The question of how we define ourselves is one that has long sparked debate. Some argue that our character is shaped by our surroundings, while others point to genetics as the primary influence. Many would look to history to explain the evolution of our identity. But amid these varying perspectives, one undeniable truth remains: our responses, beliefs and actions are deeply shaped by the civilization in which we live – its values, norms and ideologies. Civilizations, born of centuries of experience and struggle, are more than mere backdrops to our existence; they are the rich, complex tapestry of human achievement, failure, culture and thought. Each civilization, with its unique blend of ethnic, social and historical influences, offers its people a framework for understanding their place in the world. And yet, as much as these civilizations are authentic reflections of human history, they are often manipulated – twisted into ideological tools to serve narrow interests.
This ideological manipulation has led to some of the most bloodthirsty enterprises in human history. By exploiting the differences between civilizations – be they ethnic, cultural or religious – those in power have often turned those distinctions into justifications for violence, war and domination. What we are left with is a distorted view of reality, where the true richness of our shared human experience is overshadowed by the false narratives of division and conflict. We must recognize that while civilizations may differ in form and tradition, at their core, they share fundamental human aspirations: the desire for safety, prosperity and meaning. The ideological stripes we draw between ourselves and others turn these aspirations into delusions, distorting the very nature of our common humanity. To reclaim the richness of our shared heritage, we must look beyond the ideological lines that divide us and acknowledge the unity that underpins all human civilizations. Only then we can break free from the delusion and recognize the deeper truth of our collective existence.
A theory always serves someone and something. Last month, we witnessed the resurgence of an almost 30-year-old concept: the “Clash of Civilizations.” In reality, it is neither a robust theory nor a comprehensive explanation but rather a perspective designed to shape public opinion. On June 1, 1993, Samuel P. Huntington, a political scientist with notable ties to the U.S. State Department and Pentagon, published a provocative op-ed titled “The Clash of Civilizations?” Huntington argued that world politics had entered a new phase where actors’ alignment would depend on the “civilizational family” they identified with. He asserted that the primary sources of conflict would no longer be ideological or economic but civilizational. To support his argument, Huntington invoked an 18th-century observation by R.R. Palmer, who claimed wars would increasingly be fought by peoples rather than monarchs.
In social sciences, crafting a compelling argument often involves weaving old ideas with contemporary contexts to create a “grand narrative.” Huntington’s op-ed exemplified this approach, blending unrelated historical facts to form a new and polarising argument. As Robert Cox, the eminent political scientist, astutely noted, “A theory always serves someone and something.” In Huntington’s case, his perspective served the U.S. political elite, framing global events to justify foreign interventions. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, his so-called theory became a convenient instrument for legitimizing military action and cultivating public support for a U.S.-led world order.
Today, we see a similar narrative employed by Israel. Addressing fabricated “existential threats,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leverages this ideological framing to sway Western public opinion, securing tacit approval for atrocities in Gaza and across the Middle East. This is a dangerous and divisive strategy. If we uncritically accept Netanyahu’s claims, we inadvertently endorse the notion of a “civilizational war.” The consequences of such narratives are far-reaching, reinforcing harmful dichotomies and escalating conflicts.
Türkiye, as the inheritor of a long tradition of order and stability, has a unique role to play in challenging this narrative. Despite enduring immense devastation during and after World War I, Türkiye extended a hand of friendship to former adversaries, demonstrating a commitment to peace and reconciliation. This legacy calls for robust support of multilateral initiatives such as the U.N. Alliance of Civilizations, which fosters dialogue among diverse cultures and envisions a shared future for humanity.
Countering Israel’s unfounded claims and “Middle Eastern ontology” requires more than condemnation; it demands a rigorous intellectual and cultural response. By promoting scientific discourse and cultural exchange, Türkiye can dismantle these narratives and better engage with Western public opinion. We must remember Antonio Negri’s apothegmatic analysis: the State in Western traditions is constructed by its people. Similarly, the power of ideas and collective action can reshape perceptions and foster genuine understanding.
The cycle of calamities and massacres we witness today must serve as a wake-up call – a chance to transcend old divisions and envision a more inclusive and equitable world. Far from being a harbinger of doom, this moment offers an opportunity for collective awakening and action.