Non-Western IR

Question 1

Problems in international relations

Answer 1

• absent dialogue between West and global South
• parochialism (narrow view)/eurocentrism understandings pretending to be universal
• dominated by Euro-americans and only questions important to Euro-americans

Question 2

What is the ‘first mover advantage’ and the Gramscian hegemonic status?

Answer 2

-IR beginning in US = advantage
-training and education in US -> reproduction of Western IR
-hegemonic status unconsciously
(problem in IR)

Question 3

‘Area Studies’, ‘exceptionalism’, lack of IR theorizing

Answer 3

-everything outside the West = exceptional
-lack of IR theorizing is only an impression
(problems in IR)

Question 4

What is the solution to the absent dialogue in IR?

Answer 4

-bring in multiple and global origins of concepts (different types of texts and non-Western IR thinkers)
-bring in the thinking and ideas of political actors in the Global South
-consider multiple different historical contexts
(comparing and generalizing from the local -> the global, drawing more from Global History)

Question 5

What is the dependency theory?

Answer 5

• new theory
• (Cardoso, Amin)
• opposing the modernization theory (all societies progress through similar stages of development)
• dependence on West for ideas and concepts of IR
• necessary unique steps of the South to reach the modern status

Question 6

What is meant by ‘breaking out of the Westphalian narrative’?

Answer 6

1. -criticism of sovereignty assumption that it only spread from the West (it spread from connections with other parts of the globe)
2. -nationalism vs. internationalism/regionalism
   - “asian unity”, “asian values”, “the ASEAN way” emergence
   - not everything stemmed from the west

Question 7

What is a non-western perception of ideas?

Answer 7

• non-Western power = ideas (//material power)
• uneven and combined development of norms (depending on culture)
• normative exchanges and contributions by Global South:
  - >more consistent promotion of universal sovereignty and human rights
  - >human development > human security
  - > ideas of sovereignty as responsibility -> led to R2P

Question 8

What is ‘breaking with anarchophilia’?

Answer 8

• eurocentric assumption with universal ambition
• contrast: hierarchical traditions of Confucian Northeast Asia (Asian idea: your place in the hierarchy is just accepted)
  
  • > relative status (// relative power)
  • > bandwagoning (//sovereign equality/BoP)
• Islamicate Asia: assymetry in material power and order between empire
• result: rethinking of hegemony, balancing and hierarchy in Western IR

Question 9

Limitations to non-western IR:

Answer 9

• theorizing locally can restrain dialogue
  
  • > national IR schools, dangers of fragmenting discipline
  • > “theory is always for someone for some purpose” (cox)
  • > cannot be universal
  • > identify shared and common patterns of local and global right
• globalization: what/who is ‘western’ and ‘non-western’?
  
  • > problematic categories?
  • > boundary making
  • > shift and promoting global IR -> conscious on intertwined cultures

Question 10

Buzan: factors limiting non-western IR production

Answer 10

1. cultural: theories is a luxury that cannot be focused on presently
2. political: flourishes more in democracy? more closey linked to gov = less theoretical
3. institutional: absence of research culture and inadequate resources
   Has to catch up (big gap) - dependency theory