In the globalizing international relations (IR) debate, the “West” and “Global South” have conventionally been presented as fundamentally different categories. This has disguised any interconnectedness between the two categories and variation within them. What does this mean for the quest for “Global South theorizing?” In order to address this binary logic in the globalizing IR literature, I analyze the case of human security as an example of Global South theorizing. First, I disentangle the Western/Global South origins and inflection of the human security concept and find that there is Global South agency related to its conceptual development, but also Western inflections. Second, I examine and compare the apparent rejection of the concept in two regions of the Global South—Southeast Asia and Latin America—and find both similarities and differences in their disinterest in engaging with the concept. Curiously, the similarities lie in the positionality of these regions and their difference to the West. In this way, the article points to the danger of using these categories in a manner that reemphasizes binary logics and their constitutive effects, and it exposes the complexity regarding what we consider Global South and Global South theorizing.
AbboudS.DahiO.HazbunW.GroveN. S.HindawiC. P.MouawadJ.HermezS. (2018). Towards a Beirut School of critical security studies. Critical Studies on Security, 6(3), 273–295.
2.
AcharyaA. (2001). Human security: East versus West. International Journal, 56(3), 442–460.
3.
AcharyaA. (2011). Dialogue and discovery: In search of international relations theories beyond the West. Millennium—Journal of International Studies, 39(3), 619–637.
4.
AcharyaA. (2014a). Global international relations (IR) and regional worlds. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 647–659.
5.
AcharyaA. (2014b). Rethinking power, institutions and ideas in world politics: Whose IR?Routledge.
6.
AcharyaA.BuzanB. (2007). Why is there no non-Western international relations theory? An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 7(3), 287–312.
7.
AcharyaA.BuzanB. (2017). Why is there no non-Western international relations theory? Ten years on. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 17(3), 1–30.
8.
AgnewJ. (1994). The territorial trap: The geographical assumptions of international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1(1), 53–80.
9.
AgnewJ. (2007). Know-where: Geographies of knowledge of world politics. International Political Sociology, 1(2), 138–148.
10.
AgnewJ. (2016). The origins of critical geopolitics. In DoddsK.KuusM.SharpJ. (Eds.), The Routledge research companion to critical geopolitics (pp. 41–54). Routledge.
11.
AlejandroA. (2018). Western dominance in international relations?Routledge.
12.
AlkerH. R.BierstekerT. H. (1984). The dialectics of world order: Notes for a future archeologist of international savoir faire. International Studies Quarterly, 28(2), 121–142.
13.
ArzateJ. L. P.VelázquezJ. D. J. S. (2014). El concepto de seguridad ciudadana: una perspectiva desde los estudios para la paz [The concept of citizen security: a perspective from peace studies]. In Estrada RodríguezJ. L. (Ed.), Seguridad Ciudadana: Visiones compartidas (pp. 45–68). IAPEM.
14.
AydinliE.BiltekinG. (2018). Widening the world of international relations: Homegrown theorizing, worlding beyond the West. Routledge.
15.
AyoobM. (1997). Defining security: A subaltern realist perspective. In KrauseK.WilliamsM. C. (Eds.), Critical security studies (pp. 121–148). UCL Press.
16.
AyoobM. (2002). Inequality and theorizing in international relations: The case for subaltern realism. International Studies Review, 4(3), 27–48.
17.
BajpaiK. (2003). The idea of human security. International Studies, 40(3), 195–228.
18.
BarkawiT.LaffeyM. (2006). The postcolonial moment in security studies. Review of International Studies, 32(2), 329–352.
19.
BergerM. T. (1994). The end of the ‘Third World’?Third World Quarterly, 15(2), 257–275.
20.
BierstekerT. J. (2009). The parochialism of hegemony: Challenges for ‘American’ international relations. In WæverO.TicknerA. B. (Eds.), International relations scholarship around the world (pp. 308–327). Routledge.
21.
BilginP. (2002). Beyond statism in security studies? Human agency and security in the Middle East. The Review of International Affairs, 2(1), 100–118.
22.
BilginP. (2003). Individual and societal dimensions of security. International Studies Review, 5(2), 203–222.
23.
BilginP. (2008a). Critical theory. In WilliamsP. D. (Ed.), Security studies: An introduction (pp. 89–102). Routledge.
24.
BilginP. (2008b). Thinking past ‘Western’ IR?Third World Quarterly, 29(1), 5–23.
25.
BilginP. (2010). The ‘Western-centrism’ of security studies: ‘Blind spot’ or constitutive practice?Security Dialogue, 41(6), 615–622.
26.
BilginP. (2015, September17). One model of engagement between MES and IR. POMEPS Studies, 16, 6–12.
27.
BilginP. (2016). Do IR scholars engage with the same world? In BoothK.ErskineT. (Eds.), International relations theory today (pp. 97–108). Polity.
28.
BlaserM. (2013). Ontological conflicts and the stories of peoples in spite of Europe: Toward a conversation on political ontology. Current Anthropology, 54(5), 547–568.
29.
BoothK. (1996). 75 Years on: Rewriting the subject’s past—Reinventing its future. In SmithS.BoothK.ZalewskiM. (Eds.), International theory: Positivism and beyond (pp. 328–333). Cambridge University Press.
30.
BrownC. (2001). Fog in the channel: Continental international relations theory isolated (or an essay on the paradoxes of diversity and parochialism in IR theory). In CrawfordR.JarvisD. (Eds.), International relations—Still an American social science? Toward diversity in international thought (pp. 203–220). State University of New York Press.
31.
BuzanB. (2004). From international to world society—English school theory and the social structure of globalization. Cambridge University Press.
32.
BuzanB.HansenL. (2009). The evolution of international security studies. Cambridge University Press.
33.
Caballero-AnthonyM. (2004). Revisioning human security in Southeast Asia. Asian Perspective, 28(3), 155–189.
34.
ChanS. (1997). Seven types of ambiguity in Western international relations theory and painful steps towards right ethics. Theoria, 44(89), 106–115.
35.
ChanS.MandavilleP. (2001). The Zen of international relations: IR theory from East to West. Springer.
36.
ChandlerD. (2008). Review essay: Human security: The dog that didn’t bark. Security Dialogue, 39(4), 427–438.
37.
ChildJ. (1988). Interstate relations in Latin America: Peaceful or conflictual?International Journal, 43(3), 378–403.
38.
ChillierG.FreemanL. (2005). Potential threat: The new OAS concept of hemispheric security. Washington Office on Latin America.
39.
ChristieR. (2010). Critical voices and human security: To endure, to engage or to critique?Security Dialogue, 41(2), 169–190.
40.
CohnB. S. (1987). An anthropologist among the historians and other essays. Oxford University Press.
41.
CrawfordR. (2001). Where have all the theorists gone—Gone to Britain, every one? A story of two parochialisms in international relations. In CrawfordR.JarvisD. (Eds.), International relations—Still an American social science? Toward diversity in international thought (pp. 221–242). State University of New York Press.
42.
DalbyS. (1991). Critical geopolitics: Discourse, difference, and dissent. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 9(3), 261–283.
43.
DalbyS. (2002). Global environment/local culture: Metageographies of post-colonial resistance. Studies in Political Economy, 67(1), 55–82.
44.
DirlikA. (2007). Global South: Predicament and promise. The Global South, 1(1), 12–23.
45.
DoddsK.SidawayJ. D. (1994). Locating critical geopolitics. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 12(5), 515–524.
46.
DotyR. L. (1996). Imperial encounters: The politics of representation in North–South relations. University of Minnesota Press.
47.
EunY. (2018). Beyond ‘the West/non-West divide’ in IR: How to ensure dialogue as mutual learning. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 11(4), 435–449.
GjørvG. H. (2016). Human security: Lessons learned from Afghanistan. In MauerM.CaveltyM. D. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of security studies (pp. 120–130). Routledge.
50.
GoldsteinD. M. (2016). Citizen security and human security in Latin America. In MaresD.KacowiczA. M. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Latin American security (pp. 138–148). Routledge.
51.
HallidayF. (1996). Islam and the myth of confrontation: Religion and politics in the Middle East. I.B. Tauris.
52.
HalperinS. (2006). International relations theory and the hegemony of Western conceptions of modernity. In Gryffydd-JonesB. (Ed.), Decolonizing international relations (pp. 43–63). Rowman & Littlefield.
53.
HampsonF. O. (2008). Human security. In WilliamsP. (Ed.), Security studies: An introduction (pp. 229–244). Routledge.
54.
HerzM. (2010). Concepts of security in South America. International Peacekeeping, 17(5), 598–612.
55.
HerzM. (2013a). Assumptions on intervention and security in South America. In Kenkel (K. M.Ed.), South America and peace operations: Coming of age (pp. 25–44). Taylor & Francis.
56.
HerzM. (2013b). Democratization and commitment to peace: South America’s motivations to contribute to peace operations. In KenkelM. (Ed.), South America and peace operations: Coming of age. Routledge.
57.
HettneB. (2005). Beyond the ‘new’ regionalism. New Political Economy, 10(4), 543–571.
58.
HobsonJ. M. (2012). The Eurocentric conception of world politics: Western international theory, 1760-2010. Cambridge University Press.
59.
HoffmannS. (1977). An American social science: International relations. Daedalus, 106(3), 41–60.
60.
HutchingsK. (2011). Dialogue between whom? The role of the West/non-West distinction in promoting global dialogue in IR. Millennium, 39(3), 639–647.
61.
JahnB. (2000). The cultural construction of international relations: The invention of the state of nature. Palgrave.
62.
JørgensenK. E. (2017). Inter alia: On global orders, practices, and theory. International Studies Review, 19(2), 283–287.
63.
JørgensenK. E.KnudsenT. B. (2006). International relations in Europe: Traditions, perspectives and destinations. Routledge.
64.
KacowiczA. M. (2005). The impact of norms in international society: The Latin American experience, 1881-2001. University of Notre Dame Press.
65.
KleinschmidtJ. (2018). Differentiation theory and the Global South as a metageography of international relations. Alternatives, 43(2), 59–80.
66.
KoranyB. (1986). Strategic studies and the Third World: A critical evaluation. International Social Science Journal, 38(4), 547–562.
67.
KurusuK.KerstenR. (2011). Japan as an active agent for global norms: The political dynamism behind the acceptance and promotion of “human security”. Asia-Pacific Review, 18(2), 115–137.
68.
LewisM. W.WigenK. (1997). The myth of continents: A critique of metageography. University of California Press.
69.
LiuY. (2012). Security theorizing in China: Culture, evolution and social practice. In TicknerA. B.BlaneyD. (Eds.), Thinking international relations differently (pp. 72–91). Routledge.
70.
MandavilleP. (2003). Toward a different cosmopolitanism—Or, the ‘I’ dislocated. Global Society, 17(2), 209–221.
71.
MansourI. (2017). A Global South perspective on international relations theory. International Studies Perspectives, 18(1), 1–3.
72.
MedeirosM.BarnabéI.AlbuquerqueR.LimaR. (2016). What does the field of international relations look like in South America?Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 59(1), e004.
73.
MerkeF. (2016). English school and constructivism. In MaresD.KacowiczA. M. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Latin American security (pp. 88–98). Routledge.
74.
MignoloW. D. (2005). The idea of Latin America. Blackwell Publishing.
75.
MignoloW. D. (2009). Epistemic disobedience, independent thought and decolonial freedom. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(7-8), 159–181.
76.
MignoloW. D. (2012). Local histories/global designs: Coloniality, subaltern knowledges, and border thinking. Princeton University Press.
77.
NarayanU.HardingS. (2000). Decentering the center: Philosophy for a multicultural, postcolonial, and feminist world. Indiana University Press.
78.
NayakM.SelbinE. (2013). Decentering international relations. Zed Books.
79.
NeumanS. G. (1998). International relations theory and the Third World. St. Martin’s Press.
80.
NewmanE. (2010). Critical human security studies. Review of International Studies, 36(1), 77–94.
81.
Ní MhurchúA.ShindoR. (2016). Critical imaginations in international relations: Interventions. Routledge.
82.
Ó TuathailG. (1996). Critical geopolitics: The politics of writing global space. University of Minnesota Press.
83.
OwenT. (2010). Human security: A contested concept. In BurgessP. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of new security studies (pp. 39–50). Taylor & Francis.
84.
ParisR. (2001). Human security: Paradigm shift or hot air?International Security, 26(2), 87–102.
85.
PetersI.Wemheuer-VogelaarW. (2016). Globalizing international relations: Scholarship amidst divides and diversity. Palgrave Macmillan.
86.
Pion-BerlinD. (1989). Latin American national security doctrines: Hard and softline themes. Armed Forces & Society, 15(3), 411–429.
87.
Pion-BerlinD. (2005). Sub-regional cooperation, hemispheric threat: Security in the Southern Cone. In FawcettL.SerranoM. (Eds.), Regionalism and governance in the Americas: Continental drift (pp. 211–227). Palgrave Macmillan.
88.
RadtkeK. K. W.FeddemaR. (2000). Comprehensive security in Asia: Views from Asia and the West on a changing security environment. Brill.
89.
Rojas AravenaF. (2003). Human security: Emerging concept of security in the twenty-first century. In GouchaM.Rojas AravenaF. (Eds.), Human security, conflict prevention and peace in Latin America and the Caribbean (pp. 11–25). UNESCO-FLACSO.
90.
Rojas AravenaF. (2007). Seguridad humana: Aportes en la reformulación del concepto de seguridad [Human security: Contributions towards reformulating the concept of security]. In Munoz SepúlvedaI. (Ed.), Seguridad Humana y Nuevas Políticas de Defensa en Iberoamérica (pp. 49–74). Instituto Universitario General Gutiérrez Mellado.
91.
SaidE. W. (1978). Orientalism. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
92.
SalterM. B.CohnC.NealA. W.WibbenA. T.BurgessP. J.ElbeS.AustinJ. L.HuysmansJ.WalkerR. B. J.WæverO.WilliamsM. C.GilbertE.FrowdP. M.RosenowD.MartinsB. O.JabriV.AradauC.LeanderA.BousquetA.…HansenL. (2019). Horizon scan: Critical security studies for the next 50 years. Security Dialogue, 50, 9–37.
93.
SchmidtB. (2006). Epilogue. In JørgensenK. E.KnudsenT. B. (Eds.), International relations in Europe: Traditions, perspectives and destinations (pp. 253–269). Routledge.
94.
ShaniG.MakotoS.PashaM. K. (2007). Protecting human security in a post 9/11 world: Critical and global insights. Palgrave Macmillan.
SomavíaJ.InsulzaJ. M. (1990). Seguridad democrática regional: Una concepción alternativa [Regional democratic security: An alternative conception]. Comisión Sudamericana de Paz.
97.
SorjB. (2005). Segurança, segurança humana e América Latina [Security, human security and Latin America]. Sur: Revista Internacional de Direitos Humanos, 2, 40–59.
98.
TadjbakhshS.ChenoyA. (2007). Human security: Concepts and implications. Routledge.
99.
ThedeN. (2008). Human security, democracy, and development in the Americas: The Washington consensus redux?Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies/Revue canadienne des études latino-américaines et caraïbes, 33(65), 33–56.
100.
ThomasC. (2001). Global governance, development and human security: Exploring the links. Third World Quarterly, 22(2), 159–175.
101.
TicknerA. B. (2003). Seeing IR differently: Notes from the Third World. Millennium—Journal of International Studies, 32(2), 295–324.
102.
TicknerA. B. (2016). Securitization and the limits of democratic security. In MaresD. R.KacowiczA. M. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Latin American security (pp. 67–77). Routledge.
103.
TicknerA. B.BlaneyD. L. (2012). Thinking international relations differently. Routledge.
104.
TicknerA. B.BlaneyD. L. (2013). Claiming the international. Routledge.
105.
TicknerA. B.HerzM. (2012). No place for theory? Security studies in Latin America. In TicknerA. B.BlaneyD. L. (Eds.), Thinking international relations differently (pp. 92–114). Routledge.
106.
TicknerA. B.WæverO. (2009). International relations scholarship around the world. Routledge.
107.
United Nations Development Program. (1994). Human development report 1994. Author.
108.
WalkerR. B. J. (1984). Culture, ideology and world order: Studies on a just world order. Westview.
109.
WalkerR. B. J. (1997). The subject of security. In KrauseK.WilliamsM. C. (Eds.), Critical security studies: Concepts and cases (pp. 61–82). UCL Press.
