Transcending Postcolonial Essentialism in Global Governance: A Global IR Alternative

Abstract

This paper explains how the geo-culturally motivated postcolonial views on global governance produce an essentially dichotomous notion of the non- Western agency defined in terms of “silence versus defiance”: habitually, the agency of the non-West is reduced to either “silence” (under hegemony) or “defiance” (under counter-hegemony) often postured in an opposition to the West. This phenomenon is embodied in the mainstream readings of global governance that reduce India’s agency to its spectacular gestures of defiance within the institutional structures of the New International Economic Order (NIEO), the G77, and BRICS. By contrast, this paper evokes an instance of a complex trajectory of “polymorphous non-Western agency,” i.e., the agency of a subnational political-epistemic community in the Indian region of Kerala that framed a highly influential basic needs approach to global governance in the 1960s-70s. This paper spells out how this still-relevant “basic needs approach” to global governance moves beyond the postcolonial geo-cultural essentialism and reveals a “West–non-West relational agency,” thereby bridging the cognitive gaps between the West and the non-West and serving as a prototype for expanding the horizons of the Global IR research programme.

Keywords

• Global IR
• global governance
• postcolonial
• decolonial
• Indian IR

References

1. Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2007). Why is there no non-Western international relations theory? An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 7(3), 287–312.
2. Adebajo, A. (2023). Post-colonial global governance. In T.G. Weiss and R. Wilkinson [Eds.], International Organization and Global Governance [pp. 216-229]. Routledge.
3. Antunes de Oliveira, F., & Kvangraven, I. H. (2023). Back to Dakar: Decolonizing international political economy through dependency theory. Review of International Political Economy, 30(5), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2023.2169322
4. Arndt, H. W. (1987). Economic development: The history of an idea. University of Chicago Press.
5. Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2004). Power in global governance. Cambridge University Press.
6. Barnett, M., & Zarakol, A. (2023). Global International Relations and the Essentialism Trap. International Theory, 15(3), 428–444. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1752971923000131
7. Bayly, M. J. (2023). Global at birth: a relational sociology of disciplinary knowledge in IR and the case of India. International Theory, 15(3), 462–479. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1752971923000180
8. Bilgin, P. (2008). Thinking Past ‘Western’IR?. Third World Quarterly, 29(1), 5-23.

9. Centre for Development Studies. (2021). Prof K N Raj – Timeline. Cds.edu. https://cds.edu/raj-timeline/
10. Chacko, P. (2015). The New Geo-Economics of a “Rising” India: State transformation and the recasting of foreign policy. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 45(2), 326–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/004723 36.2014.948902
11. Chacko, P. (2018). Foreign policy, ideas and state-building: India and the politics of international intervention. Journal of International Relations and Development, 21(2), 346–371. https://doi. org/10.1057/jird.2016.15
12. Chakravarty, A. (2024). The moral voice: KN Raj, an economist with sociological approach. The Tribune. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/features/the-moral-voice-kn-raj-an-economist withsociological- approach-620356/
13. Chatterji, R., & Saha, S. (2017). Para-diplomacy: Concept and the Context. India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs, 73(4), 375–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/0974928417731638
14. Chenery, H., Ahluwalia, M. S., Bell, C. L. G., Duloy, J. H., & Jolly, R. (1974). Redistribution with growth. Oxford University Press.
15. Clark, D.A. (2008). The Capability Approach: Its Development, Critiques and Recent Advances. In R. Ghosh, K.R. Gupta and P. Maiti (Eds.), Development Studies Volume 2 (pp. 105–127). Atlantic Books and Distributors.
16. Cornago, N. (2010). On the Normalization of Sub-State Diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 5(1-2), 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-05010102
17. Damodaran, K., & Ali, T. (1975). Memoir of an Indian Communist. New Left Review, 93, 38-39. https://doi.org/10.64590/5eq
18. Deciancio, M., & Quiliconi, C. (2020). Widening the “global conversation”: Highlighting the voices of IPE in the Global South. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, 9(2)https://doi. org/10.20991/allazimuth.726271
19. Devika, J. (2007). ‘A people united in development’: developmentalism in modern Malayalee identity (Version 1). The Institute of Development Studies and Partner Organisations. https://hdl.handle. net/20.500.12413/3111
20. Duzgun, E., (2024). Karl Polanyi against postcolonial theory: beyond Eurocentric anti-Eurocentrism. Dialectical Anthropology, 48, 501–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-024-09714-2
21. Ersoy, E. (2023). Epistemic hierarchies and asymmetrical dialogues in global IR: increasing the epistemic gravity of the periphery through thematic density. Third World Quarterly, 44(3), 513-531.
22. Eun, Y. (2022). Reflexive solidarity: Toward a broadening of what it means to be “scientific” in global IR knowledge. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, 11(1), 107-122. https://doi. org/10.20991/allazimuth.1024925
23. Eun, Y.S., Kristensen, P.M. and Shahi, D. (2025). How (not) to advance Global IR: a rejoinder. International Theory, 17(2), pp.268-286.
24. Getachew, A. (2019). Worldmaking After Empire: The rise and fall of self-determination. Princeton University Press.
25. Gupta, B. S. (1972). Communism in Indian politics. Columbia University Press.
26. Harriss, J. (1998). Development studies and the development of India: An awkward case? Oxford Development Studies, 26(3), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600819808424158
27. Haug, S., & Roychoudhury, S. (2023). Civilizational exceptionalism in international affairs: making sense of Indian and Turkish claims. International Affairs, 99(2), 531–549. https://doi.org/10.1093/ ia/iiac317
28. Hobson, J. M., & Sajed, A. (2017). Navigating beyond the Eurofetishist frontier of critical IR theory: Exploring the complex landscapes of non-Western agency. International Studies Review, 19(4), 547–572. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/vix013
29. Huju, K. (2024). How “decolonial Hindutva” marries nativist politics with left-wing vocabulary. Scroll.in. https://scroll.in/article/1065727/how-decolonial-hindutva-marries-nativist-politics-withleft- wing-vocabulary.
30. Hunter, T. (1972). Indian communism and the Kerala experience of coalition government, 1967–691. Journal of Commonwealth Political Studies, 10(1), 45–70. https://doi. org/10.1080/14662047208447157
31. Jolly, R. (2009). UN ideas that changed the world. Indiana University Press.
32. Kannan, K. P. (2011). K.N. Raj: Development with equity and democracy. Development and Change, 42(1), 366–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2011.01692.x
33. Kerala State Planning Board. (1968). Alternative Policies for the Fourth Five Year Plan. https://eparlib. sansad.in/handle/123456789/2501?view_type=search
34. Kuznetsov, A. S. (2014). Theory and practice of paradiplomacy: Subnational governments in international affairs. Routledge.
35. Mannathukkaren, N. (2021). Communism, subaltern studies and postcolonial theory: The Left in South India. Routledge India.
36. Mannathukkaren, N. (2021). The rise of the national-popular and its limits: communism and the cultural in Kerala. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 14(4), 494–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649373.2013.83 1160 Mathur, V. (2023). Reasons Why India Must Re-Evaluate South-South Cooperation Framework. ORF. https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/reasons-why-india-must-re-evaluate-south southcooperation- framework.
37. Mattumannil, S. H. (2024). The left approach to social diversity: How the Communist Party interacted with Kerala’s social landscape? Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331 1886.2023.2292840
38. Mena, F. P. (2020, May 8). The trap of diversity: What constitutes “non-Western IR theory”? E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2020/05/08/the-trap-of-diversity-what-constitutesnon- western-ir-theory
39. Menon, A. (2022). Debunking Hindutva appropriation of decolonial thought. Interfere: Journal for Critical Thought and Radical Politics, 3, 36–57.
40. Mudge, S. L. (2018). Leftism reinvented: Western parties from socialism to neoliberalism. Harvard-University Press.
41. Mukherjee, C., & Reddy, C. R. OBITUARY: N. Krishnaji (1935–2019), A. Vaidyanathan (1931–2020) and the Centre for Development Studies. Social Scientist, 48(7/8), pp. 101-108.
42. Muppidi, H. (2004). Colonial and postcolonial global governance. In M. Barnett & R. Duvall (Eds.), Power in Global Governance (pp. 273–293). Cambridge University Press.
43. Naseem, S. M. (2010). Kerala Model & Development. Dawn. https://www.dawn.com/news/843387/kerala-model-development.
44. Ndloyu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2020). Decolonization, development and knowledge in Africa: Turning over a new leaf. Routledge.
45. Nicholls, S. T. (2019). A Moment of Possibility: The Rise and Fall of the New International Economic Order. [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Adelaide]. Adelaide Digital Library. https://digital. library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/handle/2440/123094.
46. Oloruntoba, S. (2015). G77 + China and global governance of trade and development. Latin American Report, 31(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.25159/0256-6060/427
47. Oommen, T. (2018). Rethinking indian modernity from the margins: Architectural politics in Thiruvananthapuram in the 1970s. Architectural Theory Review, 22(3), 386–409. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13264826.2018.1516684
48. Prashad, V. (2007). The darker nations: a people’s history of the Third World. LeftWorld Books.
49. Phillips, A. (2016). Global IR meets global history: Sovereignty, modernity, and the international system’s expansion in the Indian Ocean region. International Studies Review, 18(1), 62-77.
50. Plagemann, J., & Destradi, S. (2015). Soft sovereignty, rising powers, and subnational foreign policymaking: The case of India. Globalizations, 12(5), 728–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.201 4.1001596
51. Prakash, B A. (2007). Fifty Years of Kerala’ Economy (1956-2006). Kerela Economy.com. https:// keralaeconomy.com/details.aspx?mid=004&sid=004a
52. Rosa, F. (2014). On not being able to read or speak Malayalam: Language and region in Kerala. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 15(2), 214–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649373.2014.911434
53. Saith, A. (2008). Joan Robinson and Indian planning: An awkward relationship. Development and Change, 39(6), 1115–1134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2008.00531.x
54. Seth, S. (2013). Postcolonial theory & international relations: A critical introduction. Routledge.
55. Shah, A. (2010). Putting the “Kerala Model” to rest: Lessons for a new era of development in India. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1680001
56. Shahi, D. (2020). Foregrounding the complexities of a dialogic approach to global international relations. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.20991/ allazimuth.725230
57. Shahi, D. (2023). Global IR Research Programme. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-031-39121-7
58. Shahi, D., & Ascione, G. (2016). Rethinking the absence of post-Western International Relations theory in India: ‘Advaitic monism’as an alternative epistemological resource. European Journal of International Relations, 22(2), 313-334.
59. Shani, G. (2008). Toward a post-Western IR: The Umma, Khalsa Panth, and critical international relations theory. International Studies Review, 10(4), 722-734.
60. Sinha, A. (2022a). India and global governance across international regimes and time. Contemporary South Asia, 30(2), 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09584935.2022.2059064
61. Sinha, A. (2022b). India in a changing global world: Understanding India’s changing statecraft and Delhi’s international relations. The Round Table, 111(3), 398–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/00358 533.2022.2087992
62. Sreekumar, A. (2022). Feminism and Gandhi: Imagining alternatives beyond Indian nuclearism. International Affairs, 98(4), 1189–1209. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiac122
63. Sreekumar, A. (2023). The pacifist and the hypophysical: A cosmological reading of Gandhi. European Journal of International Security, 8(4), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2023.18
64. Sreekumar, A. (2025). Communist literary internationalism and worldmaking in the twentieth century: Kerala and the Soviet Union. Journal of Historical Geography, 88, 108–117. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jhg.2025.05.002
65. St Clair, A. L. (2004). The role of ideas in the United Nations Development Programme 1. In M. Boas & D. McNeill (Eds.), Global Institutions and Development (pp. 178-192). Routledge.
66. Streeten, P. and Burki, S.J. (1978). Basic needs: some issues. World Development, 6(3), pp.411-421.
67. Streeten, P., Burki, S. J., Haq, M. U., Hicks, N., & Stewart, F. (1982). First things first. Meeting basic human needs in the developing countries. Oxford University Press.
68. Tribe, K. (2021). Constructing economic science: the invention of a discipline 1850-1950. Oxford University Press.
69. United Nations. (1972) Committee for Development Planning Report on the Eight Session, E/5126.
70. United Nations Economic and Social Council. https://docs.un.org/en/E/5126%28SUPP%29
71. United Nations. (1975a). Committee for Development Planning Report on the Eleventh Session, E/5671.
72. United Nations Economic and Social Council. https://docs.un.org/en/E/5671(SUPP)
73. United Nations. (1975b). Poverty, Unemployment and Development Policy: A Case Study of Selected Issues with Reference to Kerala. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/415172?v=pdf
74. United Nations. (1978). Employment, Growth and Basic Needs: A One-World Problem Report of the Director-General of the International Labour Office and Declaration of Principles and Programme of Action Adopted by the Conference. United Nations International Labour Organisation. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/82
75. Webster, D. (2011). Development advisors in a time of cold war and decolonization: the United Nations Technical Assistance Administration, 1950–59. Journal of Global History, 6(2), 249–272. https:// doi.org/10.1017/s1740022811000258
76. Weiss, T. G., & Wilkinson, R. (2018). From international organization to global governance. In T.G.
77. Weiss & R. Wilkinson (Eds.), International Organization and Global Governance (pp. 3-19). Routledge.
78. Zhang, C. (2023). Postcolonial nationalism and the global right. Geoforum, 144, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2023.103824
79. Zondi, S. (2015). THE G77@50 and the struggle for a decolonial future. Latin American Report, 31(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.25159/0256-6060/802