Re-imagining IR in India

Abstract The poor conceptualization of Indian IR can be explained by local factors such as its disciplinary location and pedagogical issues but its mainly because Western IRT has acquired a Gramscian hegemony over the epistemological foundations of the disciplinary core of Indian IRT -termed as 'traditional IR' in this article. It discusses the 'disciplinary gate-keeping practices' of Western IRT and the intellectual dependency of Indian IRT, which does not acknowledge India's own history and philosophical traditions (e.g. Kautilya) as a source of IRT. Scholarly endeavors inspired by feminism, critical theory, development studies, and postcolonialism -termed as 'new IR' -are yet to be owned by Indian IR. This article argues for creating alternative sites of knowledge construction and explains how Indian 'ways of knowing', for example, a 'nondualistic mode of thinking' in contrast to the modern 'self-other binary mode' of understanding realities can address the problematiques of contemporary IR. There is no Indian school of IR and any assessment of Indian scholars' contribution to IR theory depends upon what counts as 'IR theory'. The article starts with a critical overview of the state of the art of the IR discipline in India by analyzing disciplinary, pedagogical and discursive reasons to explain its poor conceptualization. This assessment is, however, predicated upon a very narrow disciplinary vision of IR, which for analytical purposes, is termed as traditional IR. The next section analyzes scholarly endeavors emanating from development studies, postcolonialism and feminism that lie outside the disciplinary core of (Indian) IR to reflect on issues being debated within the postpositivist domain of the 'mainstream' IR. To the extent these debates are yet to be owned by Indian IR and these intellectuals acknowledged as part of its scholarly community, it might be termed as new IR. Finally, the article argues for creating alternative sites of knowledge creation in IR by devising different set of tool

Provincialising International Relations through a reading of dharma

This article will attempt to ‘provincialise’ (Chakrabarty, 2000) the ‘secular cosmology’ of International Relations (IR) through an examination of the relational cosmology of dharma. We argue that IR is grounded in ‘secularised’ Judaeo-Christian assumptions concerning time, relations between self and other, order, and the sovereign state that set the epistemic limits of the discipline. These assumptions will be ‘provincialised’ through an engagement with dharma based on a reading of The Mahābharāta, one of the oldest recorded texts in the world. We argue that the concept of dharma offers a mode of understanding the multidimensionality of human existence without negating any of its varied, contradictory expressions. By deconstructing notions of self and other, dharma illustrates how all beings are related to one another in a moral, social, and cosmic order premised on human agency, which flows from ‘inside-out’ rather than ‘outside-in’ and that is governed by a heterogenous understanding of time. This order places limits on the state's exercise of power in a given territory by making the state responsible for creating social conditions that would enable all beings to realise their potential, thus qualifying the principle of state sovereignty that remains the foundation of the ‘secular cosmology of IR’

COVID-19, Democracies, and (De)Colonialities

Liberal democracies often include rights of participation, guarantees of protection, and policies that privilege model citizens within a bounded territory. Notwithstanding claims of universal equality for “humanity,” they achieve these goals by epistemically elevating certain traits of identity above “others,” sustaining colonial biases that continue to favor whoever is regarded more “human.” The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these fault lines, unveiling once more the often-hidden prevalence of inequalities that are based on race, gender, class, ethnicity, and other axes of power and their overlaps. Decolonial theories and practices analyze these othering tendencies and inequalities while also highlighting how sites of suffering sometimes become locations of solidarity and agency, which uncover often-erased alternatives and lessons.https://www.berghahnjournals.com/view/journals/democratic-theory/democratic-theory-overview.xmlhj2021Political Science

Differing about Difference: Relational IR from around the World

La diferencia, una preocupación central para el estudio de las relaciones internacionales (RI), no ha visto trastocados adecuadamente sus fundamentos ontológicos. Este foro explora cómo los supuestos existenciales arraigados en la lógica relacional proporcionan un conjunto de herramientas significativamente distinto que nos impulsa a reorientar la forma en que percibimos, interpretamos y abordamos tanto la similitud como la diferencia Partiendo de compromisos cosmológicos originados en los Andes, Asia Meridional, Asia Oriental y Oriente Medio, las seis contribuciones de los Andes, Asia Meridional, Asia Oriental y Oriente Medio, las seis contribuciones exploran cómo nuestros teóricos, investigadores y docentes. Esta conversación inicial señala el contenido clave y los focos del futuro trabajo relacional en las RRII.Difference, a central concern to the study of international relations (IR), has not had its ontological foundations adequately disrupted. This forum explores how existential assumptions rooted in relational logics provide a significantly distinct set of tools that drive us to re-orient how we perceive, interpret, and engage both similarity and difference. Taking their cues from cosmological commitments originating in the Andes, South Asia, East Asia, and the Middle East, the six contributions explore how our existential assumptions affect the ways in which we deal with difference as theorists, researchers, and teachers. This initial conversation pinpoints key content and foci of future relational work in IR