The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

Huntington argues that the post-Cold War world is undergoing a profound reconfiguration as nations increasingly align themselves not according to ideology or geopolitical interest, but along cultural and civilizational lines. While the Cold War permitted states to remain nonaligned or to shift allegiance based on strategic calculation, the new global order compels every state to confront a more fundamental question: “Who are you?” (126). This emphasis on cultural identity—defined by religion, language, history, and shared values—now shapes national and international alignments, fostering cohesion among culturally similar states and conflict among culturally disparate ones.

This cultural realignment has sparked identity crises around the globe. Throughout the 1990s, countries from Canada and Germany to India and Iran were engaged in internal debates over their civilizational identities. In this new landscape, people seek security and belonging through affiliation with those who share similar ancestry, religion, and values. For example, Western European countries that were formerly neutral during the Cold War have integrated with their cultural kin through institutions like the European Union, while Muslim countries such as Turkey and Bosnia face exclusion based on civilizational differences. Similarly, Cold War alliances in the Balkans have dissolved and have been replaced by religiously defined coalitions—such as Orthodox Serbia and Greece aligning against Muslim Albania and Bosnia—with regional conflicts increasingly mapped along civilizational fault lines.

Huntington provides further examples in the former Soviet Union and East Asia. Post-Soviet republics like Armenia and Azerbaijan are supported by cultural allies (Russia and Turkey, respectively) while Russia wages war against Muslim groups in Chechnya and Tajikistan. In East Asia, despite economic integration, cultural divides remain potent. Chinese cultural commonality facilitates informal economic integration among Sinic societies, while Japan, lacking deep cultural ties with its neighbors, finds itself isolated. In Southeast Asia, tension between Muslim and non-Muslim groups also intensifies. Latin America, meanwhile, illustrates how cultural cohesion can support economic integration, as shown by organizations like Mercosur. However, attempts to include culturally distinct Mexico in North American structures, such as NAFTA, expose the limitations of such initiatives without deep cultural commonality.

This pattern holds at the global level. As civilizations become the dominant actors in world politics, states increasingly identify with broader civilizational groupings, such as “Greater Serbia” or “Greater China” (127). Although pragmatic alliances may sometimes cross civilizational lines, Huntington argues that these are less sustainable in the long term. Cultural identity, more than strategic necessity, now drives cooperation and conflict. He emphasizes that culture fosters trust, and trust is the basis of lasting political and economic partnerships. Thus, single-civilization organizations like NATO or CARICOM tend to be more effective than multi-civilizational ones, such as ASEAN, which struggle with internal cohesion and consensus.

Economic cooperation, too, increasingly follows cultural lines. Huntington notes that the most successful economic unions (such as the European Union) are grounded in civilizational unity. Multicivilizational organizations, including ASEAN and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, remain limited in effectiveness. The East Asian Economic Caucus, proposed by Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohammad, attempted to capitalize on East Asia’s shared cultural traits but ultimately struggled due to regional rivalries and Japan’s ambivalence. In practice, informal networks, such as those among overseas Chinese, have proven more resilient than formal organizations. The failure of efforts to include culturally distinct countries, like Israel in a Middle Eastern common market or Haiti in a Caribbean bloc, further demonstrates the centrality of cultural alignment to economic integration.

Huntington also elaborates on the structural dynamics of civilizations, which he categorizes into core states, member states, cleft countries, lone countries, and torn countries. Core states—like Russia for Orthodoxy or China for Sinic civilization—provide cultural and political leadership. In contrast, cleft countries, such as Nigeria and India, are internally divided along civilizational lines and prone to conflict. Lone countries, such as Japan and Haiti, lack civilizational allies. Torn countries are those whose elites attempt to reorient their nation from one civilization to another, often unsuccessfully. 

Case studies of torn countries illustrate the deep difficulties of civilizational transformation. Russia remains divided between Westernizers and Slavophiles, its identity crisis compounded by the collapse of communism and renewed Orthodox nationalism. Turkey, despite nearly a century of Kemalist reforms aimed at Westernization, faces mounting Islamist sentiment and exclusion from European institutions, signaling its persistent Islamic identity. Mexico’s reorientation toward North America under NAFTA, while supported by its elites and the United States, may ultimately falter if democratic reform fuels cultural resistance. Australia’s effort to redefine itself as an Asian country, though driven by economic interests, is similarly thwarted by cultural incompatibility and rejection by its Asian neighbors.

Ultimately, Huntington concludes that civilizational identity is enduring and resistant to manipulation. Cultural values and institutions shape alliances, trade patterns, and political structures. Attempts to override or shift civilizational identity—whether through modernization, economic integration, or elite-driven reforms—tend to generate internal tensions and external rejection.