Global International Relations (Global IR)

Global IR has been proposed by Amitav Acharya as an alternative to the Western-dominated study of international politics and IR theory (Acharya, 2014). Importantly, Acharya prefers the term ‘Global IR’ over ‘non-Western’ or ‘post-Western’ IR, as he seeks to transcend “the distinction between West and non-West – or any similar binary and mutually exclusive categories.”

Acharya does not present Global IR as a theory, but rather as an aspiration for greater inclusiveness and diversity within the discipline. It is structured around six dimensions:

1. Pluralistic universalism: Acharya, along with many other decolonial scholars, rejects the ‘monistic’ notion of universalism, which assumes that IR theories are meant to “apply to all” – a vision deeply rooted in Western IR. The alternative to this problematic universalism is not relativism, but pluralism. Diversity of perspectives, often grounded in the variety of regional experiences, is welcomed. From this point of view, Global IR also advocates for modesty compared to certain overly ambitious mainstream theories (such as neorealism) that attempt to equate social sciences with natural sciences.

2. Grounded in world history: Global IR draws on the plurality of realities, experiences, and knowledge from across the globe, rather than adhering solely to a Western historical framework. In this regard, “[a] key challenge for Global IR is to develop concepts and approaches from non-Western contexts on their own terms and to apply them not only locally, but also to other contexts, including the larger global canvas.”

3. Subsuming rather than supplanting Western IR: Global IR does not reject Western-based theoretical paradigms, but seeks to complement and transform them by incorporating knowledge from diverse global contexts. For example, neoliberal institutionalism evolves when the worldwide variety of practices of international cooperation is taken into account.

4. Acknowledgement of regional diversity and agency: Regions, understood as dynamic and socially constructed spaces, are vital components and actors in international politics. They embody the diversity of the world and highlight the relevance of a pluralist paradigm.

5. No exceptionalism: Global IR rejects claims of regional elites that ascribe unique, homogeneous, or superior characteristics to their own region.

6. A broad conception of agency: Agency is not limited to the West or a few major powers. Global IR recognizes a multitude of actors worldwide, whose agency is based on both material and ideational resources, including acts of resistance and rejection.