Andreas Herberg-Rothe

We are witnessing a new phase of globalization that can be characterized as hybrid. This conceptualization follows the concept of hybrid warfare and essentially encompasses the tense process of ongoing globalization and simultaneous local and regional resistance to it. As a result, identities worldwide are becoming uncertain, fluid (Zygmunt Bauman), or even dissolved. This process of dissolution leads to fragmented identities, held together with difficulty by age-old ideologies - or by violence. An alternative way of securing identity in this process of dissolution is the mutual recognition of the world's civilizations, which tolerance necessarily presupposes. Tolerance, however, also implies drawing the line at what is not to be tolerated. It is precisely in a process of mutual recognition that differences must not be overlooked. For example, tolerance is understood as a right in the liberal understanding, but as a task and duty in Islamic thinking. But we must not stop at the differences. In this respect, a perspective of tolerance as a process is developed here and clarified with the concept of an ascending cycle. The concept of Mulla Sadra, the important Islamic philosopher, contains the seeds of a concept of tolerance that is indispensable for intercultural dialogue and preserving identity.

The problem is how ideas and ideologies intended to liberate the peoples from misery and oppression were reversed into oppression just in the name of freedom. The reason is the reduction of equality to a numerical concept, which was a milestone in world history but finally ended up in obscene inequalities to such an extent, that the social fabric of the Western societies is dissolving, far-right and populistic movements are gaining momentum and the corruption of our values can no longer be ignored. The crisis of the (neo)-liberal world order is returning from the margins to the center. For too long we thought that modern absolute or numerical equality would supersede the former aristocratic concept of proportional equality. But in the end this understanding of equality created a kind of blind spot in our perception – a prominent example is Thomas Jefferson who included the dignity of all people into the American declaration of independence and was virtually blind to realizing that this value contradicted his own practice of possessing slaves.  Therefore we re-invent proportional equality in the footsteps of Aristotle, but transgress his aristocratic concept by balancing it with reversed-proportionality – we propose therefore to understand justice as a pair of scales between freedom and equality.  

The current Korean crisis is just a prelude to the tensions and conflicts that will accompany the rise of the ancient civilizations which have a much longer tradition than the Western World. Globalization will inevitably lead to the newly rise of the civilizations which have lost their standing and recognition in the course of Western colonialism and hegemony.  What we therefore need is a development of mutual recognition among the great civilizations of the earth, which should transcend a mere parallelism as well as a universal civilization which in the end would just be a kind of universalized Western civilization. While the task of the late 20^th century was the avoidance of the self-destruction of the planet, the task of our century will be to manage the new rise of the ancient civilizations without falling in the Thucydides trap of a repetition of the First World War – only now in Asia. As the slain former prime minister of Israel highlighted: "You don't make peace with friends. You make it with very unsavory enemies.” Mutual recognition of the civilizations of the earth has a double perspective: It allows solving conflicts on a rational basis and it is binding the conflict-parties to their own civilizational standards.     

The recognition as an equally valued subject as a solution for conflicts about material interests and power related subjects is the main point of the Clausewitz theory. In the twenty-first century, due to the effects of globalization, war and violent conflicts are characterized by the hybrid combination of the instrumentality of war and the struggles for a renewed recognition as a result of a formerly denied recognition. It is not our intention to psychoanalyze Clausewitz and the meaning this problem has for his development, but only to stress that he was ready to defend his equality. Relatedly, today, the Arab world is in a state of change and social overthrows are due to increased mobility, progressive urbanization, and a secular intercourse with Islam. People in the Arabic world are still in the adjustment process within the first modernity and at the same time have to deal with the unstoppable globalization. The nature of this study is analytical and descriptive, intending to analyze the hybrid wars, especially in the Arab world, in the twenty-first century through the Clausewitz theory, while focusing on the definitions of ‘recognition’ and ‘violence’.