In Western discourse, Eastern civilizations including Islam are associated with anti-Western values whereas Jews and Christians have come to embody what Western civilization entails: social and economic progress and colonial dominion. After September 11, Islam became the West's arch-nemesis and vice-versa. Yet the clash of civilizations had begun centuries earlier: during the rise of the Ottoman Empire and its face-off with the predominantly Christian Europe. If Huntington's argument is correct, then the clash of civilizations must transcend the East/West divide. Instead of East and West, the world's culture clashes will take place between the various cultures that comprise East and West. For instance, a cursory examination of the diversity of cultures in the Middle East proves that intra-Eastern culture clash is as significant a source of military and political conflict as the East/West culture clash. The Sunni/Shi'ite divide poignantly affects foreign relations in the Muslim world, often to a far greater degree than the divide between East and West. In this sense, Huntington is correct but limits his argument by making too many generalizations related to East vs. West.

The United States' political alliances with some but not all of the countries in the Muslim world proves that Eastern and Western civilizations share more in common than they seem on the surface. What defines one culture from another may have more to do with economic and political alliance than shared customs and values. The United States' culture differs significantly from Spain's, which differs from Sweden's. Yet all three of those nations are lumped together in with Canada, Mexico, and Brazil as part of "Western" civilization.

Dalrymple's assessment provides the most hope for the future of the world. With India and China poised to economically outshine the United States, Dalrymple's argument is also accurate. The booming economies of Eastern nations also proves that...

Noting that Eastern civilization and Western civilization can empower each other, Dalrymple more accurately assesses the current state of global conflict than Huntington, Esposito, or Makdisi.
Still, Esposito and Makdisi illustrate the sources of conflict that are at the root of global terrorism: colonialism and imperialism. The domination of the East by the West has led to mutual mistrust. Disparities between rich and poor countries are leading to unlikely alliances between Western nations like Venezuela and Eastern ones. Transcending cultural differences, nations that form political alliances for economic reasons often do so out of necessity: to thwart the power so heavily vested in the wealthy G8 nations. With such political clout, the G8 nations can influence global political and economic affairs in ways poorer nations cannot. Huntington's view that culture clash is the main source of global conflict in the 21st century seems narrow-minded and naive when compared with Esposito's and Makdisi's more thorough investigation of the reasons for anti-Americanism and anti-Islamism. The conflict between East and West is real; the political imbroglios that surface such as September 11 show how important culture clash between West and East is. However, economic and political ideologies will remain central factors in the future history of the world.

Works Cited

Huntington, Samuel. "The Clash of Civilizations." 1993. Retrieved April 4, 2008 at http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19930601faessay5188/samuel-p-huntington/the-clash-of-civilizations.html

Makdisi, Ussama. "Anti-Americanism" in the Arab World: An Interpretation of a Brief History." Retrieved April 4, 2008 at http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/89.2/makdisi.html