It Was Never the End of History, But the Beginning of the Clash of Civilizations

When Francis Fukuyama proclaimed “the end of history” in 1989, he did so with the conviction that liberal democracy had triumphed as the ultimate form of governance. The collapse of the Soviet Union, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the seemingly unstoppable march of globalization painted a picture of a world where ideological struggles were over. However, history did not end—it simply took a different turn. Instead of a universal order dominated by liberal democracy, we have entered an era that Samuel Huntington foresaw in his seminal work The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.

The current global conflicts, from Ukraine to Gaza, from the South China Sea to tensions in the Mediterranean, are not merely geopolitical disputes. They are manifestations of deeper civilizational fault lines. The West’s long-standing dominance is being challenged, not just by rival states but by alternative worldviews, historical grievances, and divergent cultural identities. The so-called “Second Cold War” framework oversimplifies these tensions as merely a revival of U.S.-Soviet-style rivalry. In reality, what we are witnessing is not Cold War 2.0 but a multipolar clash of civilizations, in which Western Judeo-Christian civilization, Chinese Confucianism, Islamic resurgence, and Russian Eurasianism are competing to shape the future.

To frame the present era as a Second Cold War is to impose a misleading historical analogy on a world that has fundamentally changed. The original Cold War was defined by a clear ideological divide between two superpowers—the United States and the Soviet Union. The current global order is far more fragmented. While the U.S. and its allies remain dominant in many respects, they are not facing a singular ideological rival but rather a constellation of competing powers. Russia is not the Soviet Union, nor is China a communist revolutionary state seeking to spread an alternative economic model globally.

Furthermore, unlike the Cold War, where the U.S. and USSR operated in largely separate economic spheres, today’s great powers are deeply intertwined. China and the United States remain economically interdependent, with vast trade networks binding them together. Russia, while isolated from the West in some respects, continues to find economic and strategic partners in the Global South. The Soviet bloc once operated under strict ideological discipline, with little room for deviation. Today’s alliances are far more fluid, shifting based on national interests rather than ideological commitments. This multipolarity cannot be accurately described using the outdated Cold War paradigm. Actors emerging in this multi-polar world each originated in their own way.

The Rise of the Axis of Totalitarianism

In the post-Cold War world, non-Western civilizations are not only reclaiming their historical identities but also forging strategic alliances against the West. This alignment is not based on shared ideological principles, as was the case during the Cold War, but rather on a pragmatic convergence of interests under the simple logic of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The result is the emergence of what I term the Axis of Totalitarianism, an informal but powerful coalition that seeks to challenge and dismantle the global influence of Western Judeo-Christian civilization.

This model is evident in three key civilizational blocs that form the core of the Axis of Totalitarianism:

1. The Islamic World – A civilization grappling with the struggle between political Islam and national sovereignty, fueled by theocratic governance, sectarian conflicts, and regional ambitions.
2. China – A hegemon that fuses Confucian authoritarianism with Communist totalitarianism, seeking both economic and civilizational dominance while exporting its model abroad.
3. Russia – An imperialist power whose ambitions are driven by a historical sense of lost grandeur, but which remains an ambiguous player in the clash of civilizations due to its shared Orthodox Christian roots with the West.

This new confrontation is civilizational in nature. It pits the values of individual liberty, democratic governance, and free markets against authoritarianism, collectivism, and state-controlled order. While the principal actors of this axis—China’s Confucian-Communist model, Islamic political resurgence, Russia’s authoritarian Orthodox nationalism, and North Korea’s dynastic totalitarianism—differ in their historical experiences and governing philosophies, they share a common objective: undermining Western dominance and reshaping the global order in their own image.

Within this axis, Russia occupies a unique position. Unlike China or the Islamic world, Russia is not entirely outside the Western civilizational sphere. Its Orthodox Christian heritage and cultural legacy share significant overlaps with Western Judeo-Christian values. This identity creates a paradox: Russia simultaneously clashes with the West geopolitically while maintaining certain civilizational commonalities that leave the door open for reconciliation. The long history of European engagement with Russia since Peter the Great, from periods of integration to fierce rivalry, suggests that while conflict currently prevails, coordination remains a potential outcome. This emerging axis directly challenges the Western model, a framework built on the enduring principles of individualism, liberty, and open inquiry.

The Western Model

Western civilization has developed through a unique synthesis of Judeo-Christian ethics, Greco-Roman political and legal traditions, and the intellectual advancements of the Enlightenment. This fusion has created a civilizational framework rooted in individualism, liberty, and open inquiry, which has driven the most significant advancements in human history. While no civilization is without its flaws, the Western model has historically produced the highest levels of scientific progress, economic prosperity, and political stability.

At its core, Western civilization prioritizes the sovereignty of the individual. Unlike collectivist societies, where the state, the religious order, or the ruling elite dictate the course of human life, the Western tradition elevates personal agency, moral autonomy, and self-determination. This concept is deeply embedded in its Judeo-Christian heritage. The Biblical tradition stresses the moral responsibility of the individual before God—a radical departure from polytheistic and tribal societies, where human beings were often seen as mere instruments of divine or state power. Christianity reinforced this idea by emphasizing personal salvation and free will, further cultivating an ethos in which individuals were responsible for their own ethical and moral decisions rather than being bound to predetermined social roles.

Simultaneously, the Greco-Roman legacy contributed a rational and legalistic approach to governance. The Greek concept of citizenship and the Roman codification of laws introduced the principles of legal rights, civic responsibility, and participatory governance. The polis, or city-state, became the foundation for democratic institutions, where debate, critical thinking, and the search for truth were not only permitted but encouraged. This legacy carried through the centuries and found new expression during the Renaissance and Enlightenment, when developed the modern ideas of constitutional government, checks and balances, and universal human rights.

The Enlightenment, in particular, played a transformative role in shaping the Western model of governance and society. It reinforced the idea that rulers derive their legitimacy not from divine authority or hereditary power but from the consent of the governed. This led to the formation of constitutional democracies, the rule of law, and the separation of church and state, ensuring that no single authority—whether religious or political—could monopolize power. The protection of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of conscience became pillars of Western governance, distinguishing it from civilizations that maintained rigid hierarchies of authority and obedience.

Western civilization’s ability to self-correct is a defining feature: from the Protestant Reformation to the civil rights movements of the 20th century, it has continuously reassessed its values, corrected injustices, and expanded freedoms. This adaptability has been a source of strength, ensuring that the West remains resilient even in the face of internal and external challenges. This strength is evident in the remarkable peace that has emerged among Western nations.

Pax Occidentalis

One of the most remarkable achievements of Western civilization has been the elimination of intra-Western warfare, a phenomenon that I describe as Pax Occidentalis. For centuries, Europe was the epicenter of devastating conflicts. The rivalry between kingdoms, empires, and later nation-states resulted in continuous warfare—from the Hundred Years’ War and the Napoleonic Wars to the catastrophic World Wars of the 20th century. The cycle of conflict seemed inescapable.

However, following the Second World War, a radical transformation took place. The Western world, recognizing the destructive potential of modern warfare, constructed a new political, economic, and ideological framework that prioritized cooperation over conflict. This shift was not accidental but the result of several interrelated developments.

First, capitalism replaced military conquest as the primary means of competition. In previous centuries, wealth and power were often obtained through territorial expansion and resource extraction. However, the expansion of free markets, global trade, and industrialization created an alternative pathway to dominance. Instead of engaging in war to secure resources, Western nations competed through economic growth, technological innovation, and financial influence. The post-war economic boom, led by the United States and Western Europe, demonstrated that prosperity could be achieved through commerce rather than conquest.

Second, the institutionalization of political cooperation reduced the likelihood of war. The creation of NATO, the European Union, and various international organizations ensured that disputes between Western nations were resolved through diplomacy rather than armed conflict. For the first time in history, European states and their transatlantic allies committed themselves to a system where political dialogue, economic integration, and security pacts supplanted militaristic rivalries. The European Union, in particular, turned centuries-old adversaries—France and Germany, Britain and Spain—into economic and political partners.

Third, democratic governance fundamentally changed the incentives for war. Unlike authoritarian regimes, which often rely on militarism to maintain internal legitimacy, democratic states are accountable to their citizens, who overwhelmingly prefer peace and stability. Public opinion in democratic societies acts as a check against reckless military adventurism. The democratic peace theory, which argues that established democracies are far less likely to go to war with one another, has largely held true in the post-war era. In contrast to this Western peace, the Islamic world grapples with its own internal conflicts and a turbulent struggle with modernity.

Islamic Resurgence and Civilizational Schizophrenia

The Islamic world’s engagement with modernity has been marked by a persistent struggle between secular nationalism and political Islam. Unlike the West, which underwent secularization Islamic civilization has largely moved in the opposite direction.

At the heart of this ideological framework is Sharia law, which in many Islamic states supersedes secular legal codes. In countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan, governance is explicitly based on Islamic jurisprudence, resulting in rigid theocratic rule where religious authorities hold immense power over law, education, social norms, and personal freedoms.

The concept of the Ummah—the global Muslim community—reinforces this collectivist worldview. It suggests that a Muslim’s primary allegiance is not to a nation-state but to the broader Islamic world. This undermines nationalism, individual sovereignty, and integration into secular societies, making it difficult for Islamic nations to develop independent, modern political structures that separate religion from governance.

A critical and often ignored phenomenon in the modern geopolitical landscape is the mass migration of Muslims to the West, which has introduced a unique ideological contradiction—what I term Civilizational Schizophrenia.

This concept encapsulates the paradox in which Western policymakers and intellectuals believe that large-scale Muslim immigration will naturally result in assimilation into Western values, despite the fact that Islamic civilization inherently conditions its adherents to resist Westernization and, instead, expand Islamic influence wherever possible.

The fundamental flaw in this assumption lies in the failure to recognize that migration is not merely a demographic shift but a civilizational export. Because Western immigration policies are not merit-based and do not prioritize individuals who embrace Western values, they have resulted in the mass importation of Islamic civilizational codes, rather than the integration of Muslims into the liberal-democratic framework.

In Islamic doctrine, the expansion of Islam is not simply a religious or spiritual mission but a political obligation. As a result, the notion that Muslim migrants will abandon their historical and religious ties to embrace Western liberalism is not only naïve but schizophrenic, as it contradicts the very structure of Islamic teachings.

The long-term consequences of Civilizational Schizophrenia are already evident in Western societies. The failure of multiculturalism in France, Germany, and Sweden, the rise of parallel Islamic societies in European cities, and the radicalization of second-generation Muslim youth all demonstrate that the Islamic world is not integrating into the West. Instead, it is reshaping Western societies from within, creating a clash of civilizations inside Western borders. This internal struggle is mirrored by a different, yet equally potent, civilizational challenge from the East: the rise of China’s civilizational hegemony.

China’s Civilizational Hegemony

China represents a unique challenge to the Western world, not merely as an economic superpower but as a civilization seeking to establish an alternative global order. While Deng Xiaoping’s doctrine of “biding time and hiding strength” guided China’s foreign policy for decades, modern China under Xi Jinping has abandoned this approach, openly seeking hegemony not only in Asia but across the developing world.

Unlike the West, China operates on a Confucian-Communist hybrid model that fuses:

1. Confucian Authoritarianism – A traditional hierarchical system that emphasizes obedience to authority, social harmony, and rigid class structures.
2. Communist Totalitarianism – A modern system of state surveillance, censorship, and political control, which enforces ideological conformity through mass internment (Uyghurs), military expansion (South China Sea), and suppression of dissent (Hong Kong, Tibet, Taiwan).

China’s ambitions go beyond economic dominance. The country seeks to become a civilizational power, offering a non-Western governance model to nations dissatisfied with democracy. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is not just an infrastructure project—it is a civilizational expansion effort, embedding Chinese influence economically, politically, and culturally in Asia, Africa, and even Europe.

China’s return to interventionist foreign policy, particularly in Africa and Central Asia, signals a departure from Deng’s doctrine and a shift toward imperial ambition. However, this imperialist expansion inevitably leads to conflict with Russia, particularly in Central Asia and Siberia, where both powers vie for strategic dominance. There may be a tendency to believe the world is still two poles with each state picking their preferred side. The friction between two imperialist powers—Russia and China—discounts this theory.

The Clash of Imperialisms

China and Russia, while often seen as aligned against the West, are in reality engaged in their own imperialist struggle, particularly in Central Asia and Siberia. This creates an opportunity for the West to exploit their growing tensions and realign Russia as a strategic counterweight against Chinese expansionism.

China’s influence in Russia’s traditional sphere is not limited to economic expansion or demographic shifts; it also extends into political maneuvering. Beijing has steadily undermined Moscow’s grip over the former Soviet republics in Central Asia. Historically, Russia dominated the region through Soviet-era institutions, security cooperation, and economic interdependence.

One of China’s primary strategies has been cultivating relationships with Central Asian leaders by presenting itself as a pragmatic and non-interventionist partner. Unlike Russia, which often imposes political demands on its allies, China has positioned itself as a power that offers economic growth without political strings attached. This has made it an attractive alternative for governments that seek to balance Russian influence while securing their own interests. China’s extensive investments in infrastructure, energy, and manufacturing have created a situation where many Central Asian nations are now more economically dependent on China than on Russia. Beijing has financed highways, bridges, and industrial zones that have linked Central Asia’s economies to China’s market, reinforcing a trade dependency that Moscow struggles to counter.

Additionally, China has deliberately worked to shift the political allegiances of Central Asia by establishing alternative security arrangements that reduce reliance on Russia. Traditionally, Moscow dominated regional security through the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), an alliance designed to maintain Russia’s military presence in the region. However, China has increasingly inserted itself into security matters through organizations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a multilateral framework that brings together China, Russia, and several Central Asian states. While the SCO originally functioned as a diplomatic platform, China has steadily transformed it into a mechanism for increasing its own political leverage. Through joint military exercises, intelligence sharing, and counterterrorism initiatives, China has subtly established itself as a key security provider, reducing the need for Russian intervention.

Russia has also struggled to contain China’s growing influence because of its own internal economic weaknesses. With Russia’s economy hampered by Western sanctions, declining foreign investment, and an overreliance on energy exports, it lacks the financial capability to compete with China’s large-scale investments. Central Asian governments recognize this and have begun shifting their long-term strategic alignment toward China rather than Russia. Beijing’s ability to offer no-strings-attached loans, build infrastructure at record speed, and open its vast consumer market to Central Asian exports has left Moscow with little leverage.

China’s political maneuvering is not limited to Central Asia; it extends into Russia’s own territory, particularly in Siberia and the Russian Far East. In these regions, Chinese political influence is growing alongside economic and demographic shifts. Local Russian officials have begun fostering closer ties with Chinese investors, sometimes bypassing Moscow in negotiations. This has led to concerns that China is not just an economic competitor but an active force in reshaping regional governance structures in ways that undermine Russian authority. Some analysts have warned that the gradual economic colonization of Siberia and the Far East could lead to a geopolitical realignment where these territories become more aligned with China’s interests than with those of Moscow.

The growing tension between Russian and Chinese interests highlights the fundamental clash of imperialisms between the two powers. While both nations are authoritarian and anti-Western, their long-term ambitions do not align. Russia sees itself as a great Eurasian power that maintains dominance over its historical sphere of influence, while China views the same region as a natural extension of its economic and strategic reach. This contradiction creates an inherent conflict that Western powers can exploit. If the West adopts a strategic, pragmatic approach, it can use Russia’s concerns about Chinese expansion to drive a wedge between the two. While Russia has been pushed closer to China in recent years due to Western sanctions and diplomatic isolation, the West could reverse this trend by offering Russia incentives to distance itself from China. If Moscow perceives Beijing as an existential threat to its long-term territorial integrity, it may ultimately seek rapprochement with the West as a counterbalance to China’s growing influence.

The clash of imperialism between China and Russia is not just a theoretical possibility—it is a geopolitical reality that is already unfolding. The demographic shifts in Siberia, the erosion of Russian influence in Central Asia, and the increasing dependency of Russian regional economies on Chinese capital all point toward an inevitable confrontation. The question is whether the West will recognize this fault line and act strategically to exploit it, or whether it will continue to push Russia further into China’s embrace.

With these dynamics, the West must adopt a comprehensive strategy to maintain its dominance in the face of these competing imperialisms and emerging civilizational challenges.

Preserving Western Dominance

The Western world stands at a crossroads. As the axis of totalitarianism continues to consolidate its power, the West must recognize that it is no longer dealing with a mere economic or military rivalry but a full-scale civilizational conflict. If the West wishes to preserve its global dominance, it must act decisively, intelligently, and strategically. The following framework outlines the essential steps that the West must take to secure its future and counter the threats posed by its adversaries.

1. Ensure the Incorporation of Japan, Korea, and India

To remain dominant, the West must not isolate itself but instead seek allies from non-Western civilizations that have a shared interest in countering the rise of China and the broader authoritarian bloc. Among these, Japan, South Korea, and India are particularly crucial.

Japan and South Korea, despite their deep integration into the global economy, remain vulnerable to Chinese influence due to their geographical proximity and economic ties to Beijing. The West must ensure that these nations do not fall into China’s sphere of influence, as they are naturally inclined to bandwagon with the strongest power if the West appears weak. To prevent this, the West must reinforce military, technological, and economic alliances with these nations, ensuring that they see greater benefits in aligning with the democratic world rather than succumbing to China’s dominance.

India, on the other hand, serves a dual purpose in this grand strategy. Firstly, with its massive population, it presents the only real demographic counterbalance to China. Secondly, India and China are historical rivals, engaged in territorial disputes and economic competition. The West must invest heavily in India’s economic and military rise, leveraging its population and anti-China stance to create a powerful counterweight in Asia. India’s participation in QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) with the U.S., Japan, and Australia should be expanded and deepened, ensuring that it becomes a long-term pillar of Western strategic interests.

2. Support Pro-Westernism via Pro-Zionism

Israel is the only beacon of Western values in the Middle East, standing as the frontline defense against radical Islamic terrorist organizations that threaten Western civilization. The rise of political Islam, backed by nations such as Iran and Qatar, has led to the formation of a sophisticated network of terrorist proxies, whose primary objective is to weaken the West by destabilizing its key regional ally—Israel.

If Israel were to fall, it would signal a catastrophic victory for anti-Western forces, emboldening Islamic radicals across the globe. The West must therefore provide Israel with all necessary military, economic, and diplomatic support, ensuring that it remains the dominant military power in the region and successfully defeats Islamist threats. This is not merely about Middle Eastern stability—it is about the survival of Western civilization itself in the face of a hostile and expansionist Islamic ideology.

3. Engage Türkiye’s Kemalist Factions

The only way for Türkiye to remain a part of the Western civilization is through Kemalism, the ideology that once firmly aligned it with secularism, nationalism, and modernity. However, under the rule of Islamist and neo-Ottoman forces, Türkiye has drifted away from these principles, adopting an ambiguous foreign policy that sometimes supports Western interests and sometimes aligns with anti-Western forces.

The West must actively engage with Türkiye’s Kemalist factions, strengthening the country’s secular institutions and ensuring that it does not fall deeper into Islamist or pro-Russian influence. A Kemalist Türkiye is not only an important Western ally but also a strategic counterweight to radical Islamic expansion in the region.

4. Exploit the Sino-Russian Imperialist Clash

Although Russia has positioned itself as an adversary to the West, its long-term interests do not fully align with China’s imperial ambitions. As previously discussed, China is gradually undermining Russia’s influence in Central Asia and Siberia, leading to a fundamental clash of imperialisms.

The West must recognize this fault line and exploit it to drive Russia away from China. While Moscow may never fully embrace the West, a pragmatic reconciliation could prevent a long-term China-Russia alliance, thereby weakening the axis of totalitarianism. Offering selective incentives—such as economic cooperation, technological partnerships, and strategic dialogue—could gradually shift Russia’s geopolitical orientation, making it more of a neutral power rather than a hostile one.

5. Revive NATO

The myth that America will save Europe must come to an end. The United States, despite its vast military capabilities, cannot bear the entire burden of Western security alone. Europe must heavily invest in its own military and revitalize NATO, ensuring that it becomes a truly formidable force capable of countering Russian aggression, Islamic terrorism, and Chinese expansionism.

This means significant increases in defense spending, the development of next-generation military technologies, and the establishment of stronger joint command structures. NATO is the single most successful security alliance in history, and the West must never allow it to weaken.

6. Counter Economic Alliances Like BRICS Through Internal Divisions

BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) poses a serious economic challenge to Western dominance, but it is far from a unified alliance. The West must exploit internal divisions within BRICS, particularly the rivalries between India and China, Russia’s concerns over China’s growing influence, and Brazil’s economic dependencies on Western markets.

By driving wedges between these nations, the West can prevent BRICS from emerging as a coherent economic alternative to the Western-led global order. The key is to offer selective economic incentives to certain BRICS members, pulling them closer to the West and weakening the bloc from within.

7. Reverse Western Demographic Decline and Cultural Decay

The West is facing an existential demographic crisis. Population declines, combined with gender ideologies that weaken social cohesion, threatens the long-term survival of Western civilization. If the West does not address low birth rates, the decline of the traditional family structure, and the erosion of core values, it will soon find itself outnumbered and overrun by civilizational competitors that do not share the same internal weaknesses.

The West must reaffirm its civilizational roots, promoting family values, social stability, and national identity, while resisting the moral decay that weakens its societal foundations.

8. Strengthen Capitalism as the West’s Greatest Weapon

Capitalism is the strongest weapon the West has ever created. It is the engine of economic prosperity, technological advancement, and military superiority. The rise of socialist and anti-market ideologies within the West itself threatens to erode the very foundation of Western dominance.

The West must embrace a renewed commitment to free markets, dismantling overregulation, socialist policies, and anti-innovation mindsets. Economic strength is directly linked to military and geopolitical power—if the West weakens itself economically, it will soon be overtaken strategically.

9. Prevent Islamic Nations from Acquiring Nuclear Weapons

An Islamic country with nuclear weapons is not just a threat to the West—it is a threat to the entire world. The West must ensure that no radical Islamic regime ever acquires nuclear capability, whether it be Iran, Pakistan’s extremists, or any other potential threat.

This requires preemptive measures, including diplomatic isolation, covert operations, and if necessary, military intervention. A nuclear-armed Islamist power could permanently alter global stability, and the West must prevent it at all costs.

10. End Civilizational Schizophrenia

The West must end its naïve approach to immigration. Current policies allow massive, unchecked Muslim migration that imports anti-Western civilizational codes.

Western immigration policy must become strictly meritocratic, admitting only those who embrace Western values and contribute to the prosperity and security of the civilization. Uncontrolled immigration is a Trojan Horse, and the West must close its gates before it is too late.

11. Gain Economic Independence from China and Isolate it from the Western Market

To preserve Western dominance, the West must economically detach itself from China, reducing Beijing’s leverage over global markets. For years, China has used its role as the world’s factory to exert influence, but its expansionist ambitions and human rights violations necessitate a strategic decoupling. This involves shifting supply chains to countries like India, Japan, and South Korea, and reducing dependency on Chinese production, thereby weakening China’s global economic power.

Decoupling also protects technological and military superiority. By limiting China’s access to advanced Western technologies, the West can prevent China from strengthening its military and technological base. While this process may cause economic disruptions, it is crucial for maintaining the West’s leadership in global affairs and ensuring it is not coerced by China’s growing influence.

Conclusion

The West faces a decisive civilizational struggle. To preserve its dominance, it must forge strong alliances with Japan, Korea, and India, unwaveringly support Israel, reintegrate a Kemalist Türkiye, and drive a wedge between Russia and China. Europe must invest in its own defense, strengthen NATO, and counter hostile blocs like BRICS.

Internally, the West must combat demographic decline, reject moral decay, and end civilizational schizophrenia by enforcing merit-based immigration. Capitalism remains its greatest weapon, while Islamist regimes must never be allowed nuclear capabilities.

The West’s adversaries are divided. Its survival depends on exploiting their weaknesses while restoring its own strength. The choice is clear: fight for dominance or fade into decline.