"Yet, history has shown that if material force can defeat some ideologies it can no longer obliterate a civilization without destabilizing the whole planet"

Abdelaziz Bouteflika’s observation addresses the complex relationship between power, ideology, and the enduring fabric of civilizations in the modern era. He points out that while material force, military might, economic pressure, or technological superiority, may be effective in suppressing or dismantling particular ideologies, it faces significant limitations when aimed at eradicating entire civilizations. This distinction is rooted in the nature of ideologies as abstract, often malleable systems of thought, contrasted with civilizations, which are holistic constructs woven from shared histories, cultures, languages, and institutions.

Historically, acts of conquest, colonization, or regime change often sought to impose a dominant ideology, sometimes with temporary success. However, as the world has become more interconnected, the attempt to eliminate a civilization through force invariably produces consequences that reverberate far beyond the immediate conflict. The interconnectedness of nations, economies, and societies means that a destabilizing act against one civilization, an effort to blot it out, disrupts delicate balances and can provoke widespread instability. In the atomic age and in the era of global communication, the mutual reliance of nations increases the risk of turmoil, humanitarian crises, refugee flows, economic shocks, and even the spread of extremism.

Bouteflika’s insight also serves as a cautionary reminder that civilizations, unlike ideologies, possess profound reservoirs of resilience and identity. They are adaptive and can outlast the rise and fall of ruling systems or dogmas. Attempts to subdue a civilization through sheer force often fail, and the collateral damage endangers the broader global community. This recognition compels responsible actors to seek dialogue, engagement, and reconciliation instead of relying solely on coercion. True stability, he suggests, is founded on respect for the diversity and endurance of civilizations, and on the understanding that the violent eradication of one endangers the stability, and ultimately the security, of all.