| Conclusion The basic thesis of this book claims that: Human history is shaped by two factors alone: environment and human nature. Human nature is a biological constant, itself under influence of environment, both in outside appearances and behavioral traits. The same hypothesis claims that if there are people who seemingly led historical processes, those people are really identifying labels rather than independent factors. I believe that the above historical hypothesis is correct. Moreover it seems likely that future readers of the book will search for some prognosis as for the future of the conflict, so I attach a prognosis together with a caveat. 1. The conflict between the Middle East and Europe, represented today by the Islamic and Western civilizations, originated in a climatic change which brought the Middle East to be desiccated and Europe to receive a temperate climate with year-round rains. 2. As a result of that climatic change, agriculture developed first in the Middle East and only later in Europe. One of the results of agriculture was a demographic explosion, whose immediate effect was the intensification of agriculture, i.e. the development of 'hydraulic societies'. 3. As these changes occurred about 6 - 7,000 years ago, the behavioral patterns which were caused by the changes became imprinted in the consciousness of both sides of the conflict, constantly fueling the mutual enmity. 4. According the hypothesis as described above, the conflict will exist until the environment remains as it is now. If the environment were to change, as it did about 11,000 years ago, i. e. if year-round rains will return to the Middle East, as before the last change, very possible the conflict will change too. So far the prediction, and now the caveat . At the time of the last climatic change, about 11,000 years ago, there was on this globe a human population estimated at about 6 million people. That population was dispersed in small hunter-gatherer bands with a minuscule rate of growth, if at all. As of now, that number was multiplied by about a thousand, and it is still increasing. It is obvious that it is not possible to repeat a historical process with such a huge difference. If there will be a new climatic change of the same force and effect as was the last, then a number of possibilities can occur. If the change will be catastrophic and sudden, it might reduce the number of people in a catastrophic way. However, if the number of people will be reduced to about 6 million, then it implies an unprecedented human catastrophe with a different globe, different humanity and different history. It is also possible that if there will be such a cataclysmic change, and if there will be continuation of human life on this globe, then the inhabitants, or rather the survivors, of some particular part of the globe, which will receive a preferential treatment, as Europe seemed to have received in the previous cataclysm, will fill the same role as Western Civilization is doing today. This, disregarding the color of skin, or the shape of eyes, or any other characteristics, dear to the hearts of 'racists' of all times. If the change should be long and protracted, as the last change seems to have been, then it means that a serious change will occur with 6 milliard people intact on the globe and with a changing climate. Changed environment means changed patterns of wealth distribution. It is inconceivable that such a redistribution of wealth could be accomplished by peaceful means, so instead of a natural catastrophe, as in the case of the first possibility, there will be a man-made catastrophe, with similar results. This short discourse shows that there is no possibility to replay a historical process. Heraclitus, one of the earliest Greek philosophers said: "You cannot step twice in the same river". When you step in the second time, neither you nor the river will be the same as at the first time. We might express the same principle differently by saying that history is linear and not circular. There is no possibility for history to return to a starting point. There is no other possibility, we have to assume that there is a conflict, there is a world picture, as it is, and there are nearly 6 milliard people on this globe. They have many problems, the constant feud is one of them. There are three major problems that the world has to confront in the very near future. The three problems are: - Uncontrolled growth of population - Warm-up of the world and the seas - Diminishing stature of Western Civilization Paul Kennedy 1 says that according to a list prepared by the UN, at the beginning of the next century, there will be 10 countries seriously affected by the rising level of the seas, which is connected to the problems of the general warm-up. The 10 countries that will be afflicted are Egypt, Bangladesh, Gambia, Indonesia, the Maldives, Mozambique, Senegal, Pakistan, Surinam and Thailand. If the sea will rise at least two meters then the Maldive Islands will disappear altogether. There are also developed countries that will be affected by the rising sea. However, the list contains only those countries that will suffer because of their inability to pay for either protective measures or a planned relocation to higher ground. This means, for example, that the Low Countries in Europe, which should be leading the list of endangered countries are supposed to be able to fend for themselves. In addition, there is also a question of the population increase. To quote only two figures from that list, the population of Egypt will increase from 54 million in 1990 to 94 million in 2025, and in Bangladesh, from 115 million to 235 million in the same period. All these on diminished territories because of the encroachment of the rising seas.2 It is a sorry fact that both the demographic increase and the warming-up process is advancing much faster than it was thought before. There is no way of knowing whether the dangers have already passed a critical point, or whether there is still time to reverse, or at least to stop them, if it is possible at all. In March 9, 1998 an interview with Lester Brown was published in Newsweek Magazine3 Lester Brown is the founder of Worldwatch Institute, a Washington D.C.-based think tank that produces a number of publications on environmental issues. The interview touched a number of frightening subjects. - Since 1984, when there was yet no indication of rising temperatures in the world, there were 15 years, of which 13 years were the warmest on records. The warming process is accelerating. - Rising living standards in the developing world causes accelerated depletion of resources. The available supply is insufficient to fulfill the increased demands. - According to Lester Brown, China has already caught up with United States in a number of resources, mainly foodstuff. In some other resources the picture is grimmer. If China would catch up with the United States in auto ownership and oil consumption, China would need 80 million barrels of oil a day, while the world's production is only 64 million barrels. Lester Brown has given a set of recommendations. Unfortunately he has not given instructions how to implement the recommendations. The global economy needs to be restructured and the automobile-based fossil-fuel-centered throwaway structure should be replaced with a renewable-energy-based economy that reuses and recycles materials and has a stable population. Noble aims, if they can be achieved. The biggest problem is that so far nobody has succeeded in stabilizing the population. Even the drastic measures of the Chinese authorities have failed. Lacking that, all other aims must fail. A few weeks after Mr. Brown's interview, an iceberg the size of a small country, broke off from the continental shelf of Antarctica. The process is accelerating indeed. The third point, the diminishing stature of Western civilization, which is in the center of international conflicts, is the restructuring of the relations between civilizations. Samuel P. Huntington 4 has written in his book that in 1928 the West controlled 48.1 % of the population of the world and about 85 % of the industrial production. It is estimated that by 2025, the West will control 10.1 % of the world's population and 30 % of the industrial production. The territory controlled by the West is about 24 % of the whole. Military capabilities should have a similar contraction. If military capabilities are measured by military manpower, then it will probably be less than its size in the population. Numbers can measure military manpower. The factor of readiness to use that power can only be guessed and not measured. It is thought that if that factor is involved then the military capability will drop even further. The size of the military and the willingness to use it, are extremely important because of a number of reasons. The first reason is of positive nature. The world is slipping fast into chaos, breakdown and catastrophe. It is sufficient to read the morning paper or open the TV, to see which nation has joined the list of has-beens. Somalia, Sudan, Ruanda, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Congo, Bosnia, Kossovo, Chechnia, Afghanistan and others The list is long and still increasing. The measure of the hatred toward the West could have been seen when the frenzied mob in Mogadishu killed and dragged in the streets 16 American marines, whose only sin was that they wanted to save starving people. This certainly taught the West that in today's world not even humanitarian aid could be given without a protective army, which is ready and capable of fighting. The second reason is that which has been explained by the interview of Lester Brown. It is doubtful that there is anyone who can give an answer whether the proverbial last straw has dropped, or not yet. If not, what is the bearing capacity of the proverbial camel? At the last time, when there was a similar situation and the Reverend Malthus has given his warning, the saviors were the industrial revolution and scientific agriculture. Both were the direct results of science, Western science. . Nobody really knows whether the present crisis can be solved, but if yes, it can only be done by science. When one speaks today about science, it means European science; there is no other. The use of the word European here means that it is not only Western but the Orthodox half of Europe, as well the overseas appendages of Western civilization, have a share in its achievements. However, the other civilizations, for some reason or other, have made no contributions, at least not in the last 700 - 800 years. The Far Eastern countries, meaning China and Japan, have made admirable advances in technology and industry, but for some reason, probably cultural causes, they have not made their mark in basic scientific research. It seems that scientific research is basically an individualistic achievement, and a scientist when he begins a research seems to be saying: "I know better and I can prove it." Cultures, which cherish conformism and social harmony, do not take lightly to individualism. It is probably the reason why the Japanese, despite their success in electronics, did not repeat it in software, also an individualistic task. As for Islamic civilization, it is even worse. V.S. Naipaul 5 wrote about Maulana Maudoodi of Pakistan, who fell ill and went to a Boston hospital and died there. Naipaul wrote with a little irony: "...he went to heaven by way of Boston, and that he went at least part of the way by Boeing". It was not only the Boeing. He must have reached the airport by a car, in Boston, equipment, instruments and medicine, all of which were created by Western science, treated him. If he wanted to reach Boston according to his beliefs, he should have reached Karachi by camel and sail to Boston by dhow. Whatever people might think of it, it is a fact. Modern science is Western science. Judging from the reaction of other civilizations, it might have been conceived in sin, but still they use it. For some curious reason, all present technical, medical and other scientific applications use the basic works of Western scholars, started by Thales, continued by Newton and Einstein, and ending by the last post-doctoral student who just submitted a scientific paper. This subject of Western science is connected with the actual balance of power. In 2025 AD the population of Western civilization will be 10.1 % of the total. The use of resources of this 10.1 % will probably be much higher than its share in the population. As it seems now, its military strength, and its willingness to use it, will be probably much less than its possible competitors for the same resources. The result can only be one. It is a pure Catch-22 situation. Both the size of the population and the problems of the environment are nearing a point of crisis, if they haven't reached already. If there is some chance of saving this planet and the humanity with it, it can probably just be done by science alone. Equalization of resources, by whatever means it will be done, will reduce the standard-of-living of the West to about one-fifth of today, which will finish all scientific activities. Anyone wishing to have an illustration can see the situation in the former Soviet Union. In view of these thoughts what is then the prognosis for the continuation of the conflict? It is doubtful that there is anybody, least of all a politician, who can answer that question. However, there seems to be no doubt, that if a new adversary to the West will appear, like the Turks did in the tenth-eleventh centuries AD, the Middle East will join it. The hatred to the West is too strong not to do so. 6 It is not really a prognosis, it is only a line of thoughts put into a logical framework. There is no way of foreseeing the future, as nobody can really know when that future will be. It can be tomorrow, it can be in another fifty years. What to do until then? For this there is a good advice. About 250 years ago there was a clever Frenchman, named Francois-Marie Arouet, also known as Voltaire. He was a thinker, a writer, full of scepticism and a general gadfly to the authorities. Among his book there is one, called "Candide, ou l'Optimisme'. The book is about a young German boy from Westphalia at the time of the Seven Years War. This was one of those wars that today have two lines in historybooks, but then it was a long and cruel affair. Candide passed the war with its entire vicissitudes; his parents were killed, his castle burnt, his fiancee raped. In his flight he was nearly pressed into the army, he passed Madrid when they burnt heretics at the stake, and reached Lisbon at the time of the great earthquake. He kept his optimism because of his tutor, Dr. Pangloss, whose character was drawn by Voltaire after Leibnitz, a German mathematician and philosopher. Leibnitz was a believer and always said: "As God has created this world and God is all-good, therefore we live in the best of all possible worlds." He said this sentence so many times to Candide, between atrocities, that at last Candide answered : "Cela est bien dit...mais il faut cultiver nos jardins." - which in free translation means :' It is all well said, but our garden must be cultivated." Its English equivalent is "Eat,drink and be merry..." It is as good an advice as anybody can give. Notes: |
