Amitav Acharya- 'Studying the Bandung Conference from a Global IR perspective' Flashcards
explain how contemporaries interpreted the significance of the Bandung Conference.
- its importance in shaping the post-war international order
- its impact on Global International Relations (IR) development.
- He argued that the conference challenged conventional accounts of international relations
- The conference highlighted the agency of newly independent states in shaping global norms and principles.
- the conference’s role in advancing decolonisation, human rights, and universalism, as well as its influence on the emergence of regionalism in Asia and the strengthening of global norms.
Sukarno’s speech at the conference described it as the “first intercontinental Conference of coloured peoples in the history of mankind.” He emphasised the significance of leaders from Asian and African nations meeting on their own turf to discuss and deliberate on matters of common concern. His speech highlighted the conference as a new departure in the history of the world, demonstrating the eagerness and maturity of the nations involved in shaping international relations.
Overall, contemporaries interpreted the Bandung Conference as a pivotal event that showcased the agency and unity of Asian and African nations in shaping global norms, challenging Western dominance, and advancing the principles of sovereignty, decolonization, and universalism.
How does Amitav Acharya view the achievements of ‘Bandung’ and its role in creating the post-war international order?
Acharya views the Bandung conference as a significant event crucial in shaping the post-war international order. He highlights several key achievements and legacies of the conference, which challenge conventional perceptions and attest to the agency of newly independent states in shaping the international order:
- Firstly, Acharya emphasises the conference’s role in frustrating Western efforts to sabotage it, demonstrating the agency and assertiveness of non-Western nations in the construction of the international order. The conference also influenced the position of newly independent countries in the Cold War by delegitimising US-sponsored collective defence pacts and laying the foundation for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which represented a significant shift in global power dynamics.
- The conference reshaped intra-Asian relations and laid the groundwork for the emergence of regionalism led by weaker states in Southeast Asia, ultimately contributing to the formation of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Additionally, the conference strengthened the emerging global normative framework by advancing decolonisation, affirming universal human rights, and supporting the United Nations (UN).
- Acharya also acknowledges the negative legacies of the conference, such as aggravating the polarization of Asia and encouraging authoritarian tendencies and regional interventionist impulses of key participants. However, he argues that the Bandung conference’s contributions to the international order, including its normative agency and impact on Cold War dynamics, have had a lasting and significant influence on the global political landscape.
- In summary, Amitav Acharya views the achievements of the Bandung conference as pivotal in challenging Western dominance, shaping Cold War dynamics, and contributing to constructing a more inclusive and diverse post-war international order.
Analyses - Despite the large diversity they should be united against collonisation/ imperialism have the same goal of independence
- Hydrogen bombs, ideologies communism/ capitalism
- Rhetorical questions, common and unity, repetition of fear shows the uncertainty of the time lack of a framework to deal with these problems
What would the study of ‘Bandung’ contribute to the study of International Relations?
- Relations between the west and the south but also relations within the south
The historical context of the Bandung Conference
- Bringing together states that had been colonised and encouraging them not to take a side of the Soviets or the West. It’s significant they organised it as it wasn’t in Europe. It was a rare appearance of China without the USSR. All countries that attended had different religions and different organisations of rule large diversity. It was the first meeting of coloured people without the West not being invited. New Deli they were observers here not Western observers. To promote economic political and cultural alliance and create a framework
- It wasn’t in Europe. South Africa, Rhodesia, Israel, north and South Korea not there
- Newly independent it was when the West and the USSR were trying to gain allies in 1955
- SEATO defense and economy 1954
- Why was the conference organised- to unite the countries that had been organised and keep their independence
Successes and failures of the Bandung conference
- No stable framwork between Africa and asia no permantant organisation that exists
- Still uprising and colonial wars that happen for example the milay communist party against Britain the war in kenya 1952 portugual had colony until 1975
Who was Sukarno and why was he so important for Bandung 1955
-Indonesia’s first president + was in Indonesia
–> was the host and instrumental to organising it + brought together the 29 leaders.
-one to declare Indonesia independent August 1945 –> him + Mohammad Hatta proclaimed republic of Indonesia
-eloquent, educated, proposed universal values
What historical contexts does Sukarno relate to in his speech?
-hydrogen bombs
-fear of ideologies - communism, capitalism
–> producing a fear for the west/ reinforcing it saying don’t need to be involved in that conflict we have our own things to worry about.
What does Acharya state are the legacies of the Bandung conference?
1) frustrating/ the frustrated west
2) diversity
3) regionalism
4) shaping new found independent countries
5) basis of ideological framework
What does ‘mainstream international relations scholarship’ mean?
–> focus upon mom-western agency
-Nagdung focuses on international and interregional relationships.
-not denying the western view - both equally applied and true but none is better or more relevant than another in creating history
How does global IR shift the focus of mainstream IR scholarship? Distinguish between several aspects that make up this approach.
-mostly Anglo-American - social science approach. Not many non-western actors
-IR should also be complemented with area studies - south east Asia, middle eastern etc, these are the expertise that international relations scholars lack.
GIR shifts the focus of mainstream IR scholarship by promoting inclusivity, historical and contextual sensitivity, interdisciplinarity, critical engagement, and practical relevance. It challenges the Western-centric dominance of traditional IR by incorporating diverse perspectives from different regions and cultures, acknowledging the significance of historical and cultural contexts, and integrating insights from various disciplines. Global IR also emphasizes the interplay between global processes and local realities, addresses issues of justice and inequality, and aims to make IR scholarship more relevant to real-world challenges. This approach seeks to create a more comprehensive and equitable understanding of international relations that reflects the complexity of the contemporary world.
