The transformation of the Eurocentric epistemological base of International Relations, without inadvertently generating a 'derivative discourse' of Western International Relations, requires an intellectual flight over rigid boundaries of Western scientism, thereby reorienting the discipline of International Relations itself towards a post-Western epoch. As such, post-Western International Relations theory can be largely viewed as an offspring of scholastic explorations aimed at breaking epistemological imperialism in International Relations. Not surprisingly, the non-Western 'rising powers' in global politics are taking particular interest in designing a post-Western International Relations theory. While the notion of 'Tianxia' has emerged as a Chinese conceptual response to the budding intellectual curiosity surrounding post-Western International Relations, the Indian scholarly scepticism towards formulating 'systemic' theories projects a hazy image of the status of post-Western International Relations theory in India.

No abstract

No abstract

One of the most commonly treaded pathways to address the widely recognized Eurocentric biases in International Relations has been the initiation of intellectual efforts toward the incorporation of non-Western world views. However, the greater assimilation of knowledge produced by non-Western scholars from local philosophical-experiential vantage points — that is, the integration of Chinese, Indian, or Brazilian outlooks expressed under the rubric “non-Western International Relations” — cannot make International Relations less Eurocentric or more “Global” if the following slippery grounds are overlooked: (1) if non-Western International Relations theories employ non-Western philosophical resources for generating a derivative discourse of Western/Eurocentric International Relations theories, thereby failing to transcend the conjectural boundaries of Western/Eurocentric International Relations; and (2) if non-Western International Relations theories manufacture an exceptionalist discourse that is specifically applicable to the narrow experiential realities of a native time–space zone, thereby failing to offer an alternative universalist explanation that grants a broad-spectrum relevance to Western/Eurocentric International Relations. In the light of these realizations, the present article aims to explore if “Sufism” — as a non-Western intellectual resource — is capable of offering a fertile ground for crafting a non-derivative and non-exceptionalist Global International Relations theory. In order to do this, the article employs the insights gained from the poetry of a 13th-century Sufi scholar, Jalāl ad-Dīn Muhammad Rūmī. The article draws the conclusion that Sufism, as an established philosophy with a grand temporal-spatial global spread, upholds a “threefold attribute” — namely, epistemological monism, ontological immaterialism, and methodological eclecticism — which gives it a unique foundational status to formulate a non-Eurocentric Global International Relations theory.

No abstract