SavedAdd your journal

Journals / All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace / 2016 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1

Non-Western International Relations Theory and Ibn Khaldun

Engin Sune
Pages
79–88
Publication Date
2016-01-02
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Barry Buzan and Richard Little, “World History and the development of non-Western International Relations Theory,” in

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Acharya and Buzan, Non-Western IR Theory, 16-22.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Acharya and Buzan, Non-Western IR Theory, 222.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Barry Buzan and Richard Little, “World History and the development of non-Western International Relations Theory,” in
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Acharya and Buzan, Non-Western IR Theory, 16-22. Acharya and Buzan, Non-Western IR Theory, 222. Barry Buzan and Richard Little, “World History and the development of non-Western International Relations Theory,” in

🔖

Cite This Article

Sune, E. (2016). Non-Western International Relations Theory and Ibn Khaldun. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1, 79–88. https://ajindex.com/articles/119725

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Acharya, Amitav, and Barry Buzan, eds. Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia. NY: Routledge, 2010.
  2. Aydinli, Ersel, and Julie Mathews. “Periphery Theorising for a Truly Internationalised Discipline: Spinning IR Theory out of Anatolia,” Review of International Studies 34 (2008): 693-712.
  3. Balakrishnan, Rajagopal. International Law From Below: Development, Social Movements, and Third World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
  4. Buzan, Barry, and Richard Little. “World History and the Development of Non-Western International Relations Wallerstein, “Eurocentrism,” 21-39.
  5. Acharya and Buzan, Non-Western IR Theory, 6. Acharya and Buzan, Non-Western IR Theory, 10. Wallerstein, “Eurocentrism,” 94-101. Theory.” In Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia, edited by Acharya and Buzan, 197-220. NY: Routledge. Cox, Robert. “Towards a Post-Hegemonic Conceptualization of World Order: Reflections on the Relevancy of Ibn Khaldun.” In Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, edited by J. Rosenau and E. Czempiel, 132-59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
  6. Hobson, John M. “What is at Stake in Bringing Historical Sociology Back into International Relations? Transcending Chronofetishism and Tempocentrism in International Relations.” In Historical Sociology of International Relations, edited by S. Hobden and J. M. Hobson, 3-41. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2002.
  7. Kalpakian, Jack. “Ibn Khaldun’s Influence On Current International Relations Theory.” The Journal of North African Studies 13, no. 3 (2008): 363-76.
  8. Say, Seyfi. İbn Haldun’un Düşünce Sistemi ve Uluslararası İlişkiler Kuramı [Ibn Khaldun’s System of Thought and International Relations Theory]. İstanbul: İlk Harf Yayınları, 2012.
  9. Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou. “International Relations Theory and the Islamic Worldview.” In Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and beyond Asia, edited by Acharya and Buzan, 174-96. NY: Routledge, 2010.
  10. Wallerstein, Immanuel. “Eurorcentrism and Its Avatars: The Dilemmas of Social Science.” Sociological Bulletin 46, no. 1 (1997): 21-39.