ALTERNATIVES TO STATE-CENTRISM: VOICES FROM MARGINS (PERIPHERAL REALISM: AND SUBALTERN REALISM)

Eurocenter has occupied hegemonic position in theoretical discourses of International Relations. Hence International Relations theory always represented the interest of powerful states that translate all the problems by only one mean and one end, i. e. Power. Power politics remained a prerogative of state and all the more, the powerful states. The prime argument of this study is that mainstream state-centric approach to International Relations is biased and reflects only on one facet of reality. The hegemonic International relations discourses with the Eurocentric biases have marginalized the voices emerging from subalterns of the system living in peripheral states comprising World-System. It is the reason that despite claims of problem solving, the state centric paradigm has left many issues and concerns of peripheral states and subaltern subjects living in these states un-heard. The non-responsive behavior of mainstream International Relations towards problems of South is contested by two powerful voices in IR theory. Taking inspiration from ECLA-Prebisch School (Dependcia) of Latin America and Subaltern History paradigm of South Asia, Carlos Escude and Mohammed Ayoob has casted reflection on poverty of Realism (State Centrism) as explanatory problem solving theory. Peripheral Realism by Carlos Escude and Subaltern Realism by Mohammed Ayoob are two critical perspectives rooted in realities of global South. Whereas the Ayoob emphasizes the internal dynamics of state, Escude focusing on global hierarchy of states discuss the issues of Rouge/ Pariah states, who refuse to accept hierarchy and compromise the living standards of their population for prestige and glory.