Potential criticisms of the theory
How tested with systematic evidence?
•
II.
Other evidence:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
III.
Huntington’s data: language and religion
Indicators of ethnic fractionalization: Alesina et al.
Cultural Values: Norris & Inglehart /Fattah
Peace and Conflict 2008: Monty Marshall and Ted Gurr
Minorities at Risk: Ted Gurr
Uppsala Conflict Data: Tusicisny
Conclusions: case study discussion: Rebuilding Iraq
Huntington’s Thesis
“In this new (post Cold war) world the most pervasive,
important and dangerous conflicts will not be between
social classes, rich and poor, or other economically
defined groups, but between peoples belonging to
different cultural entities. Tribal wars and ethnic conflicts
will occur within civilizations. And the most dangerous
cultural conflicts are those along the fault lines between
civilizations.”
Huntington (1996) Clash of Civilizations p. 28.
I. Huntington’s thesis
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Aims to develop simplified map or paradigm, not the ‘end of
history’, nor bifurcation, nor 184 nation-states, nor chaos
“Cultural identities, based on civilizations, are shaping
patterns of cohesion, disintegration and conflict in the post
Cold War World.”
“In the post-Cold War world, the most important distinctions
among peoples are not ideological, political, or economic.
They are cultural.” Huntington 1996 p.21
Global politics is multi-polar and multi-civilizational: NOT a
‘Westernization’ of non-Western states.
The balance of population is shifting with a decline in the
West, Asia is expanding, and Islam is expanding
demographically.
Huntington’s Thesis
6)
Civilizational cultures are defined by: common objective elements
(language, history, religion, customs, institutions) & by subjective selfidentification (‘us’ and ‘them’).
7)
Civilizational cultures are based mainly on religion: (p43-48)
Western Christianity, Islamic, Orthodox, Latin American, Sinic,
Japanese, Hindu, Buddhist, African (?)
8)
“Conflict between groups in different civilizations will be more frequent,
more sustained and more violent than conflicts between groups in the
same civilization.” (1993, 48)
9)
“Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the
principle conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and
groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate
global politics.”
Huntington’s Thesis
10. Modernization of society does not lead to the adoption of
Western cultures




Modernization: Developments in science & technology,
industrialization, urbanization, literacy, education, wealth, social
mobility, differentiation in workforce (p68)
Western civilization emerged in 8th & 9th Centuries – modernization
emerged in 17th and 18th C.
Other societies may modernize without Westernizing. “Non-Western
societies can modernize and have modernized without abandoning
their own cultures and adopting wholesale Western values,
institutions and practices.” P.78.
“Somewhere in the Middle East a half-dozen young men could well
be dressed in jeans, drinking Coke, listening to rap, and, between
their bows to Mecca, putting together a bomb to blow up an
American airliner.” Huntington p.58 (1996)
Concept of Western civilization
Classical legacy of philosophy & law, Catholicism
& Protestantism, multiple languages, rule of law,
social pluralism, representative bodies,
individualism. Pp.68-72
“Individually none of these factors was unique to
the West. The combination of them was, however,
and this is what gave the West its distinctive
character.” p.72
•
The core contrast between the West and Muslim
cultures relate to democratic values (1996, p70)
Huntington’s Critics
1.
2.
3.
4.
Has there been a rise in ‘civilizational’ or ‘ethnic’
conflict during the 1990s? Systematic evidence?
Is there a single distinctive Muslim culture?
If there is a shared Muslim culture, is it antithetical to
democracy and democratic values?
Deep divisions exist within Muslim societies - root
causes of radical fundamentalism may lie in structural
inequalities between rich and poor and in poor
governance in autocratic states
Evidence?
Evidence?
1.
2.
Huntington’s evidence on religion & language
Indicators of ethnic fractionalization:
•
3.
Trends in Ethnic Conflict 2007:
•
4.
Tedd Gurr ~ University of Maryland
Uppsala conflict data project:
•
6.
Marshall & Gurr
Minorities at Risk:
•
5.
Alesina et al.
Andrej Tusicisny
Cultural values in survey data:
•
•
Norris & Inglehart
Moataz Fattah Democratic values in the Muslim world
1. Huntington’s evidence: religion
Core claim: “The late twentieth century has seen a global
resurgence of religions around the world.” p64
–
–
–
–
An intensification of religious consciousness
The rise of fundamentalist movements
The growth of religious populations
Reinforced differences among religions
Evidence? World Christian Encyclopedia 1900-2000
– Rise in % of Christians (by conversion) and Muslims (by conversion and
reproduction).
– Rise in % of Muslims will continue due to fertility rates. Est.20% world pop
by 2000
– Some rise in % ‘atheists’ but due to reclassification of Chinese folkreligionists
% World pop. by religion
38
40
35
30
31 30
27
25
20 21
20
15
15
17
12
1900
1970
15
13 13 14
12
8
10
3 3
5
0.2
0
Western
Christianity
Orthodox
Muslim
Hindu
None/athiest
Other
Ref Huntington ‘Clash’ Table 3.3 p.65 from Barrett World Christian
Encyclopedia OUP 1982 (2000 estimated) 2nd ed. Pub 2001 ‘mega-census’ by
Christian clergy
2000
Problems of this evidence
Are indicators and data sources reliable?
Number of adherents does not measure intensity
of religious values, beliefs and identities
Trend evidence does not indicate anything
directly about ‘civilizational conflict’
Measures
What is the concept of ethnicity and how can
ethnicity be gauged?
• Stable and unvarying physical attributes?
» Eg skin color? Racial characteristics?
• Long-lasting social conventions
» Eg language used at home
• Or relative, plastic, and politically-defined
» Eg legal citizenship/nationality
Establishing evidence
Some conflict genuinely concerns issues of ‘ethnic’
identity – eg Ayodha temple, Temple mount, Orange
day parades
But many other cases are about social conditions,
territorial disputes, or other rights (eg over land) where it
is not clear that ethnicity is central, even where disputes
are between two different ethnic groups
Bruce Gilley 2004. “Against the concept of ethnic conflict” Third
World Quarterly 25(6): 1155-1166.
2. Alesina measures
Alberto Alesina et al. ‘Fractionalization’ June 2002
www.stanford.edu/~WACZIARG/PAPERSUM.HTML
– Easterly and Levine use ethno-linguistic fractionalization
(ELF) based on Atlas Narodev Mira (1964)
– Linguistic and religious fractionalization for 190 nations
(based on Encyclopedia Britannica 2001)
– Ethnic fractionalization combining racial and linguistic
characteristics for 650 groups
– Ethnicity treated as exogenous (stable)
– Fractionalization does not equal ethnic conflict
Alesina et al’s findings
Most ethnically diverse societies are in SubSaharan Africa
Least diverse in Korea & Japan
Linguistic (but not religious) fractionalization
has a negative impact on economic growth and
the quality of governance (eg illiteracy, infant
mortality, political rights)
Corr elations
Li ng ui s ti c
fra cti ona l izati
on (Al e s i na
20 02)
GDP p er cap ita P PP 20 00
(World Ban k 200 2)
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
Si ze of cou ntry by
po pul a ti on (3 -c ateg orie s )
(from UN DP)
.000
-.04 7
.578
136
141
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
.056
-.01 4
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
.458
.845
181
190
-.25 3**
.112
N
Free do m Ho us e Rati ng o f
De m ocrac y Re ve rs ed
19 99-2 000
-.34 6**
Re li gi o us
fra cti ona l izati
on (Al e s i na
20 02)
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
.001
.123
181
190
N
Free do m Ho us e Mea n
PR& CL 19 72 -2 003
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
.302**
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
.000
N
Ka ufm an n Voi c e and
Ac co unta bi li ty 20 02
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
Ka ufm an n Pol i ti c al
Stab il i ty 20 02
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
Ka ufm an n Governm e nt
Effec ti vene s s 2 002
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
Ka ufm an n Reg ul atory
qu al i ty 200 2
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
Ka ufm an n Rul e of l aw
20 02
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
Ka ufm an n Corru pti on
20 02
Pe ars on Corre la tio n
Si g. (2 -ta il ed )
N
* *.
Co rrel ati on i s s i g ni fi c ant at th e 0.01 l e vel (2-ta il e d).
-.06 0
.412
181
190
-.31 0**
.068
.000
.354
180
189
-.36 8**
.005
.000
.944
169
176
-.30 0**
.048
.000
.513
177
185
-.29 9**
.041
.000
.582
177
185
-.33 3**
.031
.000
.676
177
185
-.30 8**
.024
.000
.743
177
185
Issues
1. Are the measures reliable?
2. What about other dimensions of ethnic
identity?
3. What is the relationship between ethnic
heterogeneity and ethnic conflict?
3. “Peace & Conflict 2008”
Ted Robert Gurr, Monty Marshall and Deepa Khosla
CIDCM, U.Maryland,
Peace and Conflict Ledger by CSP rates 160
countries on capacity for peace-building: 19462008.
•
•
•
•
•
Avoid recent armed conflicts
Manage movements for self determination
Maintain stable democratic institutions
Substantial material resources
Free of serious threats from external environment
Center for Systemic Peace/MAR ‘Global Conflict Trends’ http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/cspframe.htm
Categories of conflict
Center for Systemic Peace/MAR ‘Global Conflict Trends’ http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/cspframe.htm
Trends in violent conflict
Total magnitude of violent conflict and of ethnic conflict rose
1945-1990 then fell during the 1990s
“Number and magnitude of armed conflict within and among
states have lessened since the early 1990s by nearly half.”
Conflicts over self-determination are being settled with increasing
frequency.
Yet African exceptionalism:
• Little international effort
• Democratic transitions failed
• Pervasive poverty
Center for Systemic Peace/MAR ‘Global Conflict Trends’ http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/cspframe.htm
Trends
Center for Systemic Peace/MAR ‘Global Conflict Trends’ http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/cspframe.htm
Center for Systemic Peace/MAR ‘Global Conflict Trends’ http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/cspframe.htm
Center for Systemic Peace/MAR ‘Global Conflict Trends’ http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/cspframe.htm
III. Next class: MAR & other
studies
Case-study discussion: Mon 5th Dec
You have been asked by the US
Institute of Peace to produce an
independent consultancy report
recommending priorities in
rebuilding Iraq during the next
decade.
The mandate of the United States
Institute of Peace, as established
by Congress, is to support the
development, transmission, and
use of knowledge to promote
peace and curb violent
international conflict.
Drawing upon one of the key
theories developed during this
course, you are asked to evaluate
the available evidence and to
present a series of
recommendations to this agency.
The reports will be presented
within groups in class on Monday
5th December.
Institutions
Lijphart
Culture
Inglehart
Ethnic conflict
Huntington
Case-study
Rebuilding
Iraq
Economic
development
Przeworski
Participation
Norris
Social capital
Putnam
Descargar

Islamic culture and the Roots of 9/11: Testing the Clash