China is leading the invention of non-Western international relations theories. With the expansion of its international influence and the growth of its national potency, it is transforming from the traditional Western experience that shaped most of the international relations discipline worldwide. Beijing recognises the preponderance of developing an independent knowledge production system as it charts a future development path.
International relations emerged as an independent branch of social sciences at the end of the Second World War. The subject initially developed around 1919 to answer important questions of the time, including: a systematic exploration of the underlying instigations of war, unravelling the logic behind inter-state conflicts, and finding measures to maintain international peace and anchor a coherent international order. This period, combined with the political environment that followed major historical developments, including the outbreak of WWII and the adversities of the Cold War that followed, gave birth to the dominant discipline we came to know as international relations.
For China, scholarship in international relations was conceived in the late 1920s, just a decade after the West had developed it. Europe offered an attractive education destination for Chinese students seeking to understand Chinese diplomatic practices in the international milieu. It was important for Chinese students at the time to explore ways for their country to maintain national independence and pursue local development amidst strong influence by powerful nations and Japanese colonial aggression.
It was these students who became scholars of international relations upon their return home. They promoted the domestication of Chinese international relations and its integration into Western epistemology. Scholars like Wang Shengzu became influential in international academic circles because of publishing English papers and monographs in Western academia.
So, what is the central difference between non-Western and Western international relations studies? The key difference lies in the level of theoretical construction. International relations assume grand explanatory power over international phenomena. Western international relations studies have been dynamic and have stimulated promiscuous intellectual intercourse in the academic ecosystem. It has produced great thinkers like John Mearsheimer.
Non-Western countries have relatively few indigenous theories of international relations. Even with the emergence of great thinkers such as Yan Xuetong in China, theoretical dependence on the West has been persistent.
The Chinese scholar, Lu Peng, holds that China failed to build an independent knowledge system for international relations studies throughout the 20th century. However, the previous decades have exposed the academic predicament caused by the lack of original theoretical discourse power. China became increasingly vulnerable as a major world power, fully integrated into the global landscape. It saw an increasing strength of Western academia fabricating arguments such as the “China threat theory” based on their own theories. So, something had to be done.
As early as the 1990s, Chinese scholars began to reflect on the lack of theoretical innovation. They began to consciously promote the overall development of the discipline by driving innovation in Chinese international relations theory.
Scholars such as Qin Yaqing and Yan Xuetong have prominently led innovation in Chinese international relations theory and impacted the global academic community. They have proposed representative theoretical developments such as relations theory and moral realism. They have also engaged in more equal and in-depth academic dialogue with Western theories based on this foundation. For instance, in 2024, the English-language journal Chinese Journal of International Politics published two consecutive issues of academic dialogue between Chinese and Western scholars on the achievements of Chinese theoretical innovation. This initiative won the 2026 Best Special Issue Award in International Relations Theory from the International Studies Association.
The international academic community is now absorbing China’s independent knowledge system in international relations. It is increasingly gaining traction.
Novel explanatory frameworks different from mainstream Western theories regarding world peace, a core concern of the international relations discipline, have been proposed by Chinese thinkers. They have systematically demonstrated the possibility and pathways for the peaceful rise of non-Western powers, especially China. Additionally, moral realism and relations theory have further provided new analytical perspectives for understanding the uncertainties in contemporary international politics.
Chinese international relations theory has also significantly changed the narrative that decreed salience to the emergence and evolution of international relations within the context of Western theoretical development, relegating non-Western academia to a secondary role as followers of Western theories. Non-Western international relations studies are emerging as important participants and drivers of theoretical innovation.
Professor Lu Peng argues that building an independent knowledge system for Chinese international relations studies should now focus on two key areas. First, continuously enhancing the explanatory power of international relations theory in relation to reality. He observes that Western international relations theories largely revolve around their core issues, and their discussions on war and peace are essentially summaries of the peacekeeping experiences of major Western powers. Therefore, as China continues to build its independent knowledge system, Chinese international relations research has gradually narrowed the gap with Western academia, possessing the potential for theoretical breakthroughs.
He suggests that the key lies in enhancing the explanatory power of theory in relation to international reality and the constructiveness of peace solutions. Realising this demands the incorporation of the academic opinions of scholars from the West and the Global South, ensuring that the theory is both grounded in Chinese experience and oriented towards broader international relations practices. Second, he advocates for expanding the international academic influence of Chinese international relations theory.
For far too long, Western theory has dominated global academia, leading many non-Western scholars to face the dilemma of theory being disconnected from reality when explaining their own countries’ diplomatic practices. They are forced to choose among Western theories, lacking local theoretical support. Therefore, promoting Chinese theory to the international stage is a crucial path to overcoming this dilemma.
The writer is a Senior research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.
