| [an error occurred while processing this directive] |  |  |
 |  | |
| ||
| |||||||
| |||||||
|
| ||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
 Recent commentary from National Journal: Media: Starbucks and Yoga (February 28, 2002) America is still at war. But the Olympic scandals, the Oscar buzz, Botox—the kinds of stories we thrived on before 9/11—have come storming back. By William Powers. Social Studies: How to Save Ground Zero: An Immodest Proposal (February 28, 2002) The Twin Towers site needs not a memorial, but memorials, commemorating not the crime but its victims. By Jonathan Rauch. Legal Affairs: Nothing in the Constitution Bars Helping Inner-City Kids (February 28, 2002) Is it morally defensible to deny decent educations to poor children for the sake of a school system? By Stuart Taylor Jr. Social Studies: 'Hello, Mr. Krugman? If the System Is Corrupt, Aren't You?' (February 20, 2002) An imaginary (we hope) dialogue in which a New York Times columnist stands up for his paper's principles. By Jonathan Rauch. Legal Affairs: The Role Of Ideology in Judicial Selection: Test Case (February 20, 2002) The battle over the nomination of Charles Pickering to an appellate court isn't about Pickering. It's about power. By Stuart Taylor Jr. Political Pulse: GOP: We'll Get Back to That (February 20, 2002) War and recession give Republicans cover for not making the surplus and Social Security higher priorities. By William Schneider. Media: The Emperor's Old Clothes (February 20, 2002) The media blob's verdict on coverage of the Winter Olympics—nice job, NBC!—shows how accustomed we have become to awful Olympics coverage. Even the slightest improvement seems special. By William Powers. More from National Journal. |
Political Pulse 
Rewriting the Nation's Enemies ListAmericans' new worldview suggests a 'Clash of Civilizations' may be becoming a reality by William Schneider .... It's a whole new world since the Cold War ended and the war on terrorism began. We now have evidence of what that world looks like to the American people. It looks very, very much like the world that Harvard University political scientist Samuel P. Huntington predicted in his 1996 book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Despite the best efforts of President Bush and the warnings of Huntington, the "clash of civilizations" may be becoming a political reality. "The rivalry of the superpowers is replaced by the clash of civilizations," Huntington predicted six years ago. That world, in his view, is defined not by economic or ideological conflict, but by cultural conflict, often dangerously reinforced by religion. The world's new wars will be fought along great civilizations' fault lines, such as in the Balkans, where the Christian and Muslim worlds collide; and in Afghanistan, the frontier between Islam, Russia, and now, the West. "In the 1990s," Huntington wrote, "many saw a 'civilizational cold war' developing between Islam and the West." This month, the Gallup Poll asked Americans to express feelings about 25 countries. Which ones are perceived as the good guys? Eight countries get highly favorable ratings—drawing positive responses from more than 60 percent of those surveyed. And one is a big surprise. These allies include our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, plus two East Asian friends, Japan and Taiwan, and four European countries, Britain, France, Germany, and Russia. Russia? Yes. Russia is on America's side in the war on terrorism. Two-thirds of Americans now express a favorable opinion of Russia, up 14 points in the past year. No other country has gone up as much in the American public's esteem. Americans give five countries favorability ratings in the 50 percent range. Three of the countries considered to be fairly friendly are Asian: India, the Philippines, and South Korea. The others are in the Middle East: Egypt and Israel. These countries' support in the war on terrorism is not considered as certain. That's true even of Israel, whose policies some Americans blame for U.S. terror problems. The public's opinion of Egypt is down 11 points in the past year, part of a broad disillusionment with the Muslim world. Which countries are viewed as the bad guys? Communist countries are still on that list: China, Cuba, and Vietnam. Their favorability ratings are in the 30s and 40s. Colombia actually does worse—28 percent favorable—because of the drug war. Three Muslim countries get lower ratings than the Communists: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan. They're dubious allies in the war on terrorism. Their governments are with us, but their people aren't necessarily. Saudi Arabia has taken a big fall, down 20 points. No other country has lost as much support. Who's on America's enemies list? Only one Communist country, the one Bush included in the "axis of evil": North Korea. But some Muslim countries fare worse: Iran and Iraq, also part of the axis of evil, plus Libya and the Palestinian Authority. All are sponsors of terrorism, which Americans now see as a bigger threat than Communism. The new world of "us" versus "them" is defined by a country's position on terrorism. The West, including Russia, is at the top of the "us" list. Muslim countries are on the "them" list, with North Korea the only non-Muslim entry. It looks as if Americans are seeing the "clash of civilizations" that Huntington predicted. In a "civilizational cold war" between the West and Islam, East Asia—Japan, South Korea, and China—becomes the nonaligned world. Bush went there this week because he wants it to align with the West. Bush rejects the "clash of civilizations" idea and insists this is a war on evildoers, not on Islam. He has gone out of his way to honor the Islamic faith and seek Muslim allies. Some observers think that one reason he included North Korea in the "axis of evil" was to keep that list from being exclusively Muslim. Huntington warned in 1996: "Some Westerners, including President Bill Clinton, have argued that the West does not have problems with Islam but only with violent Islamic extremists. Fourteen hundred years of history demonstrate otherwise." Interviewed last November, Huntington acknowledged Bush's determination to avoid a civilizational conflict and Osama bin Laden's determination to start one. "Muslim governments are under pressure from their populations," Huntington said. "Clearly, Osama bin Laden has great appeal among large numbers of Muslims. If he can win their support, and they can either pressure or overthrow their governments, then we will have a clash of civilizations. "We have to do everything we can to prevent Islam as a whole from becoming our enemy," Huntington warned. "I think it would be very undesirable at this point to expand the war into a war, say, with Iraq." That warning is echoed by our European allies, including Russia, which are openly opposed to military action against Iraq. "We know which nations' representatives and citizens were fighting alongside the Taliban and where their activities were financed from," Russian President Vladimir Putin said. "Iraq is not on that list." Ironically, expanding the war to Iraq is the one action that could galvanize a clash of civilizations on the Muslim side—and cause the Western alliance to crack.
What do you think? Discuss this article in the Politics & Society conference of Post & Riposte. More from National Journal. More on politics and society in Atlantic Unbound and The Atlantic Monthly. William Schneider is the Cable News Network's senior political analyst. He is also a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., and a contributing editor for the Los Angeles Times, National Journal, and The Atlantic Monthly. His column appears every week in National Journal, a weekly magazine covering politics and government published in Washington, D.C. For information on National Journal Group publications, see NationalJournal.com. Copyright © 2002 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved. | [an error occurred while processing this directive] | ||
|
Home |
Current Issue |
Back Issues |
Forum |
Site Guide |
Feedback |
Subscribe |
Search
| ||||
