Halliday's title "Myth of Confrontation" has thrown off more than one reviewer and probably left some potential readers to dismiss the book entirely. (It is ironic and also unfortunate, that another book more shallow and less valuable became a big seller because it's title appeared to be confirmed by 9-11 shortly after it was completed, "What Went Wrong?" - such are the fates and irrationality of opinion formation.)
Readers should start with the new Preface written a year after 9-11 and be prepared to work a little harder to think rather than merely find simplistic confirmation of bias they may have. This is not to say one always agrees - only that Halliday has worthwhile things to say to those with an open mind.
The first section has chapters on the Middle East in International Relations reminding us that similar drives apply as elsewhere in the world and that it is not totally and mystically unique. An interesting essay on the Iranian Revolution is followed by another on the Gulf War.
Part two provides mature reflections on select issues: "Islam and the West" and the validity of their mutual threats; human rights issues; and many sources of anti-Muslimism (one might wryly comment that his oversight misses Amazon reviewers and the darker side of the US Media). The conclusion critiques both Said and the Orientalists although it is not terribly satisfying and not really tightly constructed conclusion for the book so much as another essay.
Some general readers may find the analytical style a bit tough going built as it is on more than the flaccid assertions of some other more popular books. Yet the case that Islam is too varied, focus too much centered on domestic concerns, and conflicts of interest and character of various Muslim regimes and Fundamentalist groups too considerable for a meaningful interpretation based on Islam's "confrontation" or "civilizational clash" to really explain anything worth explaining is made - however indirectly. Conspiratorial theorists, paranoids, and Crusaders will be disappointed - but probably would not think their way through the book anyway (fundamentally convinced of their own just truth already).
Huntington's thesis is not directly addressed here but is, and should be, discredited by the discussion of particulars. (For a more direct analysis of that one should see such things as relevant chapter's of "Why America's Top Pundit's Are Wrong".) This book draws from specific analysis, Huntington's from broad generalization and assertions. Halliday is a scholar of Muslim themes, Huntington read Lewis's essay on "Rage" and not a whole lot more. Pundits, politicians, polemicists, press people have climbed on Huntington's bandwagon and policy has been effected - it is a pity that few have honestly considered alternatives. But then "60 million Americans can't be wrong" - no that was `Frenchmen'.