Decentring Western IR Theories Unveiling Efforts from the Arab World

Year 2026, Volume: 15 Issue: 1 , 139 - 160 , 29.01.2026

Lourdes Habash

https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.1700780

https://izlik.org/JA32AD83RS

Abstract

Since Stanley Hoffmann's assertion that the field of international relations (IR) is predominantly Western, several non-Western trends have emerged to challenge this dominance. This study aims to examine Arab efforts that challenge Eurocentrism, their success in doing so within the field of IR, and to draw connections with other transformative efforts, mainly Global IR and Post-Western IR. The analysis is carried out within the broader context of the "Homegrown" trend in IR that seeks to diversify and decolonize the field.

The argument within this article states that while the Arab efforts, represented by the Beirut School of Critical Security Studies, the School of International Relations of the Middle East (IRME), and the Islamic IR, are important steps. However, they have had limited impact and, in some cases, replicated the problems they seek to address. It also advocates for a more self-critical and contextual approach to decentralizing Western International Relations Theories (IRT), drawing lessons from the experiences and shortcomings of other non-Western initiatives. Moreover, a vision for enhancing the Arabic efforts to overcome Western hegemony, on the level of knowledge production as well as on the pedagogical and institutional levels, will be presented. An Arab exclusivity is not advocated in this article; instead, it emphasizes the need for a thorough examination of Arab initiatives, as part of the Global South, to improve their impact in achieving their goals

Keywords

Global IR , Post-Western IR Beirut School of Critical Security Studies , the School of International Relations of the Middle East , the Islamic Civilizational Paradigm , Eurocentrism.

References

• Abboud, S., Abi Yaghi, M., & Sune, H. (2018). Towards a Beirut School of Critical Security Studies. Critical Studies on Security, 6(3), 273–295.
• Abu Samra, A. (2016). Mafhoum alalameya fee alelaqat aldawleyah: Derasah fee etegahat naqdeyah muqaranah [The concept of universalism in international relations: A comparative study of critical theories]. In N. Mostafa (Ed.), Alelaqat adawleyah fee alam mutaghayer: Manthourat we madakhel muqaranah (pp. 1409–1508). Cairo: The Civilization Centre for Studies and Researches.
• Abu Samra, A. (2019). Manthoor hadari Islami fe kharetat jadeeda lehakl al alakat ad-awyleya [An Islamic civilizational perspective in a new map of the field of interna-tional relations]. The Journal of College of Economics and Political Science, 20(3), 115– 166.
• Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (Eds.). (2010). Non-Western international relations theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia. London: Routledge.
• Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2010). Conclusion: On the possibility of a non-Western IR theo-ry in Asia. In A. Acharya & B. Buzan (Eds.), Non-Western international relations the-ory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia (pp. 221–238). London: Routledge.
• Acharya, A. (2014). Global international relations (IR) and regional worlds: A new agenda for international studies. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 647–659.
• Adiong, N. M., Mauriello, R., & Zambanga, D. (2018). Analysing and theorizing Islam and IR: Non-Western international relations and geocultural epistemologies (1st ed.). London: Routledge.
• Adiong, N. M., Mauriello, R., & Zambanga, D. (Eds.). (2019). Islam in international re-lations: Politics and paradigms. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Anderl, F., & Witt, A. (2020). Problematising the global in Global IR. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 49(1), 37–58.
• Awad, H. (2021). Understanding Hamas. AlMuntaqa, 4(2), 42–62.
• Aydinli, E., & Biltekin, G. (2018). Introduction: Widening the world of international rela-tions. In E. Aydinli & G. Biltekin (Eds.), Widening the world of international relations: Homegrown theorizing (1st ed., pp. 1–12). London: Routledge.
• Aydinli, E., & Aydinli, J. (2024). Exposing linguistic imperialism: Why Global IR has to be multilingual. Review of International Studies, 1–22. (Online-first article; sayı ve cilt belirtilmemişse bu şekilde kalabilir.)
• Aydinli, E., & Mathews, J. (2008). Periphery theorising for a truly internationalized dis-cipline: Spinning IR theory out of Anatolia. Review of International Studies, 34(4), 693–712.
• Aydinli, E. (2024). Theory importation and the death of homegrown disciplinary potential: An autopsy of Turkish IR. Third World Quarterly, 45(3), 513–530. Ayoob, M. (2019). Subaltern realism meets the Arab world. In S. Akbarzadeh (Ed.), Routledge handbook of international relations in the Middle East (pp. 59–68). London: Routledge.
• Ayoob, M. (1998). Subaltern realism: International relations meets the Third World. In S. G. Neuman (Ed.), International relations theories and the Third World (pp. 31–49). New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Ayoob, M. (2002). Inequality and theorizing in international relations: The case for subal-tern realism. International Studies Review, 4(3), 27–48.
• Ayoob, M. (1983/1984). Security in the Third World: The worm about to turn? International Affairs, 60, 41–51.
• Bakir, A. (2024, September 4). Arab contributions to Islamic international relations: Why is there no breakthrough in theorizing? E-International Relations.
• Bakir, A. (2022). Islam and international relations (IR): Why is there no Islamic IR the-ory? Third World Quarterly, 44(1), 22–38.
• Barnett, M. (2002). Radical chic? Subaltern realism: A rejoinder. International Studies Review, 4(3), 49–62.
• Behr, H., & Shani, G. (2021). Rethinking emancipation in a critical IR: Normativity, cosmology, and pluriversal dialogue. Millennium, 49(2), 368–391.
• Bilgin, P. (2020). Opening up international relations, or: How I learned to stop worrying and love non-Western IR. In S. C. Roach (Ed.), Handbook of critical international re-lations (pp. 12–28). London: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Bull, H. (1972). The theory of international politics 1919–1969. In B. Porter (Ed.), The Aberystwyth papers: International politics 1919–1969 (pp. 30–55). London: Oxford University Press.
• Capan, Z., & Zarakol, A. (2018). Between East and West: Travelling theories, travelling imaginations. In A. Gofas, I. Hamati-Ataya, & N. Onuf (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of the history, philosophy and sociology of international relations(pp. 122–133). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
• Cox, R. (1981). Social forces, states and world orders: Beyond international relations theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 10(2).
• Dabashi, H. (2015). Can non-Europeans think? London: Zed Books.
• Darwich, M., & Kaarbo, J. (2019). IR in the Middle East: Foreign policy analysis in theo-retical approaches. International Relations, 34(2).
• Darwich, M., Hazbun, W., & Salloukh, B. (2021). The politics of teaching international relations in the Arab world: Reading Walt in Beirut, Wendt in Doha, and Abul-Fadl in Cairo. International Studies Perspectives, 22(4), 407–438.
• Escudé, C. (2014). Realism in the periphery. In J. Domínguez & A. Covarrubias (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Latin America in the world (pp. 45–57). New York: Routledge.
• Eun, Y. S. (2018). Opening up the debate over “non-Western” international rela-tions. Politics, 39(1), 1–14.
• Frihat, I. (2021, May 21). Hamas as an informal actor in the international system: Transformations and implications. Al Jazeera Center for Studies.
• Galal, A. M. (2020). External behavior of small states in light of theories of international relations. Review of Economics and Political Science, 5(1), 38–56.
• Hanafi, M. K. (2016). Qera’a nakdyah lewda’a al jameat al arabya fel tasneefat al alamyiah [A critical reading of the major Arab banks in international classifica-tions]. Criticism and Enlightenment Journal of Alexandria University, 4.
• Hazbun, W., & Valbjørn, M. (2018). The making of IR in the Middle East: Critical per-spectives on scholarship and teaching in the region. APSA-MENA Newsletter, (5), Fall.
• Hazbun, W. (2017). The politics of insecurity in the Arab world: A view from Beirut. PS: Political Science & Politics, 50(3), 656–659.
• Hobson, J. (2022). Un-veiling the racist foundations of modern realist and liberal IR theo-ry. In A. Layug & J. M. Hobson (Eds.), Globalizing international theory: The problem with Western IR theory and how to overcome it (pp. 54–71). London: Routledge.
• Hoffmann, S. (1977). An American social science: International relations. Daedalus, 106(3), 41–60.
• Holsti, K. J. (1996). The state, war, and the state of war. Cambridge: Cambridge Universi-ty Press.
• Hurrell, A. (2016). Beyond critique: How to study global IR? International Studies Review, 18(1), 149–151.
• Hussein, A. (2023). Estiqsa hakl el alakat adawlyah fel watan elarabi: Derasa felwaqe wa tahadeyat [Surveying the field of international relations in the Arab world: A study of reality and challenges]. Siyassat Arabia, 11(61), 31–52.
• Hutchings, K. (2011). Dialogue between whom? The role of the West/Non-West distinc-tion in promoting global dialogue in IR. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 39(3), 639–647.
• Jørgensen, K. E. (2017). Would 100 global workshops on theory building make a dif-ference? All Azimuth, 0(0), 1–16.
• Kerner, I. (2018). Beyond Eurocentrism: Trajectories towards a renewed political and so-cial theory. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 44(5), 550–570.
• Korany, B. (2022). Foreword. In N. Mostafa, A. Abu Samra, & M. Abderrazzaq (Eds.), Approaching the discipline of international relations: Competing paradigms and contrasting epistemes. London-Washington: International Institute of Islamic Thought.
• Kuru, D. (2018). Homegrown theorizing knowledge, scholars, theory. In E. Aydinli & G. Biltekin (Eds.), Widening the world of international relations: Homegrown the-orizing (pp. 59–79). London: Routledge. Layug, A. (2022). On the logic of non-Western theoretical argument. In A. Layug & J. M. Hobson (Eds.), Globalizing international theory: The problem with Western IR the-ory and how to overcome it (pp. 106–125). London: Routledge.
• Leigh, J., & Murray, C. (2022). Ethno-culturalism in world history: Race, identity and the global. In A. Layug & J. M. Hobson (Eds.), Globalizing international theory: The problem with Western IR theory and how to overcome it (pp. 139–164). London: Routledge.
• Ling, L. H. M., & Pinheiro, C. M. (2020). South–South talk. In K. Smith & A. Tickner (Eds.), International relations from the Global South: Worlds of difference (pp. 317– 340). London: Routledge.
• Matos-Ala, J. de. (2017). Making the invisible, visible: Challenging the knowledge struc-tures inherent in international relations theory in order to create knowledge plural cur-ricula. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 60(1), 1–18.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2016). Benign hegemony. International Studies Review, 18(1), 147–149.
• Mostafa, N. (1996). Alakat adwleya fel Islam [International relations in Islam]. Cairo: The Higher Institute for Islamic Intellectual.
• Mostafa, N. (2013). Alakat adwleya fel Islam: Al eshkalyat al manhajeyah wa khareetat al manahij al fekreyah wa manthomat al mafahim [The international relations in Is-lamic political thought: Methodological problems, a map of intellectual models, and a system of concepts]. Cairo: The Civilization Center for Political Studies.
• Mostafa, N. (2009). Alakat adwleya fel Islam: Nahow ta’seel men manthoor feqh hadari [International relations in Islam: Towards rooting from the perspective of civilizational jurisprudence]. The Modern Journal.
• Mostafa, N. (2023). Approaching the discipline of international relations (A. Abou Samra & M. Abderrazzaq, Eds.; A. Lake, Abrid.). Herndon: International Institute of Islamic Thought.
• Neuman, S. (1998). International relations theory and the Third World: An oxymoron. In S. Neuman (Ed.), International relations theory and the Third World (pp. 1–29). New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Qin, Y. (2020). A multiverse of knowledge cultures and IR theories. In Y. Qin (Ed.), Globalizing IR theory: Critical engagement (pp. 139–157). London: Routledge.
• Qin, Y. (2020). Introduction: The global turn in IR and non-Western IR theory. In Y. Qin (Ed.), Globalizing IR theory: Critical engagement (pp. 1–26). London: Routledge.
• Querejazu, A. (2022). Cosmopraxis: Relational methods for a pluriversal IR. Review of International Studies, 48(5), 875–890.
• Said, E. (1983). Traveling theory. In The world, the text, and the critic. Cambridge: Har-vard University Press.
• Salloukh, B. F. (2015). Overlapping contests and Middle East international relations: The return of the weak Arab state. In International Relations Theory and a Changing Middle East. POMEPS Studies.
• Salloukh, B. F., & Brynen, R. (2004). Preface. In Persistent permeability? Regionalism, localism, and globalization in the Middle East. London: Ashgate Publishing Lim-ited.
• Salloukh, B. F., & Darwich, M. (2023). Siasat tadris alealaqat alduwliat fi buldan alealam alearabii [Policies of teaching international relations in Arab countries].
• Santos, B. de S. (2016). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. New York: Routledge.
• Schenoni, L., & Escudé, C. (2016). Peripheral realism revisited. Brazilian Review of In-ternational Politics, 59(1).
• Shani, G., & Behera, N. (2022). Provincializing international relations through a reading of Dharma. Review of International Studies, 48(5), 837–856.
• Shani, G. (2022, April 1). An introduction to 'Post-Western' international relations the-ory. YouTube.
• Shani, G. (2021). IR as inter-cosmological relations? International Politics Review, 9(4), 306– 312.
• Shani, G. (2008). Towards a post-Western IR: The Umma, Khalsa Panth and critical in-ternational theory. International Studies Review, 10(4), 722–734.
• Sheikh, F. (2016). Islam and international relations: Exploring community and the limits of universalism (Vol. 1, Global Dialogues: Developing Non-Eurocentric IR and IPE). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Shih, C.-y., & Hwang, Y.-J. (2018). Re-worlding the ‘West’ in post-Western IR: The re-ception of Sun Zi’s The Art of War in the Anglosphere. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 18(3), 421–448.
• Shilliam, R. (2011). The perilous but unavoidable terrain of the non-West. In R. Shilliam (Ed.), International relations and non-Western thought: Imperialism, colonialism, and investigations of global modernity (pp. 12–26). London: Routledge.
• Sil, R., & Katzenstein, P. J. (2010). Beyond paradigms: Analytic eclecticism in the study of world politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
• Sil, R. (2000). The foundations of eclecticism: The epistemological status of agency, cul-ture, and structure in social theory. The Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12(3), 353–387.
• Smith, K., & Tickner, A. (2020). Introduction: International relations from the Global South. In K. Smith & A. Tickner (Eds.), International relations from the Global South: Worlds of difference (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.
• Telhami, S. (1999). Power, legitimacy, and peace-making in Arab coalitions: The new Ar-abism. In L. Binder (Ed.), Ethnic conflict and international politics in the Middle East (pp. 43–60). Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.
• Telhami, S. (1992). Power and leadership in international bargaining: The path to the Camp David Accords. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Thakur, V., & Smith, K. (2021). Introduction to the special issue: The multiple births of international relations. Review of International Studies, 47(5).
• Tickner, A. (2003). Seeing IR differently: Notes from the Third World. Millennium: Jour-nal of International Studies, 32(2), 295–324.
• Trownsell, T., Abboud, S., Barakat, S., & Hazbun, W. (2019). Recrafting international re-lations through relationality. E-International Relations.
• Turner, J. (2009, August 3). Islam as a theory of international relations? E-International Relations.
• Turton, H. (2016). International relations and American dominance: A diverse discipline. London: Routledge.
• Valensi, C. (2015). Non-state actors: A theoretical limitation in a changing Middle East. Military and Strategic Affairs, 7(1), 59–78.
• Vasilaki, R. (2012). Provincializing IR? Deadlocks and prospects in post-Western IR the-ory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 41(1), 3–22.
• Wæver, O. (1998). The sociology of a not so international discipline: American and Euro-pean developments in international relations. International Organization, 52(4), 687–727.
• Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of international politics. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
• Willis, J. (2021). Breaking the paradigm(s): A review of the three waves of international relations small state literature. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 5(1).