A significant book will be released at the end of next week this month (September 12) by the academic publisher Routledge, authored by researchers from the University of Delhi, India: Nirmal Jindal and Kamal Kumar, titled: Decolonising International Relations: Perspectives from the Global South
This book provides students and researchers with an understanding of international relations from diverse national perspectives in the Global South, focusing primarily on India. It critically analyzes theories and concepts of international relations, contributing to their understanding from a non-Western perspective. Given its emphasis on the necessity of decolonizing the field, it analyzes and discusses alternative viewpoints from the Global South.
International relations have developed as an academic field, primarily understood from a Western perspective. Western dominance in the teaching of this discipline persisted until the late 20th century, with the Global South adopting the content and curricula of this field without any critical scrutiny or review. Consequently, the epistemic exclusion of alternative discourses for understanding the field of international relations has not only constrained its scope but has also limited the teaching of non-Western perspectives, including those from the Global South. Thus, the modernist school has dominated the discipline of international relations since its inception, reinforcing European-centric universality.
The end of the Cold War saw the emergence of multiple schools, such as postmodern and postcolonial schools, which challenged the global claims of the modernist school. However, these schools have also varied in their objectives. For instance, the postcolonial school critiques colonialism and European centrality primarily in the political realm. It seeks to liberate indigenous identity from the universality of the modern school, which perpetuated coloniality even after formal decolonization in the countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Postcolonial advocates believe that coloniality continued even after decolonization and still affects independent societies.
The postcolonial school emphasizes the need to present an alternative global vision from the perspectives of indigenous populations in postcolonial societies, as each community has the right to define itself rather than perceiving itself through a Western lens. The postcolonial school also acknowledges the necessity for variance and diversity, while the Western modern school insists on homogeneity. According to Anibal Quijano, the fundamental aim of postcolonialism is “epistemic,” aiming to “end the coloniality of knowledge” to enable a new form of inter-cultural communication. Catherine E. Walsh and Walter Mignolo argue that decolonization should aim to confront the “epistemic political violence” of modernity. “Epistemic insurrection” can lead to a postmodern world devoid of coloniality.
In recent years, researchers from the Global South have sought a comprehensive framework for decolonizing the field of international relations, aiming to redefine its theoretical frameworks and broaden its scope by making it hybrid and inclusive of diverse perceptions from the Global South.
In a globalized world, international relations transcend from “international relations” to “global international relations,” demonstrating a shift from exclusionary Western theorization to more inclusive and diverse international relations based on global pluralism and world history.
This book is a step towards ending the coloniality of this discipline by exploring the worldview from the Global South that challenges the homogeneity emanating from the Western power and knowledge system. The book illustrates that the generalization of Western knowledge has created epistemic violence and emphasizes the need to legitimize alternative worldviews from marginalized states in the Global South. The attempt to decolonize international relations aims to liberate the discipline from Western homogeneity since it primarily relies on Western historiography and interests.
Western-centric nations have historically utilized racial centrality and ethnic awareness as tools of colonialism and have constructed the concept of the “other.” The narratives and labels used about the Global South are derogatory and entirely ignore the history, knowledge, and cultural aspects of these countries. Terms such as “third world,” “developing,” “conflict-ridden,” “chaotic,” “poor,” “traditional,” “unscientific,” and “irrational” are used for the Global South, completely masking the colonial past. In contrast, the Western world is depicted as “scientific,” “developed,” and “rational,” creating a hierarchical and asymmetric international system.
The absence of any theory about colonialism clearly points to Western dominance over power and knowledge. Postcolonial and decolonial thinkers argue that imperialism and racism are ingrained in the essence of international relations. In a colonial context, Western colonial powers utilize narratives such as the “white man’s burden,” the mission of civilization, development, democracy, and modernization, among others, to justify their policies and agendas regarding the Global South. The generalization of Western knowledge, regardless of the diverse history, culture, and needs of the Global South, has contributed to the failure of these countries’ development. Incomplete knowledge of international relations, based solely on an individual and exclusionary perspective of a small group of Western scholars, has persisted without any resistance from the Global South, despite its negative implications for these nations.
The colonization of knowledge has led to the continuation of colonialism, both in terms of knowledge and culture, in politically independent nations of the Global South, where the Western world is still considered superior. Due to colonial consciousness, colonized peoples remain disconnected from their cultural experiences.
People are entirely unaware of their civilization and heritage due to the deliberate denial of history. Despite opposing colonialism to undermine Western hegemony, the alienation of peoples from their culture and civilization has been equally responsible for the continuation of colonialism in the post-colonial period. One reason colonialism persists is that the elites in Global South countries have not attempted to address their challenges through local systems of knowledge; those elites themselves have been internally colonized and victims of the complex of Western superiority and modernity. They have perceived the Western model of development as the solution to their problems. Furthermore, most newly independent countries relied on Western financial/economic support for their survival. The Cold War further enforced the political and economic independence of these nations.
The Western perception of international relations is based on their unique historical experiences and requirements, revolving around power, state security, and the balance of power, among other aspects. The methodology of international relations has centered on the conflict between major powers.
After the end of the Cold War, the world system became unipolar, as the United States attempted to subjugate the entire world to its influence. In a multipolar world, various powerful states compete for power and influence. The discipline of international relations revolved around the struggle for power, contextualized within the history of the United States and Western Europe.
Consequently, international relations students in the universities of the Global South often feel less interested in this discipline since the discourse revolves around security and power issues in the United States and European states, focusing on the history of wars and relations between European nations and the great powers of the world. The discipline has entirely ignored the security interests of the Global South.
It highlights the relationship between knowledge and power; this has prevented scholars from the Global South from thinking differently to address their local challenges. Furthermore, their interpretations or analyses of any issues receive little attention in the Western academic world. As a result, the elites and youth in the non-Western Global South have worked under the influence of Western theories and have sought to interpret most problems within the framework presented by Western thinkers.
The book also discusses some myths, such as the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648, which was a landmark in the history of international relations as it provided the concept of sovereignty and the modern state system. International relations were confined to a small geographical area of Europe, while the rest of the Global South remained colonies, denied the right to statehood and sovereignty, with the populations referred to as subjects of these colonies.
Thus, the right to sovereignty and security remained confined to Western states; this right did not extend to the rest of the non-Western world, which suffered from colonialism and imperialism for a long duration. The absence of a theory of colonialism in the field of international relations indicates that Westerners sought to separate this history from the barbaric nature of Western societies and their influence on the Global South, in order to present the image of Western societies as democratic and peaceful.
Colonialism is often interpreted as economic exploitation and political hegemony, while imperialists aim to dismantle the religious and cultural fabric of their colonies. Most colonies have been portrayed as uncivilized and barbaric. The myth of the white man’s burden and the contributions of Western colonial masters, such as railways and education, among others, have been welcomed in the Global South. Critical theorists and postcolonial thinkers stress the importance of raising awareness among the peoples of postcolonial societies about the continued Western colonialism in the guise of modernity, in terms of culture, religion, political systems, and economic development. Furthermore, postcolonial thinkers go a step further by emphasizing the necessity of decolonizing knowledge by reconstructing it from diverse perspectives.
Researchers from the Global South strive for epistemic freedom by exploring concepts of nation, development, state, and security from their original knowledge and wisdom. Scholars from Africa and Latin America have initiated the process of decolonizing knowledge through a cognitive reconstruction of the historical experiences and cultural diversity of various nations. Edward Said argued that human existence is plural, and that pluralism is distributed across multiple interactive communities.
International relations are not solely about interactions among multiple political units; they also pertain to social, economic, and cultural spaces. They represent relationships among communities where societies interact, coexist, and evolve with external influences. Thus, nations are not individual political units but communities.
The book explains the Indian worldview and its perspective on state, security, and development, which fundamentally differs from the Western perspective, making it more valuable for small and medium-sized nations. For example, the Indian worldview rejects the democratically international system based on the philosophy of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam and principles of peaceful coexistence and unity in diversity, clearly rejecting the binaries in the international system.
The dominant theories in international relations have focused on power struggles, creating binaries or divisions between center and periphery, West and non-West, and developed and developing. The pluralistic and civilizational values of Global South nations stand in stark contrast to the Western concept of the state and homogeneity.
This book also presents India’s vision of the world, its authentic perspective on international relations, based on its history, knowledge, and traditional wisdom. In this context, it critically analyzes colonial history and its impact on these nations from an indigenous perspective. The book maintains a balance by discussing the dominant theories of international relations alongside alternative perspectives on numerous concepts and issues within this field. It aids in understanding alternative perceptions of international relations without diminishing the understanding of prevailing theories and concepts.
The book, at its outset, presents authentic knowledge of international relations through non-Western intellectual contributions and academic studies. This volume provides a detailed description and analysis of the theories and concepts of international relations. Given its focus on understanding the need to liberate this discipline from coloniality by offering an alternative understanding of international relations from the Global South generally, and the Indian perspective specifically, it will represent a significant contribution to enriching this discipline and a step towards making the world more humane and just.
About the Book
This volume explains the main approaches and concepts in international relations, such as state, markets, inequality, power, sovereignty, conflict, security, development, and migration, among other concepts from non-Western (Global South) perspectives, which entirely differ from or contrast with Western views, as they are based on their own historical experiences and traditional knowledge and wisdom. The book is divided into four parts. The first part discusses the emergence of international relations and how it has been challenged in the contemporary world, along with the main theories ranging from realism, Kautilyan realism, liberalism, and constructivism. The first chapter debates the myths of the emergence of international relations with the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 and the establishment of the first chair at the University of Wales in 1919. Colonial accounts in international relations are referenced through proponents such as Anibal Quijano, Enrique Dussel, and Walter Mignolo, figures at the forefront of theological thought in Latin America. The discourse on decolonizing international relations is portrayed as a structure that will confront and replace the colonial specialized structure by consolidating standards, traditions, academic practices, and institutions. These intellectual pursuits aim, ultimately, to mitigate the effects of the colonial legacies in international relations, allowing for the reimagination of this discipline as a unified whole. This chapter emphasizes the importance of colonial accounts in international relations from the perspective of the Global South. The first part also discusses the dominant theories in international relations. The attempt to separate “realism and neorealism” provides a fundamental understanding of realism in the theory of international relations and the crisis it faces in the contemporary international system. The chapter traces its historical development and explains its defining characteristics, some of the key theories within the realist model, and the ongoing discussions around them. The chapter discusses prominent ideas from thinkers such as Thucydides, Kautilya, Machiavelli, Hobbes, E.H. Carr, Hans J. Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, and John J. Mearsheimer. Realist thinkers have narrowly focused on understanding the relationships between great powers, deeming developing nations unimportant for analysis. Consequently, realism has been criticized as a theory that concentrates on the status quo and fails to comprehend the dimensions of change in global politics. Nevertheless, as a dominant theory in international relations, it reflects how the relationship between power and knowledge operates in international relations, where powerful states control knowledge production and distribution in varied ways, thus maintaining their interests and priorities in international relations.
The chapter “The Realist Politics of Kautilya: Reflections from the Global South” presents an alternative perspective on international relations. Kautilya wrote his “Arthashastra” centuries before Machiavelli, yet he is absent from dominant theories. He was the first realist thinker whose ideas were crucial in the development of theories of governance, diplomacy, strategy, and power. Special attention is given to explaining how Kautilya’s realism differs from Western realism and its significance in contemporary international relations, especially for small and medium-sized countries in the Global South. The chapter “Revisiting Liberalism and Neoliberalism: Postcolonial Insights and Challenges” tracks the historical development of various schools of liberalism in international relations, focusing on its key events, influential thinkers, foundational concepts, guiding principles, and challenges it faces. Liberalism has become an alternative theory to the realist approach in international relations due to its capacity to reshape the world. However, this theory must be dismantled to make it more inclusive and hybrid, thus more relevant to this field, contributing to global peace and security.
The chapter “Marxist and New Marxist Approaches” aims to explain Marxist and new Marxist theories and critical approaches that emerged in reaction to traditional methodologies of international relations to provide an alternative perspective on understanding the international system. Marxist and new Marxist theories offer valuable insights for understanding the situation in developing countries and aim to instigate change in contemporary society. New Marxist theories also explain why resistance, protest, and revolution, as put forth by Marx, have not emerged in exploitative and divisive systems and why a revolution has not occurred in highly industrialized Western countries. In this context, the shifting role of the state is discussed through a critical analysis of the perspectives of various critical theorists. The chapter “The Feminist Perspective in International Relations” seeks to place the concept of feminism within the field of international relations. The contextual understanding of feminism relates to conceptualizing power and diplomacy and strength. This chapter highlights the different strands usually mentioned to reflect the bias and rationality of its significance and continuity, if not as a dominant ideology, then as a perspective defining new boundaries and the evolving scope of international relations. The chapter on “Constructivism” offers an alternative understanding of the nature of international relations, challenging the materialism of dominant theories. Constructivism focuses on the social construction of state identities, interests, and roles in international relations, basing its approaches on social theory to interpret how ideas shape international relations.
The second part addresses international relations institutions, their structure, and processes. The chapter “The State, Nation, and Market” discusses that the concepts of nation and market can only be realized concurrently. This chapter presents a postcolonial perspective on this issue by emphasizing the meanings of political economic sovereignty and social and economic liberation for postcolonial societies. The anti-colonial interpretation portrays the state as responsible in the international arena for achieving justice. The chapter “Empire and the International Order: A Postcolonial Perspective” seeks to provide insights into the essence of the dynamic international system, where states struggle for status and recognition, not through conquests and external influence but by exercising sovereign rights to induce change from within through a civilizational political lens. Theoretically, this chapter dedicates its efforts to understanding the nuances of these policies from a postcolonial perspective. The postcolonial perspective aims to describe the positive actions required to ensure their sustainability and long-term impact. The chapter “Decolonizing the Concept of Power: Perspectives from the Global South” redefines international power politics through a decolonizing framework that incorporates the epistemic knowledge from the Global South. The chapter “Practicing Buddhist Diplomacy and Soft Power in International Relations: Reflections from the Global South” examines the interplay between soft power discourse and Buddhism, focusing primarily on India, and offers an epistemic alternative for understanding diplomacy from the Global South. By positioning Buddhism as a key mechanism of soft power, this chapter aims to decolonize Western knowledge about diplomacy and soft power. Buddhism is frequently used as soft power to foster relationships, particularly among nations in the South and Southeast Asia. This chapter argues that Buddhism as soft power in Indian diplomacy contrasts with Western employability, especially for nations like the United States that seek dominance models based on neoliberalism. This chapter aims to decolonize diplomacy and soft power by acknowledging the contributions of Buddhism from the Global South and recognizing them.
This book significantly contributes to the existing literature on decolonizing international relations and international politics from the perspective of the Global South. The chapter titled “Knowledge of Our Virtual and Creative World: The Visual Turn in International Relations” presents coherent arguments about how non-Western thinking in international relations influences by revealing the silent narratives through virtual knowledge repositories such as museums, cinemas, and other creative platforms from postcolonial societies. This chapter seeks to address international relations from a creative perspective, emphasizing the importance of this approach in a vibrant virtual world, where concepts like cyber warfare, cybersecurity, and cyber power have developed as conceptual fields influencing international relations.
The third part discusses key international issues such as war and international security, political and economic disparities, human rights, and migration from the perspective of the Global South. The chapter “War, Conflicts, and International Security” offers an alternative perspective on these issues. The chapter defines the concept of war and examines traditional methodologies of international relations regarding war among states, explaining conflicts both between and within states in the Global South. It emphasizes the need to decolonize the understanding and concept of war, conflicts, and security to address injustices and hierarchies, thereby contributing to positive peace and security. The chapter “Political and Economic Inequality” critiques the dominant concept of sovereign equality. It analyzes the idea of order and justice to comprehend disciplinary and structural inequalities. The chapter questions the Eurocentric foundations of knowledge production and how they exacerbate structural inequalities. Various theoretical aspects are explained, presenting dependency perspectives as a challenge to modernization theories, situating the issue of inequality within the discussion. It offers views from the Global South and interacts with anti-colonial perspectives to understand international inequalities. The chapter “Human Rights” provides a new analysis of the concept in an effort to break Eurocentrism and presents non-Western perspectives from the Global South. Redefining human rights as a cross-cultural concept is crucial for ensuring its global significance while simultaneously achieving local legitimacy. Integrating indigenous non-Western perspectives and Global South insights with European interpretations of human rights is essential for generating comprehensive knowledge. Thus, this chapter does not aim to reject Western knowledge of human rights but seeks to offer a mixed understanding of this concept. The chapter “Understanding Migration” aims to comprehend migration, including asylum seekers and refugees, within the framework of colonialism, decolonization, and neocolonialism. It explores the history of migrations caused by European hegemony, including the expansion of European globalization and the migration of Europeans to new lands. The chapter challenges the prevailing concepts and methodologies of migration, discussing new and more ethical ways to address the issue across national borders.
The fourth part discusses future trajectories for international relations from a decolonial perspective. The chapter titled “Exploring Future Trajectories of International Relations: Decolonizing the Imperial Narrative” analyzes the dimensions of the project of dismantling international relations, emphasizing that the dynamics of the contemporary global system and perceptions of international relations coalesce around inclusiveness, diversity, equity, sustainability, and joint progress. To enhance the efficacy of reformed and reconstructed international relations studies, the analysis embodies the synergy of the diaspora and the aspirations and contributions of all segments of the world’s population in real time and space, irrespective of geographical dimensions. The final chapter, titled “India’s Contribution to International Relations: Perspectives on Future Pathways,” discusses the Indian perspective on international relations and its significance for its future trajectory. It aims to unveil the civilizational values of India that have profoundly contributed to the global community. The chapter explains how India’s resurgence can shape global perspectives and provide a new direction for the international system.
Each chapter aims to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of the diverse theoretical approaches regarding the topics discussed in the book, particularly from the perspective of the Global South. The book raises critical questions and presents diverse viewpoints, promoting critical thinking on the issues addressed and fostering an inclusive and comprehensive understanding of international relations.
This book will be a valuable addition for students and researchers to gain a deeper understanding of international relations from the perspective of the Global South, with a particular focus on India. It also offers new insights for researchers engaged in exploring paths to develop this discipline to make it more “inclusive,” “global,” and contributory to global peace and security.
