Besides, going back to the fundamental teachings of any faith, however incongruous it may seem in the post-modern world of today, cannot be debatable as long as the journey back is made voluntarily by those convinced of the ultimate uselessness of the material benefits offered by today's world.

The problem arises when, in the name of religion majoritarian, religious belief is imposed on the minority community through violence in any country, and also when violence having multi-national character spreads its wings to other countries where people do not subscribe to the extremist faith the corruptors are bent upon inflicting upon the people.

Not to oppose these people would constitute, in the words of Tony Blair, "a doctrine of benign inactivity," and he picks up the cudgel against the majority view of a large part of Western opinion which regards American policy since 9/11 as gross overreaction, George Bush as much of a threat to world peace as Osama bin Laden, and that the bloody conflict is understandable in the light of US/UK imperialism.

Blair tells these people, and especially the deviants from the Muslim faith, that their attitude towards America "is absurd, their concept of governance is pre-feudal, their position on women and other faiths reactionary and regressive."

In Tony Blair's mind, what is happening in the world is not a clash between civilizations but a clash about civilizations. "It is the age old battle between progress and reaction," he says, "between those who embrace, and see the opportunity in, the modern world and those who reject its existence, between optimism and hope on the one hand and pessimism and fear on the other."

The British prime minister knows that not to fight the menace which has afflicted many countries, including Bangladesh despite the hanging of six JMB terrorists, would be in Churchillian language wasted opportunities, and that the future generation would describe this inaction as "The Locust Years."

Tony Blair's enunciation in 1999 of the doctrine of international community the basic thesis of which is the defining characteristic of today's world through its interdependence, yet while the economics of globalization is well matured, the politics of globalization are not, and therefore unless a common global policy based on common values is articulated, "we risk chaos threatening our stability, economic and political, through letting extremism, conflict or injustice go unchecked."

British foreign policy of late, despite the Iraq misadventure, is seen by Tony Blair as being instrumental in causing setback to terrorist barbarity and advance for the forces of democracy as against the forces of tyranny, thus justifying the Anglo-US invasion of Iraq, can be described as more humane and less self-interested.

When British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett addressed The Yale Club in New York last month on "Climate change-the Gathering Storm," the tenor of her address was akin to the dependency theory that sought to explain that the continued impoverishment of the Third World countries was not internally generated but a structural condition of global capitalism itself.

Detailing the adverse effects of climate change Beckett gave the example of Bangladesh where rising sea level could displace millions of people, adding a "new dynamic to an already tense region."

One hopes, as did Beckett, the world has heard the words of Ugandan President Museveni that climate change is an act of aggression by the rich against the poor. This grim scenario becomes grimmer if by 2020 half of the world's oil production is controlled by countries currently running the risk of internal instability.

But then British foreign policy, even if one were to look at it from a benign point of view, may not carry Gordon Brown, the anointed successor to Tony Blair, very far if Nicholas Sarkozy succeeds in taking away the far right votes of Jean-Marie Le Pen in the second round of the French presidential election.

Under Sarkozy, who has a comfortable lead over Socialist Segolene Royal, family reunification may become a thing of the past and foreign workers would no longer have access to welfare payments.

Given last year's race riots that left French multiculturalism in tatters, a majority of French voters believe that mastering immigration would be the greatest challenge for the next government and, hence, the race to the right has taken center stage in French politics.

Added is the continuing intransigence of President Bush, displayed through his vetoing the Congress resolution asking for a time frame for withdrawal from Iraq. One cannot be sanguine about Western munificence towards developing countries, so necessary for their economic development and future survival. Australia has refused to take in few thousand people from Vanuatu, an island in the South Pacific, which is being slowly submerged due to climate change.

In the ultimate analysis, while the optimists may hold on to their hope that the clash about civilizations may ultimately be resolved without resorting to brutal Hobbesian struggle and the mechanism of social Darwinism, the pessimists may have less confidence in a just international structure and believe in the thesis of former State Department official Mark Lagon that where consensus cannot be achieved in the United Nations, US efforts to enforce norms constitute leadership rather than "license."

Some hold the view that it is a positive development that the UN recognizes situations in which national sovereignty loses legitimacy, paving the way for the Responsibility to Protect that was affirmed at the 60th UN anniversary World Summit of September 2005.

One cannot but wonder whether paying obeisance to Robert Kagan's thesis of US muscularity and Liam Ferguson's entreaty to the US to take up the call of history would not, after all, bring anew the metropolitan-peripheral relationship of a different variety.

Some day in the near future the developing countries (barring those who would be embraced by the First World) would have to decide on the course they would be taking for the welfare of the future generations.

Kazi Anwarul Masud is a former Secretary and Ambassador.