G-COE Initiative 1 International Seminar
Politics of ‘Non-Western’ International Relations from Asian Perspective
Date: 29 November 2010, 13:00-16:00
Venue: Small-size Seminar Room II (Room 331), Inamori Foundation Building 3rd floor, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University
13:00 Opening
13:00-13:15 International Relations as a Academic Hegemony for Asian Studies
Shiro Sato (Researcher, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University)
13:15-13:45 The Post-Western Turn in International Theory and the English School
Josuke Ikeda (Post-doctoral Fellow, Kinugasa Research Organization, Ritsumeikan University)
13:45-14:15 Dangerous Liaisons? The English School and the Construction of a “Japanese” IR
Chen Ching Chang (Assistant Professor, College of Asia Pacific Studies, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University)
14:15-14:45 A Critique of South Korean Methods of Constructing a Korean School in IR
Cho Young Chul (Post-doctoral Fellow, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Yonsei University)
14:45-15:00 Coffee Break
15:00-16:00 Discussion
*This seminar is supported by “Junior Researchers Support Program” (FY 2010), Global COE Program “In Search for Sustainable Humanosphere in Asia and Africa”, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University.
【Activity Report】
The purpose of this international seminar was to examine the politics of ‘Non-Western’ International Relations (IR) theory from an Asian perspective. This seminar is supported by the “Junior Researchers Support Program” (FY 2010) from the Global COE Program “In Search for Sustainable Humanosphere in Asia and Africa” of Kyoto University.
First, Dr. Sato clarified why we attempted to consider ‘Non-Western’ IR, and explained why considering ‘Non-Western’ IR itself is political from the viewpoint of Asian Studies. Second, Dr. Ikeda argued that the ‘English School’ of IR is Western-centric, but he contended that the ‘English School’ could be employed to overcome the hegemony of ‘Western’ IR. Third, Dr. Chen argued that uncritical engagement with the ‘English School’ would run the risk of reinforcing the Westphalia narrative. This was not to say, however, that we should not seek ‘Non-Western’ IR. Last, Dr. Cho used the example of ‘Korean’ IR to argue that ‘Non-Western’ IR is hegemony in that it would strengthen the hegemony of ‘Western’ IR.
We concluded that in-depth research needs to be conducted on the ‘Paradox of Non-Western IR’ and the ‘Dilemma of Non-Western IR’ in order to examine the politics of ‘Non-Western’ IR. We plan to present on this research outcome at the Leiden Institute for Area Studies (LIAS) at Leiden University on 23 February 2011.
(Shiro Sato)