Aurelian LAVRIC
Assoc. Prof., PhD, Moldova State University, Chişinău, Republic of Moldova
Corresponding author: aurelian_loverick@yahoo.com
Abstract
The globalization is the contemporary
international context and is aimed at integration processes of world economy,
cultural interactions etc. In 1993 Samuel P. Huntington published the article
“The Clash of Civilizations?”, in which he presented the theory of multi-polar
world, which was established after the Cold War. Underlying each of the nine
civilizations Huntington set a religion (confession). The researcher noted
possible conflicts between communities belonging to different civilizations.
Therefore, in the new context the civilizational dialogue is vitally important,
to ensure the international security. It can take various forms: meetings of
leaders of churches, festivals, programs and media exchanges (“people to
people”) etc. Twenty years after the publication of Huntington’s theory, the
present day trend in international relations is to strengthen the international
organizations to which countries from different civilizations belong. The
Republic of Moldova, located by Huntington in the Slavic-Orthodox civilization,
can integrate into Western civilization space.
Keywords:
Globalization, Multipolar World Civilizations, Religion, Conflict,
International Terrorism, Dialogue, EU, NATO, the Republic of Moldova.
THE GLOBALIZATION – THE CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
The globalization is a term denoting processes underway that are
increasing, and that undoubtedly affect all the areas of human life and the
overwhelming majority of world states that have the slightest openness to the
international environment. From the point of view of the German authors Michael
Kunczik and Astrid Zipfel, “The globalization is a term which has became
fashionable when discussing the processes of the world economy, of cultural
overlays etc. The interrelations and the interconnections in the world have
become much more intense in recent years. The globalization is not just the
expansion of trade between countries increasingly remote, but also a more intense
division of labor inputs becoming more mobile (the international flow of
capital, the increasing mobility of employees), but in particular the mobile
capital. We develop a competitive production platforms of countries, a regional
sites competition. Economic globalization means a development which brings the
world economy closer to the theoretical ideal of a perfect, plenary market, ie
a market where the competition is out of the narrow framework of national
states “(Kunczik, Zipfel, 1998, 212). The German authors have also referred to
the globalization of culture, insisting on developments in the media sector.
There are opinions according
to which signs of globalization that can be glimpsed at hundreds of years ago:
the Persian, the Macedonian and the Roman empires are looked upon as a framework of processes occurring on large
territories, which led to the imposing rules and common practices for different
people, the contacts (including the economic ones) and the cultural exchanges
from which they got more intense. The visible difference is the fact that in
those cases it was a political joint framework (of a state), while
globalization now includes territory of the planet without the existence of a
planet state (common political space). However, the term appeared in the late
‘60s and was released by the Canadian specialist in the theory of mass media,
Marshall McLuhan and American expert” in communism problems” Zbigniew
Brzezinski. Marshal McLuhan also released at the time the phrase “global
village”. According to other authors, the globalization widened in the ‘70s,
when oil-producing countries were united in OPEC and oil prices increased (from
1.90 to 28.76 dollars).
Personally I think that the
process of globalization has coincided with the advent and widespread use of
information technologies - the Internet. The term World Wide Web, abbreviated
as WWW or and www, in short called web, which in English means “global network”
and “network” was coined in 1989 at the European Centre for Nuclear Research
(CERN) in Geneva, Switzerland. The initial proposal for the creation of a
collection of documents with links between them was made by Tim Berners-Lee in
March 1989. The proposal arose from communication problems the teams of
researchers, who used the center, faced with, even using email. The first
prototype of this collection (first in plain text format) appeared not long
before December 1991, when the first public demonstration was made. The study
was followed by the appearance of the first Mosaic graphical application in
February 1993 conducted by researcher Marc Andreessen from the university
centre National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) in
Urbana-Champaign city of the federal state of Illinois, USA. Basically, the
advent of the Internet and globalization, between which there is an
inextricable link – coincided with the end of the Cold warfare, ie the collapse
of the USSR.
SAMUEL P. HUNTINGTON’S MULTIPOLAR WORLD THEORY
This process has been endorsed
by the American researcher Samuel P. Huntington in developing World Multipolar
Theory in International Division. In 2013 we celebrate 20 years from
publication in the journal “Foreign Affairs” of the article “The Clash of
Civilazations” (“Clash of Civilizations?”) Signed by Samuel P. Huntington (1927
– 2008) (Huntington 1993, 22 – 49). In 1996 appeared in print volume
Huntington’s “The Clash of Civilizations and the “Remaking of the World Order”
(in Romanian translation appeared in 1997: “The Clash of Civilizations and
Restoring World Order”) – this time without question mark at the end of the
title (Huntington 1997). The article in 1993, was written as a response to
Francis Fukuyama’s book, “The End of History and the Last Man” (1992), but,
apparently, was also elaborated and under the impression of the war in the
former Yugoslavia: Croatia (1991–1995) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992-1995).
Huntington proposed a new vision of international relations in the post Cold
War: he presented the transition from the bipolar world divided on the
ideological-political criterion (two systems / blocks of countries – democratic
/ capitalist and totalitarian / communist or socialist) to a multipolar world,
divided into eight civilizations, religious criterion. The eight civilizations,
according to Huntington, are: Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu,
Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and “possibly” African (Huntington 1993, 25).
In his later published volume from Huntington’s presentation there results that
he considers the existence of the new civilization: the Buddhist one
(Huntington 1997, 67), even though he claims that “(...) the Buddhism, although a great
religion was not the basis of a great civilization“ (Huntington 1997, 68).
Referring to several
scientists before him, Huntington argues that “civilization” as well as
“culture”, “refers both to the way of life,” “to values, rules, institutions,
and ways of thinking” (Huntington, 1997, 58). At the foundation of thinking and
the way of life of people belonging to different civilizations, according to
Huntington, there are the religions (confessions). “Millennia of human history
have shown that religion is not a” small difference “, but perhaps the most
profound difference between people” (Huntington 1997, 378). That is why the
American scholar concluded that “ the cultural dimension and the most dangerous
of global politics emerging [in 1993 when his article was published in the
journal ”Foreign Affairs“] will be the conflict between groups that belong to
different civilizations “(Huntington, 1997, 11).
Huntington’s theory has
sparked controversy; some scientists brought him criticism from the time of the publication in the journal
(“Foreign Affairs”, 1993). However, his vision has been accepted as one of the
theories by the specialist in International Relations. The essence of the
American researcher’s vision aims at the fact that in the multipolar world,
consisting of 8-9 civilizations, civilization conflicts can arise that will
involve communities belonging to different civilizations. The collapse of the
World Trade Centre towers in New York on September 11, 2001, confirmed, in a
certain way Huntintington’s alarming forecasts. Although the international
terrorism has became since then the main threat to international security,
there has been no conflict / civilizational war yet with broad involvement of
communities from different states of different civilizations. Al-Qaeda the
terrorist organization that has claimed responsibility for attacks on
11.09.2001, is a non-state actor, clandestine, which does not represent the
interests of the wide human communities from the states belonging to the
Islamic civilization.
Another case that confirmed,
to some extent, the forecast of Huntington’s theory was the publication on September 30/2005, as illustrations
to an article in the Danish newspaper “Jullands Posten” the 12 cartoons, which
represented the Prophet Muhammad. Since the representation of Mohammed is
forbidden in Islam (the fact that the prophet was represented in those
hilarious caricature pictures no longer counted on the background of the
prohibition idolatry to Muslims), many Muslims in Denmark and other countries
felt the publication of cartoons as a conscious challenge. Foreign Ministers of
11 Islamic states asked the Danish government to apologize for the publication,
and some even closed their embassies in protest because they have not obtained
the expected apology. After diplomatic protests followed the boycott on Danish
goods. The Danish authorities, as well as the direction of the newspaper,
explained that the drawings were part of the practical realization of freedom
of speech. The cartoons accompanied an article on censorship and freedom of
speech, which talked about the fact that no painter wanted to draw
illustrations from a children’s book about Islam. In the riots that followed,
there were attacks on Danish embassies in some Muslim countries (eg in Jakarta,
Indonesia, Beirut, Lebanon etc.).
THE CIVILIZATION DIALOGUE IN THE CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
The concern for peace in the
world, for international security, to prevent possible outbreaks of
civilization conflicts, determined steps to be taken towards having a
civilization dialogue. It must take place both at the governmental level
(considering that civilizations are not political organizations, it is about
intergovernmental connections among states belonging to different
civilizations), and especially the civil societies of the world countries. Some
types of civilization dialogue may be mentioned:
• Meetings of world religious leaders (following
the pattern of ecumenical movement established within Christianity);
• Science conferences, of the international
scientific community, devoted to the theme of the civilization dialogue.
• Various international festivals (music, theater,
cinema etc.);
• Media programs, including On-line (Internet)
about peoples’ cultures and religions world wide- both programs of some nations
/ states for others, as well as programs through which the representatives of a
culture / civilization discover another culture / civilization; Exchange of
experience (following the principle “people to people”) of various professional
groups (eg, journalists, researchers etc.) or social (eg, students).
• Programs like “Work and Travel” (within which
students from different countries of the world can go to work, for example in
the U.S. during holidays);
• Tourism.
All these (and others that I
have not mentioned) can be considered as forms of the civilization dialogue.
Former Supreme Pontiff, Benedict XVI, like his predecessor John Paul II
promoted the idea of the civilization dialogue (Stanila 2006). Although the
civilization dialogue activities are carried out in the world, their number and
the number of people involved in them can be and should be higher.
A REVIEW OF S.P.HUNTINGTON’S THEORY AFTER TWENTY YEARS AFTER ITS ISSUE
The theory of multipolar world, by Samuel P.
Huntington, fully contributed to stimulate more the concern for the
civilization dialogue. However, today, 20 years after the publication of the article of the American researcher in the journal “Foreign Affairs” can
a review of his theory can be undertaken, some critical approaches respectively:
Not all civilizations have a
power center (“core state”), as it exists in the Western civilization, about
which Huntington writes: “Historically, the West usually had several core
states and now it has two cores, the United States and the Franco-German
Europe, the UK being an additional center of power, at random, between the two
“(Huntington 1997, 195). In the Slavo – Orthodox civilization: the Russian
Federation, in the Sinic: China. For example, in the case of African
civilization (sub-Saharian region) such core state (influent) is missing - even
the author doubted about that civilization, writing: “The African civilization
(possible)” (Huntington 1997, 67), as in cases of Latin-American, Buddhist or
Islamic civilizations - Huntington writes about “The absence of a core Islamic
state” (Huntington 1997, 261). Given the lack of a core state in a space
civilization, it is difficult to talk about a civilization - that matters in
the balance of power in world politics.
In line with the vision of American researcher,
Greece, Bulgaria and Romania, as states with majority Orthodox populations
belong to the Slavic-Orthodox civilization. Still, in 1981 Greece joined the
European Communities, and in 2007 Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU, which
showed that those states identify themselves more with the Western civilization
space (without ceasing, however, to be Orthodox countries ).
Huntington was subjective and
selective concerning the composition of a civilization - the number of states
it is formed of. While he awarded a civilization-state status for Japan, no
other state has ever been considered worthy of such a double situation (Japan
being, according to the author, the only state-civilization).
It seems subjective too
sharing the Christian world, on terms of the type of confession, into two
civilizations - Western (Catholic and Protestant) and Slavic-Orthodox, in the
latter case a generic name being used for a group of nations (slav peoples).
However, in the case of the Islamic civilization Huntington makes no
distinction between the Sunni and the Shia, knowing that between Shiite Iran
and Sunni Saudi Arabia and Indonesia are substantial differences, both
religious and ethnic.
The division of the states
from the Western Hemisphere of the Western civilization (USA and Canada) and Latin American seems to be based
too on rather ethnic criteria (not to say racial).
Twenty years after the
publication of Samuel P. Huntington’s article, we can consider that the vision
was of particular importance in the academic world. I think his theory
reflected the mood at the end of the Cold War - when after the crash communist
system of ideas in the former socialist countries the peoples of those states
resorted to trying to find new landmarks values, religious values, civilization
respectively: “In the ‘90s, a global crisis of identity broke out. Everywhere
you looked, people were asking “who are we?”, “Who do we belong to?” and “who
is not like us? ‘” (Huntington 1997, 180). I believe that in these 20 years,
the process of globalization, the world has evolved into a global system,
which, however, currently is not based on religiosity, but to ensure the economic and the
security concern. We can say that the evolution of the international system, during the last
historical period it can be represented as follows:
1815 – 1945: multipolar system with empires as
international actors (it was based on the economics and the ensurence of
security, by dividing spheres of influence in the world);
1945 – 1991: bipolar system (the Cold War was
based on ideological-political criterion);
1991 – present: multipolar system (according to
Huntington, it is based on religion / confession).
I believe that in the modern
period, in the XXI century, a multipolar international system is reinforced
based on economics and the concern for safety. So, now we notice that some of
the characteristics from the period 1812-1945 is manifest again except that now
they act not as notorious international acting empires, but as nation states
strongly developed (G7 would be a list of them, to which he added Russia).
Currently there are examples
of integration in common economic and security areas, which includes countries
belonging to various religions / confessions. For example, in the Customs Union
of the future Eurasian Union includes both Russia and Belarus with Orthodox
majority population and Kazakhstan, with main Muslim population in full with
demographic growth. Orthodox Greece, Romania and Bulgaria were integrated into
the EU and NATO – together with the states Huntington cosidered as lawfully
belonging to Western civilization. As a matter of fact, NATO includes so far
Turkey, which Huntington has included it in the Islamic civilization, countries
of the Western civilization and the three Orthodox countries (Greece, Bulgaria
and Romania) that Huntington incuded in the Slavo-Orthodox civilization.
Advanced integration processes between the U.S., Canada and Mexico under the
North American Free Trade Agreement (North American Free Trade Agreement -
NAFTA), signed on December 17, 1992, are another example of economic
cooperation that prevails over any differences of religion / civilization. In
an increasingly secularized world, the economic factor and the security become
prevailing in relation to religious factors (civilization) and the ideological
(taking into account that the old socialist world camp four states with the
communist state ideology have left: China, North Korea, Cuba and Vietnam).
Thanks to its booming economy, communist China is an economic partner, and
therefore - and politically important for the U.S., Japan or Russia.
Samuel P. Huntington was aware
of the importance of the economic and the security factors: “Will the political
and economic alignments always coincide with those based on culture and
civilization? Of course not. Balance of power considerations will sometimes
lead to cross-civilization alliances (...) “(Huntington 1997, 183). However,
Huntington believes: “However, it is possible that these patterns become
weaker, less significant and adapting less to serve the goals of the new era”
(Huntington 1997, 183). Referring to multicivilization organizations,
Huntington wrote: “Internationa Multicivilization Organizations, such as ASEAN,
could face an increasing difficulty in maintaining consistency” (Huntington
1997, 183). Huntington showed that ASEAN, established in 1967, includes “a
Sinic state, Buddhist one, a Christian one and two Muslim states” (Huntington
1997, 189). In our case, we believe that “cross-civilization alliances”, ie
they belong to member organizations from different cultures (religions /
confesions) reinforce themselves and represent the key international actors in
contemporary international multipolar system, which in fact, is not a system of
civilizations, but one of security and economic organizations. Although the
civilization factor (religious / confessional) should not be ignored either now
or in the future.
An example of the trends in
the contemporary world is the Orthodox states of the Balkans: Macedonia,
Montenegro and Serbia - although Orthodox countries are clearly oriented
towards EU integration and NATO, where they see the the economic intetrets and
security assurance fulfilled, without special relations with the Russian
Federation – the pillar of Slavic-Orthodox civilization.
Therefore, recognizing the
value of Huntington’s theory, which emphasized the cultural diversity of the
peoples of the world, united in civilizatios by religion (ie, the confessions
of a religion) and stressed the importance of civilization identity, we can say
that the trend in the contemporary world to set up a global system consists of
unions of states based on the economic principle (common economic interests),
but also of security (collective). From this point of view, despite the fact
that it was placed in the Slavic-Orthodox civilization, Moldova can become a
member of EU and NATO, to the extent that can help strengthen the security on
the south-eastern border of the EU and NATO, and to the extent that it is
economically interesting (of its internal market and its products) for European
Community organization.
THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA FROM THE CIVILIZATION PERSPECTIVE
In light of Huntington’s
theory, the Republic of Moldova belongs to the Slavic-Orthodox civilization. Maybe, this was why Huntington
referred to Moldova only three places in his book. In one paragraph the author
made reference to the situation (conflict) in eastern part of Moldova: “After
Moldova became independent, with the fall of the Soviet Union, many thought
about an eventual union with Romania. The fear that something like that might
happen the secessionist movement from the unified East of the republic was
stimulated, which had the tacit support of Moscow and the active Russian 14th
Army, which led to the creation of a Transnistrian Republic. However, the
Moldavian union feeling with Romania started to decline as a sequence of the
economic problems of both countries and the Russian economic pressure. Moldova
has joined C.S.I. and trade ties with Russia expanded. In February 1994, the
pro-Russian parties had an overwhelming success in the parliamentary elections
“[Huntington 1997, 241].
So, the war from March 2 to
July 21 1992 in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova was almost
overlooked by the researcher, compared to that in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
probably because he had seen it as an intracivilization one. Huntington
explicitly wrote: “At the same time, the former Soviet Union, the Orthodox
Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine revolve around Russia (...)” (Huntington 1997,
182). In another place, the American researcher wrote: “The successor of the
Tzarist and Communist empires is a civilization bloc, similar in many respects
to that of Western Europe. In the nucleus, Russia, the equivalent of France and
Germany, is closely linked to an inner circle that includes two republics,
mostly Orthodox – Belarus and Moldova – Kazakhstan, whose population is 40%
Muslim, and Armenia, a historic ally of Russia “(Huntington, 1997, 239-240).
However, Moldova is part
Huntingtonian concept of “torn state”. “Torn countries can be identified by two
phenomena. Their leaders refer to them as a “bridge” between two cultures and the observers describe them as Janus “(Huntington
1997, 201). Although the author relies on the examples of Turkey, Mexico,
Australia, Ukraine etc., the Republic of Moldova, which Huntington clearly saw
as part of a Slavic-Orthodox civilization, fits quite well the described
concept in question. The literature in the field of International Relations of
writes in connection with the Republic of Moldova about a civilization dilemma
West – East (or West – Russia).
We believe, however, that some
details of the hot phase of the conflict reveal something of great significance:
the membership of the Republic of Moldova to the Western civilization space. It
is known that the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as that in Chechnya, were to
some extent civilization conflicts too, taking into account that there came
Muslim fighters from other countries (some of them became leaders of rebel
commandos – eg Hatab, a native of Jordan, who fought in Chechnya). The same
happened in Bosnia. An intercivilization conflict involves fighters from
several states, united by the same religion, which fight against the believers
of another religion in a territorial conflict.
In the 1992 war, in the
Transnistrian region of Moldova, as it is known that Cossack groups and
mercenaries from Russia and Ukraine took part. The fact that this was possible,
demonstrate that Moldova does not belong to the same civilization space as
Russia (despite the common religion – Orthodox Christian). In the context of
Huntington’s theory – without diminishing the value of his vision – we can say
that the example of Moldova – the Russian – Moldovan since 1992 – is the
exception that confirms the validity of that theory, however. The fact that the
conflict led to participation of Cossacks and Russian mercenaries - alongside
the regular army (the 14th) Russian - clearly shows that Moldova is currently
confronted with a geopolitical dilemma: West- East. In the light of this fact,
we can say that Moldova rightfully belongs to the Western civilization. The
arguments in this respect are, of course, many more than that.
This is why the war in Eastern
Moldova an intracivilization not one, but is part of the concept of “fault line
wars” (Huntington 1997, 337), that is, it was a rupture war zone that separated
the Western civilization and the Slavo-Orthodox. Huntington believes that “the
frequency, the intensity and violence of fault line wars are far greater due to
beliefs in different gods” (Huntington 1997, 378). The paradox of conflict in
the Transnistrian region of Moldova is that the majority of the population of
the two conflicting parties - the Republic of Moldova and the Russian
Federation – do not only belong to the same religious confession (Orthodox
Christian), but even to the same Church – Russian Orthodox. However, the
Russian-Moldavian conflict on the Nistru is an exception, although, it is part
of the concept of “fault line wars”, so the dilemma East – West, for the
Republic of Moldova, is a false one. The Moldavian state has no other option
than the Western one, the massive participation of Russian Cossacks in the 1992
war clearly demonstrates that both political factors that have stimulated and
supported paramilitary movements in Eastern Moldova and a part of the Russian
society from where those paramilitaries were recruited considered the Moldavian
people an enemy – belonging to another civilization, namely the Western one.
I think the value system of
the Western civilization resulted in the four pillars – “embodied by NATO
defense and security; shared confidence in the rule of law and parliamentary
democracy, liberal capitalism and free trade”, “common European cultural
heritage, emerging from Greece and Rome through Renaissance “(Huntington 1997,
457) – is an ideal which the Republic of Moldova assumed, although still it
faces issues related to the rule of law (both the political leadership and in
terms of functioning of the system of justice), corruption etc. But to the
extent that the Western values will be made aware by the political parties and
the Moldavian society, the Republic of Moldova will strengthen its status politically,
economically and in ensuring security. The civilization space that can be the
only beneficial framework for achieving these goals is the Western one. At the
same time, the people of the Republic of Moldova must preserve its Orthodox
Christian values shared by the majority of the citizens of the country.
References
1. Kunczik, Michael, Zipfel, Astrid (1998)
Introducere în stiinta publicisticiisi a comunicării, Cluj: Editura Presa
universitară Clujeană.
2. Huntington, Samuel P. (1993) “The Clash of Civilazations?”
in Foreign Affairs: Volume 72, No.3/1993: 22‑49.
3. Huntington, Samuel P. (1997) Ciocnirea
civilizatiilor si refacerea ordinii mondiale. Bucuretti: Antet.
4. Stanila, Claudia (2006) “Papa invocă
necesitatea vitală a dialogului dintre crestini si musulmani”, pe Creștin
Ortodox.ro. http://www.crestinortodox.ro/stiri/ziua/papa-invoca-necesitatea-vitala-dialogului-dintre-crestini-musulmani-78980.html (6 martie 2013).
„THE CIVILISATION DIALOGUE IN THE GLOBALIZATION PROCESS: S.P. HUNTINGTON THEORY AFTER 20 YEARS”, by Aurelian LAVRIC, in „International Journal of COMMUNICATION RESEARCH”, Iași, Vol. 3, Issue 2 / 2013, p. 179 - 185:
