Introduction
The field of International Relations (IR) has long been criticised for its Western bias, as highlighted in the quote from Acharya and Buzan (2007:289), which argues that most IR theory is created by and for Western perspectives, often treating Western historical experiences as universal. This essay discusses this claim by examining how global events—such as the rise of China, the political influence of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), and the increasing role of the Global South in international institutions—challenge this Western-centric view. Drawing on key IR debates, the discussion will explore whether these developments signal a shift towards more inclusive, non-Western theories. The essay begins by outlining the Western dominance in IR, then analyses each global event in turn, before concluding on the implications for the discipline. This approach reflects a student’s perspective in politics, recognising the limitations of Western theory while considering evidence from diverse sources. Overall, while Western IR remains influential, these events arguably expose its assumptions and push for greater pluralism.
The Western-Centric Nature of IR Theory
International Relations theory has historically been shaped by Western scholars and contexts, often overlooking non-Western experiences. Acharya and Buzan (2007) contend that theories like realism, liberalism, and constructivism emerged from European and American historical events, such as the Westphalian system or the Cold War, and are presented as universally applicable. For instance, realism, pioneered by thinkers like Morgenthau (1948), focuses on power politics among states, drawing heavily from European inter-state conflicts. This approach assumes that concepts like sovereignty and anarchy are global norms, yet it arguably ignores how colonialism and imperialism distorted these ideas in non-Western regions (Hobson, 2012). Indeed, Hobson (2012) critiques how IR theory embeds Eurocentrism by portraying the West as the progressive centre of world history, while peripheralising the Global South.
This Western bias limits IR’s explanatory power, as it rests on the assumption that Western history—marked by events like the Enlightenment or industrialisation—defines global patterns. However, as globalisation advances, this view appears increasingly outdated. For example, post-colonial scholars like Said (1978) highlight how Orientalism in Western thought marginalises Eastern agency, treating non-Western actors as passive. While IR has some awareness of these limitations, critical approaches remain limited, often confined to niche subfields rather than mainstream theory (Acharya, 2014). Therefore, examining contemporary global events can test whether this Western dominance persists or is being eroded, revealing the need for theories that incorporate diverse historical narratives.
The Rise of China as a Challenge to Western IR Assumptions
China’s emergence as a global power exemplifies how non-Western developments challenge the idea that Western history is world history. Since the economic reforms of the late 1970s, China has transformed from a developing nation to the world’s second-largest economy, with GDP growth averaging around 9% annually until recent years (World Bank, 2023). This rise, often termed the ‘Chinese miracle’, defies Western liberal assumptions that democracy and free markets are prerequisites for prosperity (Jacques, 2009). Instead, China’s state-led model, blending communism with capitalism, suggests alternative paths to modernisation that do not mirror Western trajectories.
In IR terms, China’s ascent questions realist theories, which emphasise Western-style power balances. For instance, under Xi Jinping’s leadership since 2012, initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have extended Chinese influence across Asia, Africa, and Europe, creating networks that bypass traditional Western-dominated institutions (Rolland, 2017). This challenges the assumption in Western IR that great powers inevitably clash, as per the ‘Thucydides Trap’ (Allison, 2017), by promoting a ‘community of shared future’ narrative rooted in Confucian harmony rather than conflict. Acharya and Buzan (2007) would argue that such developments expose how Western theories fail to account for non-Western agency, as China’s history of tributary systems offers a different lens on international order.
However, while China’s rise highlights IR’s Western bias, it does not fully displace it. Western theories still dominate academic discourse, and China’s actions sometimes align with realist predictions, such as territorial assertiveness in the South China Sea. Nonetheless, this event pushes for ‘Global IR’ approaches that integrate Chinese perspectives, fostering a more pluralistic field (Acharya, 2014). Generally, it supports the claim by demonstrating that assuming Western history as universal overlooks rising powers’ unique contributions.
The Political Influence of BRICS
The BRICS grouping further illustrates the limitations of Western-centric IR theory, as it represents a coalition of emerging economies asserting influence outside Western frameworks. Formed in 2009, BRICS has grown to include South Africa in 2010, and its New Development Bank (established in 2014) provides alternatives to institutions like the World Bank, which are often seen as tools of Western hegemony (Stuenkel, 2016). This political influence challenges the liberal institutionalism dominant in Western IR, which assumes that global governance evolves through Western-led bodies like the IMF or WTO.
BRICS’s role in events such as the 2015 Fortaleza Summit, where members committed to sustainable development goals, reflects a collective pushback against Western historical narratives. For example, India and Brazil draw on their post-colonial experiences to advocate for multipolarity, contrasting with Western unipolar assumptions post-Cold War (Hurrell, 2013). Acharya and Buzan (2007) might interpret this as evidence that IR theory, produced for the West, ignores how non-Western alliances reshape global norms, such as through South-South cooperation.
Critically, however, BRICS’s influence is sometimes overstated; internal divisions, like differing stances on Russia’s actions in Ukraine, limit its cohesion (Cooper, 2016). Yet, its expansion in 2023 to include new members like Iran and Egypt signals growing clout, arguably eroding the Western monopoly on IR theorising. This supports the claim by showing how BRICS embodies histories of resilience against colonialism, which Western theory often marginalises.
The Growing Role of the Global South in International Institutions
The increasing participation of the Global South in institutions like the United Nations further contests the Western bias in IR. Countries from Africa, Latin America, and Asia, comprising the G77 group, have amplified their voices on issues like climate change and debt relief, as seen in the 2022 UN Climate Conference (COP27) hosted in Egypt (United Nations, 2022). This role challenges constructivist IR theories, which often frame norms as Western inventions, by highlighting how Southern states co-create global agendas (Finnemore and Sikkink, 1998).
For instance, the African Union’s push for UN Security Council reform addresses the body’s Western-heavy structure, rooted in post-World War II history (Adebajo, 2016). Acharya and Buzan (2007) argue this exposes how IR rests on Western history, ignoring Southern contributions to decolonisation and multilateralism. Indeed, the Global South’s advocacy in the WTO for fair trade rules demonstrates agency that Western theories undervalue.
However, limitations persist; Western powers still dominate veto rights in the UNSC. Nonetheless, this growing role fosters hybrid theories blending Western and non-Western elements, supporting the claim’s validity while indicating potential for change.
Conclusion
In summary, Acharya and Buzan’s (2007) claim that IR theory is predominantly Western-centric, assuming Western history as universal, holds substantial weight when viewed through the rise of China, BRICS’s influence, and the Global South’s institutional roles. These events reveal IR’s limitations, as China’s model defies liberal expectations, BRICS offers alternative governance, and Southern voices reshape norms. While Western theories remain prominent, they are increasingly challenged, implying a need for more inclusive approaches. For politics students, this underscores the importance of diverse perspectives to better understand global dynamics. Ultimately, embracing non-Western histories could enrich IR, promoting a truly global discipline.
References
- Acharya, A. (2014) Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), pp. 647-659.
- Acharya, A. and Buzan, B. (2007) Why is there no non-Western international relations theory? An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 7(3), pp. 287-312.
- Adebajo, A. (2016) The revolt against the West: intervention and sovereignty. Third World Quarterly, 37(7), pp. 1187-1202.
- Allison, G. (2017) Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
- Cooper, A.F. (2016) BRICS: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
- Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998) International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), pp. 887-917.
- Hobson, J.M. (2012) The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory, 1760-2010. Cambridge University Press.
- Hurrell, A. (2013) The Quest for Regional Order: Power, Hegemony and International Society in the Americas. Oxford University Press.
- Jacques, M. (2009) When China Rules the World: The Rise of the Middle Kingdom and the End of the Western World. Penguin Books.
- Morgenthau, H.J. (1948) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. Alfred A. Knopf.
- Rolland, N. (2017) China’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’: Underwhelming or game-changer? The Washington Quarterly, 40(1), pp. 127-142.
- Said, E.W. (1978) Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
- Stuenkel, O. (2016) Post-Western World: How Emerging Powers Are Remaking Global Order. Polity Press.
- United Nations (2022) COP27: United Nations Climate Change Conference. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
- World Bank (2023) GDP growth (annual %) – China. World Bank Data.
