In the early 1990s, political scientist Samuel P. Huntington introduced the "Clash of Civilizations" theory, which argued that future conflicts would be predominantly driven by cultural and civilizational differences rather than ideological or economic ones. According to the hypothesis, conflicts would occur along fault lines between different civilizations such as Western, Islamic, Confucian, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, and others in a post-Cold War world. While the concept gained popularity and spurred controversy, its legitimacy is still being debated. Arguments in Favor of the Theory: Huntington's theory emphasizes the growing importance of cultural identity in a globalized environment. Cultural and theological differences, he claimed, might lead to increased tensions and conflicts, as shown in controversies such as the West's contact with the Islamic world. Huntington highlighted analogies with historical conflicts, implying that civilizations struggled historically owing to differing ideals, traditions, and worldviews. To support his thesis, he cited examples of cultural conflicts throughout history. Post-Cold War Dynamics: Huntington's theory gained acceptance after the Cold War, when numerous conflicts, particularly in the Middle East and the Balkans, arose along religious or cultural fault lines. Objections to the Theory: Critics say that the idea oversimplifies the intricacies that exist within civilizations. It homogenizes multiple cultures and communities within the same civilization, ignoring internal diversity and potentially reducing sources of conflict or collaboration. Economic and political considerations, according to critics, are frequently the fundamental drivers of conflicts, rather than cultural or civilizational differences. Conflicts are typically fueled by resource battles, power dynamics, and political ambitions rather than cultural differences. Cooperation and Interdependence: The hypothesis ignores numerous examples of cooperation and interaction between civilizations. Nations and cultures regularly cooperate economically, politically, and culturally despite their differences in a closely interconnected world. Globalization has expanded interconnection, blurring the barriers between civilizations and cultivating a feeling of a common global community. It implies that a single "clash" oversimplifies the multifaceted, interrelated nature of modern global civilization. To summarize, while the "Clash of Civilizations" idea raised awareness of the importance of cultural differences and identity in global relations, its validity is still being contested. Critics contend that it oversimplifies the causes of war and ignores nations' common interests and interdependence. While cultural differences and disputes do exist, they are frequently linked with economic, political, and historical reasons, and conflict is decided by factors other than civilizational fault lines. Understanding global conflicts necessitates a comprehensive approach that takes into account variables other than cultural differences.