Terry O’Callaghan

CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS

In 1989 the Cold War ended and in 1991 the Soviet Union ceased to exist, over night the ruling paradigm of International Relations was obsolete. What would happen now? Samuel Huntingtons answer was that in the future, cultural identity would be the most important factor behind international conflict. And that the threat of world war would come from clashes between civilizations instead of clashes between ideologies like during the cold war. Was he correct? This thesis is an attempt to find out if Huntingtons theory was right in its predictions of the world to come. My conclusion is that Huntington was wrong. After the Cold war there was an decrease in international conflict both religious and non-religious. But Huntington was not completely wrong after all. He proved the importance of culture in international relations. It is not as Huntington suggests the most important factor. But it is a factor to be reckoned with. Nyckelord: Huntington, Clash of Civilizations, The West, Islam, Culture Innehållsförteckning 1 INLEDNING ................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 FORSKNINGSPROBLEMET ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 MIN HYPOTES........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.3 SYFTE.................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.4 TIDIGARE FORSKNING ........................................................................................................................... 2 1.4.1 Avgränsningar ................................................................................................................................. 3 1.4.2 Disposition....................................................................................................................................... 3 2 METOD ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.1.1 Intersubjektivitet .............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 BEGREPPSDEFINITIONER ....................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 KÄLLKRITIK .......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3.1 Material ........................................................................................................................................... 5 3 HUNTINGTONS TEORI............................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 REALISM ............................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.1 Kinrallying....................................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 MOTIVERING AV PARADIGMET .............................................................................................................. 8 3.2.1 Konkurrerande paradigm................................................................................................................ 9 3.3 DET CIVILISATORISKA SYNSÄTTET ...................................................................................................... 10 3.4 SAMMANFATTNING AV HUNTINGTONS TEORI ..................................................................................... 11 4 TEORETISK KRITIK .............................................................................................................................. 12 4.1.1 Monolitiska, sammanhängande civilisationer ............................................................................... 13 4.1.2 Parsimoni ...................................................................................................................................... 14 4.1.3 Determinism .................................................................................................................................. 14 4.1.4 Svaghet i Huntingtons teori ........................................................................................................... 15 5 EMPIRISK KRITIK ................................................................................................................................. 16 5.1.1 Minskning av antalet konflikter ..................................................................................................... 16 5.1.2 Feltolkning av konflikter................................................................................................................ 16 5.2 ÄR ISLAM HOTET ? .............................................................................................................................. 17 5.2.1 Har Islam blodiga gränser? .......................................................................................................... 18 6 AVSLUTNING........................................................................................................................................... 21 6.1 REFLEKTIONER.................................................................................................................................... 22

ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE (OSCE)

Background • Resolution 1977 (2011) encourages the 1540 Committee, with the support of the necessary relevant expertise, to actively engage in dialogue with States on the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004), including through visits to States at their invitation. • The resolution encourages all States to prepare on a voluntary basis national implementation action plans (NAP), with the assistance of the 1540 Committee as appropriate. Since the adoption of resolution 1977 (2011), the 1540 Group of Experts has interacted with States to assist them with the drafting of such plans, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kyrgyzstan, Montenegro, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Malawi, Niger, Togo and Serbia. • On 31 July 2015 the OSCE invited the 1540 Committee and its experts to join a meeting to assist Turkmenistan to develop and draft a voluntary 1540 National Implementation Action Plan and to participate in discussions of the Inter-Ministerial Working Group to help facilitate drafting a voluntary NAP.