This book seeks to reposition international relations (IR) theory by providing insights into non-Western concepts and theories. By engaging with understandings of power, identity, the state and the individual from a range of states outside of the Western hemisphere, the contributors to this book introduce new methods for understanding aspects of IR in context considerate ways. Engagements with Western theories and cases highlight how we need to reposition traditional understandings to allow non-Western approaches to IR develop alongside and inform their Western counterparts. Moreover, the book reinforces the need to move beyond the traditionally used Western-centric lenses without removing them completely, instead it advocates a harmonisation between them to reduce generalisations across the local, state and regional levels.

Given that the world has moved well beyond the period of Western colonialism, and clearly into a durable period in which non-Western cultures have gained their political autonomy, it is long past time that non-Western voices had a higher profile in debates about international relations, not just as disciples of Western schools of thought, but as inventors of their own approaches. Western IR theory has had the advantage of being the first in the field, and has developed many valuable insights, but few would defend the position that it captures everything we need to know about world politics. In this book, Acharya and Buzan introduce non-Western IR traditions to a Western IR audience, and challenge the dominance of Western theory. An international team of experts reinforce existing criticisms that IR theory is Western-focused and therefore misrepresents and misunderstands much of world history by introducing the reader to non-Western traditions, literature and histories relevant to how IR is conceptualised. Including case studies on Chinese, Japanese, South Korean, Southeast Asian, Indian and Islamic IR this book redresses the imbalance and opens up a cross-cultural comparative perspective on how and why thinking about IR has developed in the way it has. As such, it will be invaluable reading for both Western and Asian audiences interested in international relations theory.

This book provides an alternative perspective of International Relations from Hiroshima to 9/11. Both its diplomacy and mainstream scholarship are linked by realpolitic, in a vicious circle of retrogressive symbiosis. It simultaneously undermined the UN system of collective security from its origin and the scientific credential of its scholarship. The Cold War that it spawned restricted economic propsperity, political stability and democratic freedom within its narrow core-area of the United States and Europe at the cost of its vast periphery in the Third World. Its unpredicted collapse extended insecurity across the entire globalised system, including its core area, as evnts since 9/11 forcefully underscores. While the new hegemonic system has become globally more insecure for all its citizens, its scholarship is still clueless about the collapse of teh bipolar system it created in the midst of the massive confidence-building exercise to stabilise it; it is even less able to creatively respond to its orderly transition.

This book addresses the problem of World Regional Studies and its components: regional complexes, regional subsystems and global regions. With an increasingly complex international system and the emergence of new actors, it is clear that the conceptual framing within the classical disciplines of IR, Political Theory, International Political Economy or Comparative Politics can no longer fully explain a number of processes originating from a tighter and intricate nexus between local, regional and global dimensions. World Regional Studies explains the emergence of new phenomena in international relations and world politics on a regional and predominantly non-Western regional level. How do non-Western societies react to the transformations of the global order? Is a non-Western democracy possible? Should we discuss the possibilities for the appearance of a non-Western IR theory or a new framework for analyzing de-westernized global development? This study, based on decade-long research and teaching post in World Regional Studies at MGIMO-University and Russian University of Humanitarian Studies (RGGU), seeks to answers these questions.

International Relations (IR), as a discipline, is a western dominated enterprise. This has led to calls to broaden the scope and vision of the discipline by embracing a wider range of histories, experiences, and theoretical perspectives – particularly those outside the Anglo-American core of the West. The ongoing ‘broadening IR projects’ – be they ‘non-Western IR’, ‘post-Western IR’, or ‘Global IR’ – are making contributions in this regard. However, some careful thinking is needed here in that these attempts could also lead to a national or regional ‘inwardness’ that works to reproduce the very parochialism that is being challenged. The main intellectual concerns of this edited volume are problematising Western parochialism in IR; giving theoretical and epistemological substance to pluralism in the field of IR based on both Western and non-Western thoughts and experiences; and working out ways to move the discipline of IR one step closer to a dialogic community. A key issue that cuts across all contributions in the volume is to go beyond both parochialism and fragmentation in international studies. In order to address the manifold and contested implications of pluralism in in the field of IR, the volume draws on the wealth of experience and research of prominent and emerging IR scholars whose contributions make up the work, with a mixture of theoretical analysis and case studies. This book will appeal to scholars and students interested in Global IR and promoting dialogue in a pluralist IR.

International Relations (IR) as a discipline is often deemed to be “too Western” centric. It has been argued that much of mainstream IR theory is “simply an abstraction of Western history.” In this respect, many IR scholars have called for “broadening” the theoretical horizon of IR while problematising the Western parochialism of the discipline, and it is increasingly acknowledged that IR needs to embrace a wider range of histories, experiences, and theoretical perspectives, particularly those outside of the West. However, despite such a meaningful debate over broadening the theoretical and practical horizons of IR, several critical questions remain unclear and under-explored. For example, does IR need to embrace pluralism? If so, how much? To what extent, and in what sense, is IR parochial? Should IR promote dialogue across theoretical and spatial divides? If so, how? Yong-Soo Eun addresses these questions. He undertakes a literature review and an empirical analysis of the extent to which the field has actually become diverse and pluralistic. This investigation considers diversity beyond the current limited focus on the geographical origins of theory. Yong-Soo also draws attention to the mechanisms and processes of knowledge production and transmission in IR. More importantly, he addresses what is probably the most acute issue associated with the “non-Western” IR theory-building enterprise; namely, fragmentation and dialogue. In conclusion, Yong-Soo notes that the role of unsettling the present hierarchical structure of the discipline falls to reflexive individual agents. He argues that in order for their agential power to be more fully harnessed in the opening up of IR, critical “self”-reflection and “collective” empathy and collaboration among marginalised scholars are all essential.

International Relations, as a discipline, tends to focus upon European and Western canons of modern social and political thought. Alternatively, this book explores the global imperial and colonial context within which knowledge of modernity has been developed. The chapters sketch out the historical depth and contemporary significance of non-Western thought on modernity, as well as the rich diversity of its individuals, groups, movements and traditions. The contributors theoretically and substantively engage with non-Western thought in ways that refuse to render it exotic to, superfluous to or derivative of the orthodox Western canon of social and political thought. Taken as a whole, the book provides deep insights into the contested nature of a global modernity shaped so fundamentally by Western colonialism and imperialism. Now, as ever, these insights are desperately needed for a discipline that is so closely implicated in Western foreign policy making and yet retains such a myopic horizon of inquiry. This work provides a significant contribution to the field and will be of great interest to all scholars of politics, political theory and international relations theory.

Despite attempts to redress the balance, international relations (IR) as a discipline is still dominated by Western theories. The contributors in this book explore the challenges of constructing an alternative, with a dialogue between global and local approaches. Drawing on scholars with backgrounds in the United States, Europe, Asia and South America, this volume attempts to critically engage with and reflect upon existing traditions of IR theory to produce a deeply pluralist approach. Traditions, cultures, histories and practices from around the world influence their respective theoretical understanding and in turn explain why the Western tradition of IR is insufficient. This book provides great insight for scholars of IR from around the world, looking for more diversity in IR theory.

This four-volume collection of seminal journal articles and book excerpts examines traditional approaches to international relations (IR) as well as critical, radical and non-Western theories of global politics. The set includes a detailed introduction by the editors and is designed to complement their successful set Theories of International Relations.

This edited volume explores the contours of Global International Relations (IR) in terms of teaching and research in Southeast Asia and China with the purpose of revealing existing and “hidden” pre- theories, conceptual frameworks, and theoretical contributions to Global IR rooted in local histories, contemporary experiences, and indigenous thought. The exploration is conducted within a context where scholars across regions are progressively taking strides to reshape IR, which has long gravitated towards Western experiences, thought, and knowledge, into a more inclusive discipline. Otherwise known as the Global IR project, these efforts aim not only to amplify marginalized voices and experiences but also introduce new conceptual and theoretical tools derived from a diverse range of experiences. While some of these insights provide new understandings, others offer useful implications that transcend national and regional boundaries, fostering crossregional discussions about the diverse realities within our world. An essential read for scholars and students of IR with an interest in Global IR, IR theory in general, and the development of IR in parts of Southeast Asia.