Roebear, thanks for the link to "The Clash of Civilisations," which is interesting but hardly forms any sort of guideline for practical action. As a long time student of Arabic civilization (Univ. of Mich.) and as one who worked in Muslim countries for seven years, I find the article so full of gross generalizations that one can't really evaluate them other than to note that the conclusions are impractical and unjustified.
One could just as easily characterize the Protestant and Catholic civilizations in Western Europe during the period of the crusades as bent on destroying a much more highly developed Muslim civilization. Doing so, however, gets one no closer to a practical solution of the present crisis.
What occurs to me, based on my studies as well as my work in various foreign assistance programs in Tunisia, Turkey, and Indonesia, is that modernized nations (be they Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Confucian, etc.) will resort to violence almost as a gut reaction to not being able to play on a level field (i.e., not having the same technological development). Just like a bully using his muscles instead of his head.
A more constructive response is to show the bully that his approach won't work over time. That is to say, one need not resort to bullying tactics to beat the bully. In fact that may be counterproductive. There are many examples in history of how to deal with bullies. Armed might is only one alternative, usually the most expensive, and often no more effective than the use of skilled diplomacy. One good example is how the emperors of Byzantium managed to survive against much stronger enemies on all sides for such a long time. They became very skilled in diplomacy. Just a few ideas that in my view are more practical than those offered by a guy whose background appears to be mainly academic.
Art |
