Emma van Schalkwyk

20640812
PTO101
Essay Submission 1

Semester 2 Assignment

When approaching the historical events surrounding Europe’s success in terms of

setting the standard to which the modern conception of global order adheres, it
seems impossible to ignore the preceding external circumstances that made this
very determination of global order possible. Yet, it seems as though there is a
substantial argument for claiming that the history surrounding the foundational roots
of modern-day bilateralism has been severely whitewashed. This, in turn, has led to
the resulting eurocentrism that can be seen in the academic discipline of
International Relations (IR). Without discrediting this argument, one must also
consider whether studying a Eurocentric version of IR remains necessary, even if
only for the purpose of changing the discipline to reflect a more accurate
representation of the historical events and accounts that shaped IR as we know it
today. This essay will serve as an analysis of the extent to which studying IR from an
exclusively European perspective has been promoted, especially at the expense of
relevant, but non-European contributions.

The most overt misconception when looking at Europe’s successful domination of

the world economy and supposed global order is that this was a result of a purely
European induced phenomenon. In reality, Europe’s exponentially growing influence
and power can, in a very simplified manner, be broken down into a few main
components (Stuenkel, 2016). The first was an opening in the global market due to
internal strife that was being experienced in Asia at the time. European suppliers
were able to fill this opening due to their unmatched advancements in mechanisation
during the first Industrial Revolution, which led to these European suppliers flooding
the markets with cheaply made, mass produced products. The natural resources –
including manpower – that Europe needed to sustain its newly demanding input-
output cycle created by industrialisation, was supported by the ongoing slave trade in
Africa – which was funded by the sugar cane production in the Americas that had
been colonised through the process of mass genocides as early as the late 1400’s.

1
Emma van Schalkwyk
20640812
PTO101
Essay Submission 1

Finally, due to the constant internal conflict that Europe had experienced before its
increased participation in the global economy, Europe’s military forces had grown to
be comparatively advanced, thus being able to ward off any potential foreign threats
(Stuenkel, 2016). These components formed a symbiotic relationship that enabled
Europe to “take over” in an extensive manner. However, due to this symbiosis, room
can be left to theorise that without even just one these components, Europe would
have been far less successful, if at all.

Another misconception is that after Europe was able to gain momentum as a key
global contender, that the infrastructure for extensive global trade as well as the
conceptions of politics and philosophy that surrounded the development of IR, were
built from the ground up purely by European means. Long predating European
colonialism, there existed a history of important developments in areas such as law
and mathematics – as could be viewed in Arabic texts (moreover, Arabic was for a
long time considered the language of law, mathematics and science (Stuenkel,
2016)) – as well as in philosophy and politics – as were extensively taught in India at
institutions such as the Nalanda University, which existed long before Oxford and
served over 10 000 students – not to mention the inconceivably large global market,
trade routes and posts that were created and dominated by Asian dynasties and
empires as well as North African kingdoms.

Whilst there seems to be no valid justification surrounding the erasure of these

integral parts of history, that all had a hand in the creation of global order, there may
still exist benefits of studying the Eurocentric discipline of IR. It seems pertinent to
note that despite all of the qualms that could be raised with the Eurocentric IR
system and studies in place, the system has prevailed. Additionally, following the
decolonisation of many nations worldwide, European models of democracy were
often adopted by these same nations (Ringmar, 2017). As a result, it seems relevant
to study the European origins from which these models were adopted.

2
Emma van Schalkwyk
20640812
PTO101
Essay Submission 1

This, however, becomes academically negligent when paired with the negation of
most non-European influences and events that led to Europe’s success, as is
explained above. This has led to the need for a process of decolonisation – of sorts –
of IR. One of the direct problems created by this Eurocentrism has been the refusal
to recognise race as “a central organi[s]ing feature of world politics” (Kelebogile
Zvobgo, 2020). This lack of recognition can be alternatively identified in the denial of
the racist foundations upon which “the ‘big three’ IR paradigms: realism, liberalism,
and constructivism” are built. A noticeable mind shift occurred following European
global colonization that saw to previously heralded civilizations – upheld for their
intellectual prowess – such as India and virtually all African and Middle Eastern
societies, being diminished to an inferior role and in need of European values to
save them from their own insufficiency. These foundational problems have resulted
in continuous modern-day “othering” (Stuenkel, 2016).

An example of this has been the infamous “war on terror” that was instigated by the
U.S. following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The war on terror has purposefully become
synonymous with a war on the Middle East or even the war on Islam (UNESCO,
2017) as can be seen not only in the media and mass media portrayals of terrorists,
clearly being linked to the Middle Easter or Islam, but also in the extreme military and
foreign policy actions that have been implemented in the name of curbing terrorism.
In actuality, these extreme actions seem to be thinly veiled means to continue the
devastating warfare and exercise dominance in the Middle East. The subsequent
Middle Eastern terrorist attacks, as explained by Ohio State University political
scientist, John Mueller, have not been retaliation against “Ideology in the form of
religion”, but rather “boiling outrage at U.S. foreign policy… [namely] – the wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan…” (Shermer, 2013). A conclusion could be drawn that the
United States’ response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks created the very war America
now needs to implement foreign policy against to control.

3
Emma van Schalkwyk
20640812
PTO101
Essay Submission 1

Through still exclusively practicing the Eurocentric discipline of IR, not only does the
erasure of the historic contributions of non-European actors continue, but so does
the erasure of the atrocities that took place in the process of Europe rising to power.
Moreover, the refusal to address the repercussions of these atrocities and, in more
euphemistic terms, the role that race has played in the formation of global order, has
left room for IR to be used as a tool in the enabling of further racially discriminatory
actions.

4
Emma van Schalkwyk
20640812
PTO101
Essay Submission 1

Bibliography
 Kelebogile Zvobgo, M. L., 2020. Why Race Matters in International Relations.
Foreign Policy, Issue 237, pp. 1 - 7.
 Ringmar, E., 2017. The Making of the Modern World. In: S. McGlinchey, ed.
International Relations. Bristol: E-International Relations Publishing, pp. 8 -
19.
 Shermer, M., 2013. The Five Myths of Terrorism—Including That It Works.
[Online]
Available at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/five-myths-of-
terrorism-including-that-it-works/
[Accessed 25 September 2020].
 Stuenkel, O., 2016. The Birth of Western Centrism. In: Post-Western World.
Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 29 - 62.
 UNESCO, 2017. Correcting media myths about terrorism. [Online]
Available at: https://en.unesco.org/news/correcting-media-myths-about-
terrorism
[Accessed 25 September 2020].