Chapter 20: The Future of IPT

Question 1

What was argued in ‘The end of IR theory?’, a special issue of European Journal of International Relations published in 2013?
(Tim Dunne, Lene Hansen and Colin Wight)

Answer 1

The argument was that the great debates shaping the discipline of IR had subsided, with a shift towards narrower focus on hypothesis testing, lamenting the decline of grand theory-building.

Question 2

According to Justin Rosenberg (2016), why has IR struggled to develop novel ideas?

Answer 2

Rosenberg argues that IR emerged as an extension of Politics or Political Science and has remained trapped within a borrowed ontology, which he terms the “prison of Political Science.”

Question 3

What does Rosenberg (2016) propose as a solution to IR’s struggle in developing novel ideas?

Answer 3

Rosenberg suggests leaving Political Science behind and establishing IR as its own independent discipline to develop ideas that can speak to other social sciences and humanities.

Question 4

How does Olaf Corry characterize the debate about IR’s future as a discipline?

Answer 4

Corry characterizes the debate as consisting of four different sides: remaining a subdiscipline of Political Science (stay put), becoming interdisciplinary (reach out), dissolving into transdisciplinarity or abolishing IR altogether (burn down), and establishing IR as a discipline in its own right (break out).

Question 5

What problem has been growingly discussed alongside debates about IR’s status as a discipline?

Answer 5

The problem of Eurocentrism and parochialism in international political theory. (Acharya and Buzan, 2007, 2017) (Hobson, 2012)

Question 6

What are the core elements of global IR according to Acharya?

Answer 6

IR must become pluralistic, diverse and inclusive (Acharya, 2014)

Question 7

What is the goal of global IR?

Answer 7

The goal is not to dismantle mainstream theories like realism and liberalism but to challenge their parochialism and urge them to accept ideas, experiences, and insights from the non-Western world. (Acharya and Buzan, 2017)

Question 8

Who is IR made for?

Answer 8

IPT is produced by and for the West and assumes western history is human history

Question 9

According to John Hobson (2012), what is the problem with international theory?

Answer 9

International theory does not explain international politics objectively but instead celebrates and defends the West as the proactive subject and highest normative referent in world politics.

Question 10

What is the goal of postcolonial scholars regarding IR?

Answer 10

Postcolonial scholars seek to reveal the colonial histories and structures underlying IR and demand its decolonization instead of promoting pluralism and diversity.

Question 11

How do postcolonial approaches differ from global IR approaches in terms of diversity?

Answer 11

While global IR approaches aim to include non-Western perspectives in a Western canon to promote dialogue between supposed equals, postcolonial approaches aim to uncover the violence of international structures and demand decolonization instead of glossing over real divisions.

Question 12

Evaluate the current state of IR as a discipline

Answer 12

Overall, the current state of IR is characterized by a tension between traditional approaches and calls for reform and inclusivity.

While some scholars advocate for maintaining the status quo or advancing interdisciplinary approaches, others push for a more radical transformation of the discipline to address its Eurocentrism and colonial legacies.

Moving forward, the discipline must grapple with these challenges and strive to become more inclusive, diverse, and reflective of the complexities of global politics.

Question 13

Compare and contrast calls to globalise, decolonise, abolish and preserve international political theory.

Answer 13

Refer to individual flashcard for each of these looking at, focus, objective, method, advantages and limitations

Question 14

Global International Political Theory

Focus, Objective, Method, Advantages, Limitations

Answer 14

Focus: The focus of globalizing IR is to incorporate diverse perspectives from around the world into the mainstream discourse.

Objective: It aims to make IR more pluralistic, inclusive, and reflective of the experiences and insights of non-Western actors.

Method: This approach advocates for integrating non-Western theories, histories, and voices into existing frameworks without necessarily challenging the fundamental assumptions of the discipline.

Advantages: Globalizing IR allows for a broader range of perspectives to be considered, enriching the field with insights from different cultural, historical, and geopolitical contexts.

Limitations: It may risk tokenizing non-Western perspectives or reinforcing existing power imbalances if not accompanied by efforts to critically examine and challenge Western-centric narratives and methodologies.

Question 15

Decolonize International Political Theory

Focus, Objective, Method, Advantages, Limitations

Answer 15

Focus: Decolonizing IR aims to critically examine and challenge the colonial legacies and power dynamics embedded within the discipline.

Objective: It seeks to uncover and disrupt the ways in which IR naturalizes Western-centric narratives and marginalizes non-Western voices and experiences.

Method: This approach involves interrogating the colonial histories and structures underlying IR, challenging dominant discourses, and advocating for the inclusion of marginalized perspectives.

Advantages: Decolonizing IR can contribute to a more just and equitable understanding of global politics by centering the experiences and agency of historically marginalized communities.

Limitations: It may face resistance from entrenched power structures within the discipline and require significant changes to institutional practices and curriculum to be fully realized.

Question 16

Abolish International Political Theory

Focus, Objective, Method, Advantages, Limitations

Answer 16

Focus: The focus of abolishing IR is to question the relevance and legitimacy of the discipline itself, particularly in light of its historical complicity in perpetuating colonial and imperialist ideologies.

Objective: It seeks to dismantle existing structures and hierarchies within the discipline and imagine alternative ways of understanding and engaging with global politics.

Method: This approach may involve advocating for the dissolution of IR as a distinct academic field or calling for radical transformations in its epistemological foundations and institutional practices.

Advantages: Abolishing IR opens up space for imagining new ways of conceptualizing global politics that are not constrained by traditional disciplinary boundaries or Eurocentric frameworks.

Limitations: It may be seen as overly radical or impractical by some scholars, and the absence of a disciplinary framework could lead to fragmentation or loss of coherence in the study of global politics.

Question 17

Preserve International Political Theory

Focus, Objective, Method, Advantages, Limitations

Answer 17

Focus: The focus of preserving IR is to uphold and maintain the discipline’s foundational principles, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks.

Objective: It aims to safeguard the integrity and continuity of IR as a distinct academic field with its own traditions, debates, and areas of inquiry.

Method: This approach involves defending the relevance and importance of IR in understanding and analyzing global politics, while also acknowledging the need for evolution and adaptation in response to changing geopolitical realities.

Advantages: Preserving IR ensures continuity and coherence in the study of global politics, allowing scholars to build on existing theories and frameworks to address contemporary challenges.

Limitations: It may risk reinforcing existing power dynamics and excluding alternative perspectives if not accompanied by efforts to critically engage with the discipline’s Eurocentric biases and limitations.