Realism’s Timeless Wisdom and its Relevance for the Global South

Abstract

Since the numerous calls for developing a truly global and plural IR discipline,
 a growing spate of IR studies have sought to contextualize and critique the
 Euro-centeredness of the field. One of the most significant problems scholars
 have pointed out is the hegemonic status of Anglo-American IR theories, which
 seemingly assert an ontological preeminence and universality at the expense of
 local knowledge and homegrown theories. While the present article shares many
 of global IR’s concerns, it nevertheless proposes that in our quest to teach IR
 and develop homegrown theories, we should not lose sight of the importance
 of traditional contributions to the field. Our argument is based on a series of
 reflections about the relevance of realist scholarship for the developing world.
 Through an analysis of the major criticisms of classical IR theories, we seek to
 show that classical and, to a lesser extent, structural and neoclassical realism
 contain several and diverse arguments that speak directly to audiences in
 the global South. Classical realism, in particular, shares some interesting
 commonalities with postcolonial theory, which could pave the way for a more
 systematic engagement between the two approaches. Therefore, we argue that
 a global IR founded primarily on critiquing classical theories would be an
 impoverished IR, and “the thousand small steps” to a globalized discipline ought
 not neglect the valuable insights and reflections of traditional theory.