Two modes of dialogue in IR : testing on Western versus non-Western engagement with IR theory

Abstract

Dialogue in International Relations (IR) is neither a unitary concept nor an undifferentiated process; the aim of this paper is to separate out two principal modes of dialogue, their attributes and differing efficacy in contributing to IR theory (IRT). The two mechanisms of 'competition' and 'learning' will be tested on selected cases of Western and non-Western applications of IRT to Asian international relations. By showing how 'competition' leads to sameness, I will explain current monolithic nature of IRT. The main argument I advance is that dialogue is particularly constructive when it operates in the responsive mode of 'learning', as contrasted with passive and reactive modes. This paper contributes to enhancing the application of dialogue as a method in IR. The applied analysis indicates that dialogue can be most fruitful via engagement with existing theory from Asian perspective. This finding could not be achieved when treating dialogue as a uniform practice