Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:24:49.902Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Disarming norms: postcolonial agency and the constitution of the international

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2014

Vivienne Jabri
Vivienne Jabri*
Affiliation:
Department of War Studies, King’s College, London
*
E-mail: Vivienne.Jabri@kcl.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this article is to provide a postcolonial reading of norms in international politics. Focusing specifically on the question of postcolonial agency, the article argues that the constructivist literature provides a distinctive spatial and temporal ordering of the ‘international’ that on the one hand can be seen to attribute agency to the postcolonial subject, while on the other can easily be interpreted as denying a presence for this subject. An alternative reading suggests that postcolonial agency is not only constituted by the international and its normative construction, but is also constituting, having the capacity to variously subvert and transform, but within limits. While some constructivist thinkers, primary among them being Christian Reus-Smit, recognise the normative order of the international as historically contested terrain, and where such contestation testifies to the role of the postcolonial world, how this role is articulated, and in what terms it is understood pose distinct challenges for understandings of agency and the constitution of the international. Focusing on Homi Bhabha and Franz Fanon, the article looks to how postcolonial thought can be mobilised to respond to this challenge, and to point to an alternative conception of the transformative potential of postcolonial agency. The turn to Bhabha and Fanon reveals such potential in both discursive and material terms so that where Bhabha can be said to frame agency and the terrain of the international in hybrid ideational terms, complementing Reus-Smit’s understanding of what can be termed the ‘postcolonial international’, Fanon’s more radical materialist ontology envisages agency in terms of embodied presence. This mobilisation of postcolonial thought provides the theoretical tools for conceptualising postcolonial subjectivity and articulations of agency in relation to the international and its constitution.

Keywords

postcolonial subjectpostcolonial agencythe internationalnormsconstructivism
Type
Forum: Interrogating the use of norms in international relations: postcolonial perspectives
Information
International Theory , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , July 2014 , pp. 372 - 390
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acharya, Amitav. 2011. “Dialogue and Discovery: In Search of International Relations Theories Beyond the West.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39(3):619–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acharya, Amitav, and Buzan, Barry. (eds) 2011. Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Anghie, Antony. 2004. Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barkawi, Tarak. 2006. Globalization and War. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Barkawi, Tarak, and Laffey, Mark. 2006. “The Postcolonial Moment in Security Studies.” Review of International Studies 32:329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhabha, Homi. 1994. The Location of Culture. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of World Order. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, Hedley 1984. “The Revolt Against the West.” In The Expansion of International Society, edited by Hedley Bull, and Adam Watson. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley, and Watson, Adam. (eds) 1984. The Expansion of International Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 1992. “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for ‘Indian’ Pasts.” Representations 37:1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakrabarty, Dipesh 2000. Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Chan, Stephen, Mandaville, Peter, and Bleiker, Roland. (eds) 2001. The Zen of International Relations. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, Partha. 1993. The Nation and its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Coole, Diana. 2000. Negativity and Politics: Dionysus and Dialectics from Kant to Poststructuralism. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dussel, Enrique. 1993. “Eurocentrism and Modernity (Introduction to the Frankfurt Lectures).” Boundary 2 20(3):65–76.Google Scholar
Dussel, Enrique 1998. The Underside of Modernity. New York: Humanity Books.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Shmuel Noah. 1987. “Introduction: Historical Traditions, Modernization, and Development.” In The West, Vol. 1, edited by Shmuel Noah Eisenstadt. London: Francis Pinter.Google Scholar
Epstein, Charlotte. 2011. “Who Speaks? Discourse, the Subject and the Study of Identity in International Politics.” European Journal of International Relations 17(2):327–350.Google Scholar
Fanon, Frantz. 1952. Black Skin White Masks. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
Fanon, Frantz 1967. The Wretched of the Earth, trans. C. Farrington. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1982. “The subject and power.” Critical Inquiry 8(4):777–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. “Norms, Culture, and World Politics: insights from sociology’s institutionalism.” International Organization 50(2):325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, Martha, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 51(4):555–590.Google Scholar
Gates, Henry Louis Jr. 1991. “Critical Fanonism.” Critical Inquiry 17(3):457–470.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Grovogui, Siba. 1996. Sovereigns, Quasi Sovereigns, and Africans: Race and Self-Determination in International Law. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Hobson, John. 2012. The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, Stanley. 1986. “Hedley Bull and his Contribution to International Relations.” International Affairs 62(2):179–195.Google Scholar
Inayatullah, Naeem, and Blaney, David. 2004. International Relations and the Problem of Difference. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jabri, Vivienne. 2007a. War and the Transformation of Global Politics. London and New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jabri, Vivienne 2007b. Michel Foucault’s Analytics of War: The Social, the International, and the Racial.” International Political Sociology 1(1):67–81.Google Scholar
Jabri, Vivienne 2013. The Postcolonial Subject: Claiming Politics, Governing Others. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jones, Branwen Gruffydd. (ed) 2006. Decolonising International Relations. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Kapoor, Ilan. 2003. “Acting in a Tight Spot: HomiBhabha’s Postcolonial Politics.” New Political Science 25(4):561–577.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret, and Kathryn, Sikkink. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Keene, Edward. 2002. Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kratochwil, Friedrich V. 1989. “Rules.” Norms and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Democratic Affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mignolo, Walter. 2000. Local Histories/Global Designs: Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Muppidi, Himadeep. 2001. “State Identity and Interstate Practices: The Limits to Democratic Peace in South Asia.” In Democracy Liberalism and War: The Democratic Peace Debate, edited by Barkawi Tarak, and Mark Laffey. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Muppidi, Himadeep 2004. The Politics of the Global. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Muppidi, Himadeep 2005. “Colonial and Postcolonial Global Governance.” In Power in Global Governance, edited by Michael Barnett, and Raymond Duvall. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Paolini, Albert. 1999. “Navigating Modernity: Postcolonialism.” Identity & International Relations. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner.Google Scholar
Parry, Benita. 1987. “Problems in Current Theories of Colonial Discourse.” Oxford Literary Review 9(1):27–58.Google Scholar
Pasha, Mustapha Kamal. 2011. “Western Nihilism and Dialogue: Prelude to an Uncanny Encounter in International Relations.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39(3):683–699.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian. 2011. “Struggles for Individual Rights and the Expansion of the International System.” International Organisation 65(2):207–242.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian 2013. Individual Rights and the Making of the International System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sabaratnam, Meera. 2011. “IR in Dialogue…But Can We Change the Subjects? A Typology of Decolonising Strategies for the Study of World Politics.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39(3):781–803.Google Scholar
Sajed, Alina. 2012. “The Post Always Rings Twice? The Algerian War, Poststructuralism, and the Postcolonial in IR Theory.” Review of International Studies 38:141–163.Google Scholar
Shilliam, Robbie. (ed.) 2011. International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen. 1992. Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar