• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUNATO
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Moisés Naím"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Middle East",
    "North Africa",
    "Western Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Security",
    "Civil Society",
    "Religion"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

The Clash Within Civilizations

From the self-proclaimed Islamic State to Dylann Roof, internal struggles are the dominant theme in conflict today.

Link Copied
By Moisés Naím
Published on Jul 1, 2015

Source: Atlantic

Friday, June 26 was a day of terror. In Tunisia, a gunman killed 38 tourists, nearly all of them European, at a beach resort. In Kuwait, a suicide bomber murdered 27 people at a Shiite mosque. In France, an assailant decapitated his boss and attempted to blow up a chemical plant. ISIS claimed responsibility for the first two attacks; the perpetrator of the third appears to have ties to radical Islamist groups.

Although there is so far no evidence that the three attacks were coordinated, they further underscore that Islamic terrorism is a growing global threat. But do attacks like these confirm Samuel Huntington’s post-Cold War hypothesis about the coming “clash of civilizations”? With the end of ideological confrontation between communism and capitalism, the distinguished Harvard professor theorized, major international conflicts would arise between countries with cultural and religious differences. “On both sides the interaction between Islam and the West is seen as a clash of civilizations,” Huntington wrote in a 1993 article for Foreign Affairs. He continued:

It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.

For some, the ascent of al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the rise of the Islamic State and similar jihadist groups, and attacks like those on Friday all seem to support Huntington’s view.

The reality, however, is that since Huntington advanced this idea, the world has witnessed something very different: In terms of terrorism, one of the defining modes of conflict of our time, the deadliest clashes are currently occurring within civilizations, not between civilizations. Based on media coverage and the rhetoric of government officials, you’d think that the bloodiest conflict of the 21st century is the one between Muslim extremists and Westerners.

This perception is wrong. Today, internecine struggles are the dominant theme in geopolitical conflict. Militant jihadists have in fact killed far more fellow Muslims than members of any other group or, as Huntington would call it, “civilization.” Behind these casualties is a centuries-old conflict in Islam between Shiites and Sunnis that has grown more acute and multifaceted in recent years. According to the Global Terrorism Index (GTI), created by the Institute for Economics and Peace, in 2013 nearly 18,000 people around the world died from terrorist attacks. Eighty-two percent of the victims were in just five countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Syria. Of the attacks for which groups claimed responsibility, 66 percent were executed by ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, or al-Qaeda. In the past 14 years, just 5 percent of deaths from terrorist attacks have occurred in the industrialized countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which includes the United States. Of the 162 countries in the GTI study, Iraq ranks as the nation most affected by terrorism. France, to cite just one example in the West, places 56th.

Deaths From Terrorism, 2000-2013

Casualties by Terrorist Group, 2000-2013

 

Many people also believe that Islamist radicals commit the majority of terrorist attacks in the United States. This, too, is false. Since 9/11, according to a recent study by New America, terrorist attacks by white supremacists and other right-wing, non-Muslim extremists have resulted in nearly double the number of deaths as attacks perpetrated by jihadists. Non-Muslim terrorists have killed 48 people in 19 attacks, while their Muslim counterparts have slain 26 people in seven attacks. A jarring reminder of this often-concealed truth came when Dylann Roof murdered nine people at a church in Charleston, South Carolina.

Terrorism is not going away. But the strategies that are adopted to fight it should be based on reality, not prejudice or preconceptions. 

This article originally appeared in the Atlantic.

About the Author

Moisés Naím

Distinguished Fellow

Moisés Naím is a distinguished fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a best-selling author, and an internationally syndicated columnist.

    Recent Work

  • Research
    The World Reacts to Biden’s First 100 Days
      • +10

      Rosa Balfour, Frances Z. Brown, Yasmine Farouk, …

  • Commentary
    View From Latin America

      Moisés Naím

Moisés Naím
Distinguished Fellow
Moisés Naím
Political ReformSecurityCivil SocietyReligionNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastNorth AfricaWestern Europe

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Commentary
    Deciphering Europe’s Relationship with Turkey

    Debate is heating up on how Turkey could be integrated into a common European defense framework. Commercial and industrial deals offer a better chance at alignment than sweeping political efforts.

      Marc Pierini

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is it Worth it for Europeans to Placate Trump?

    After spending much of 2025 trying to placate Donald Trump, some European leaders are starting to change posture. But is even a hostile Washington still so important to Europe that the U.S. president’s outbursts are worth putting up with?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europeans Are Quiet Quitting the United States

    European leaders have now not only lost faith in Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency, but also in America’s hegemony as a whole. But short-term challenges make an immediate divorce unwise.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Article
    EU Integration Without Ratification?

    Countries face several hurdles in joining the EU, including the final stage of ratifying their accession treaties. Procedural reforms and substantive adjustments could help move the process forward.

      Stefan Lehne

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    There Is No Shortcut for Europe in Armenia

    Europe has an interest in supporting Armenian leader Nikol Pashinyan as he tries to make peace with neighbors and loosen ties with Russia. But it is depersonalized support in the long term, not quickfire flash, that will win the day.

      Thomas de Waal

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.