December 22, 2025

International Relations (IR) scholarship has long grappled with its Western-centric roots, often sidelining regional insights that could enrich the global discourse. In Southeast Asia, particularly in Singapore, there is significant potential for theoretical contributions given the region’s rich history of colonialism, state-building, and economic development. However, the balance between addressing local experiences and conforming to dominant Anglophone norms remains a challenge. From pressures to publishing international standards represented by the Anglophone world and academic freedom concerns, the study of IR in Singapore tends to follow academic norms that are typically established in North America. This tension reflects broader global debates on the need for more inclusive and pluralistic approaches in IR theory. 

In ‘Discipline over Exceptionalism: Singapore-Based Scholars, Regional Sensitivities, and the Appeal of Anglophone International Relations Approaches’ (Global International Relations in Southeast Asia, 2024), Associate Professor Ja Ian Chong (NUS Political Science) examines how scholars navigate between two main pressures: 1) aligning with international academic standards for legitimacy and to gain academic visibility, and 2) addressing local and regional sensitivities to remain contextually relevant. Through a survey conducted among Singapore-based IR scholars, A/P Chong finds a strong preference from the scholars to conform to global frameworks and trends. This tendency is shaped by institutional incentives and the global intellectual hierarchy, which prioritise North American-dominated Anglophone academic norms, often at the expense of engaging with debates and exchanges beyond the North American Anglophone sphere. 

Despite awareness of ‘non-Western’ IR approaches, their adoption remains limited among Singapore-based scholars due to institutional pressures, the dominance of Anglophone academia, professional incentives tied to established paradigms, and a focus on practical, policy-oriented research over theoretical innovation. Many respondents emphasise empirical research over theoretical innovation, often relying on established frameworks to interpret local phenomena. Furthermore, while some scholars express interest in promoting indigenous perspectives that challenge established norms, their integration into mainstream IR theory has been inconsistent, reflecting a broader ambivalence toward globalising the field of IR. 

As A/P Chong notes, the dominance of Western paradigms in Singapore’s IR scholarship not only limits intellectual diversity but also perpetuates the marginalisation of alternative perspectives. To address this, he advocates for a more inclusive approach that bridges local insights with global debates. This shift would not only enrich IR theory but also position Singapore as a key player in advancing a truly globalized understanding of international relations. 

Read the article here.