│By Aiman Urooj, Gale Ambassador at the University of Delhi│
International Relations (IR) has long been dominated by Western-centric theories, primarily shaped by European and American intellectual traditions. These frameworks—Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism prioritise state sovereignty, individualism, and economic liberalism. This Eurocentric lens limits IR’s ability to fully explain global politics, reinforcing a Westphalian state system that does not reflect realities outside the West.
Non-Western epistemology challenges the universal applicability of mainstream IR theories by offering alternate frameworks for understanding contemporary IR. This blog explores these alternate perspectives, with concepts like Ubuntu’s relational ethics in Africa, Tianxia’s hierarchical harmony in China, Islamic justice, and Russia’s civilizational sovereignty.
By exploring archival sources from Chatham House Online Archive scholars can uncover evidence that highlights the contributions of non-Western societies to global diplomacy.
What is Knowledge Production, and Why Does It Matter?
In simple terms, knowledge production refers to how knowledge is created, validated, and disseminated. In IR, Western institutions, universities, and think tanks have long dictated what counts as legitimate knowledge. This has led to the relegation of alternate worldviews.
For example, concepts like Ubuntu (a Southern African philosophy emphasising community and interdependence) or the Mandala system (an ancient Southeast Asian diplomatic structure based on hierarchical but fluid power relations) offer different lenses through which global relations can be understood. However, these ideas have historically been neglected in mainstream IR.
Non-Western Alternates in IR through Indigenous Epistemologies
Ubuntu and African Communitarianism
“I am because we are.” – Ubuntu philosophy
Ubuntu, an African philosophy emphasising communal well-being and ethical interdependence, offers a relational alternate to Western individualism. It contrasts with power-driven, state-centric sovereignty by prioritising social harmony, reconciliation, and collective security. This philosophy has shaped Pan-African diplomacy, influencing institutions like the African Union (AU) and regional peace initiatives.
Chatham House Online Archive contains critical discussions on peacebuilding in Africa, such as Curran and Woodhouse’s analysis of peacekeeping in Sierra Leone (2007). Their research aligns with Ubuntu’s principles, demonstrating how African diplomacy prioritises restorative justice and consensus-building over coercion.
China’s Tianxia and the Harmonious World Model
Tianxia, meaning “All Under Heaven,” is an ancient Chinese worldview that envisions a harmonious global order based on moral authority rather than military dominance. Unlike the Westphalian model, which assumes international anarchy, Tianxia promotes hierarchy and interdependence as the basis for stability.
Today, Tianxia’s influence is evident in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which fosters economic connectivity over military alliances. Lo’s (2008) analysis discusses how China employs this philosophy to expand its global influence through economic partnerships rather than traditional power politics. China’s evolving strategies, particularly in relation to its concept of a “Harmonious Society”, underpin its domestic and international policy promoting economic stability, social cohesion, and diplomatic engagement.
Islamic Internationalism and the Ummah-Centric Approach
Islamic internationalism, rooted in the concept of Ummah (global Muslim community), challenges Western IR’s state-centric and secular-materialist assumptions. Thinkers like Ibn Khaldun and Al-Farabi emphasise justice, moral responsibility, and collective welfare as central to governance.
One example is Iran’s “Neither East nor West” foreign policy, which rejects Western and Soviet power blocs in favour of strategic autonomy based on Islamic principles. The book Islam in Foreign Policy: Some Methodological Issues in the Chatham House Online Archive highlights how Islamic governance traditions prioritise ethical diplomacy over realpolitik, offering a moral alternate to mainstream IR theories.
Russia’s Multipolarity and Civilisational Sovereignty
Russia’s Eurasianist ideology challenges Western unipolarity, emphasising civilisational sovereignty over liberal democratic universalism. Thinkers like Alexander Dugin argue that Russia should lead a multipolar world, fostering strategic alliances with China, India, and Middle Eastern nations to counterbalance Western influence.
Russia’s foreign policy demonstrates how civilisational identity shapes geopolitical alignments, rather than merely following Western-defined modernisation pathways.
Türkiye’s Strategic Autonomy and Neo-Ottoman Diplomacy
Similarly, Philip Robins’ Turkey and the Middle East examines Türkiye’s evolving foreign policy, highlighting its pursuit of strategic autonomy balancing between the West and the broader Muslim world. Ahmet Davutoğlu’s Strategic Depth doctrine envisions Türkiye as a bridge between civilisations, leveraging its Ottoman heritage to strengthen regional ties. This neo-Ottomanist approach reasserts Türkiye’s influence in the Middle East through diplomacy, economic partnerships, and military engagements.
Conclusion: Towards a Pluralistic IR
To truly decentre Eurocentrism, IR must embrace non-Western epistemologies that reflect the diverse ways societies conceptualise power, governance, and diplomacy. By exploring journals, historical newspapers, and archival documents available in Gale’s collections, researchers can uncover alternate perspectives on sovereignty and governance.
If you enjoyed reading about International Relations through a Non-Western Lens, check out these posts:
- Redefining What Philosophy Means: Why Primary Sources Are Now More Important Than Ever
- A Window Into Decolonization: Perspectives From Formerly Colonised and Commonwealth Regions
- Uncovering the History of Twentieth-Century Hong Kong, China, and the World
Cover image: Various documents from Chatham House Online Archive
