Ambiguous universalism: theorising race/nation/class in international relations

Abstract

Although in the past decades the study of international relations (IR) has become much more sensitive to questions of culture, identity and movement, racism has remained an under-theorised area. The marginalisation of race in IR has become much more striking in the 1990s because of the renewed interest in migration and other intercultural exchanges as ‘security threats’, as well as the emergence of nationalism and putatively ‘ethnic’ conflict as a central basis of strife in the post-Cold War era. This article is an attempt to discuss new forms of racism in international relations with particular reference to American policy responses to September 11. Drawing from the work of Etienne Balibar, we argue that a contemporary neo-racism, a kind of ‘racism without races’, grounded in ambiguity and contradiction, is present in international relations simultaneously as a problem of knowledge and as a problem of political practise. Our aim is to contribute to the strategic movement of international relations theory from a conception of race as a marginal category in IR to one that is more fully theorised, including its history and present role in constituting the discipline and its relationship to power, hierarchy and inequality.