How postcolonial is post-Western IR? Mimicry and mētis in the international politics of Russia and Central Asia

Abstract

Scholars of International Relations have called for the creation of a post-Western IR that reflects the global and local contexts of the declining power and legitimacy of the West. Recognising this discourse as indicative of the postcolonial condition, we deploy Homi Bhabha’s concept of mimicry and James C. Scott’s notion of mētis to assess whether international political dynamics of a hybrid kind are emerging. Based on interviews with Central Asian political, economic, and cultural elites, we explore the emergence of a new global politics of a post-Western type. We find that Russia substantively mimics the West as a post-Western power and that there are some suggestive examples of the role of mētis in its foreign policy. Among Central Asian states, the picture is more equivocal. Formal mimicry and mētis of a basic kind are observable, but these nascent forms suggest that the dialectical struggle between colonial clientelism and anti-colonial nationalism remains in its early stages. In this context, a post-Western international politics is emerging with a postcolonial aspect but without the emergence of the substantive mimicry and hybrid spaces characteristic of established postcolonial relations.

Making Friends with Neighbors?: Local Perceptions of Russia and China in Kyrgyzstan

“…As the author has argued elsewhere, contemporary Central Asia is an important example of a "post-Western" space in the international system. 41 In April 2018, Russia and China pronounced that bilateral relations were at the "best level in history." 42 However, a number of analysts have noted that it is actually China who calls the shots in this relationship: Russia's weakened economy and deteriorating relations with the West mean that Chinese support, both discursive and material, is of paramount importance, and that Russia may be open to joint thinking with China on the development prospects for Central Asia.…”

Centred discourse, decentred practice: the relational production of Russian and Chinese ‘rising’ power in Central Asia

“…'Decentring' here is used not as a normative preference and strategy of government in the wake of New Public Management, 4 but as an analytical conceptualization of the processes of state transformation wrought by the incorporation of market logic into state bureaucracies. 5 Drawing on earlier work which explored the political-economic and regime security imperatives of the decentred post-Soviet state, 6 and which linked post-Western powers to postcolonial mimicry in Central Asia, 7 we extend our analysis by demonstrating that the discursive claim to be a 'rising' or 'great' power is intertwined with and produced through decentred, localised practices of two types. First, we identify practices of mimicry which are derived from the concept of Homi K. Bhabha and extended by L.H.M.…”

“…As we elaborate below, a postcolonial move reveals how actors associated with rising powers' centres in Moscow and Beijing employ formal mimicry in their discursive and institutional emulation of established powers, substantive mimicry in the subversive or hybrid meanings and identities they frequently attach to these new institutions, and practical mētis (cunning, evasion) at the everyday level. 28 In turn, relations between risers and fallers, powerful patrons and their clients, dominant discourses and practices, between institutions and individuals, must be at front and centre of analysis.…”

Commissioned Book Review: Dmitri Trenin, What Is Russia Up to in the Middle East?

“…This book is highly recommended for new students of International Relations, Political Science and anyone interested in becoming informed about Russia’s new strategy in the Middle East. Since Russia views this region as a critical geopolitical neighbourhood, the Kremlin hopes to create a ‘post-West system of international relations’ (Owen et al, 2018: 300) that is no longer dominated by the United States, and in which Washington will show Moscow the respect that it deserves.…”