Discipline over Exceptionalism: Singapore-based Scholars, Regional Sensitivities and the Appeal of Anglophone International Relations Approaches

Abstract

Despite an association with claims of Asian exceptionalism, the discipline of International Relations (IR) in Singapore tends to reflect approaches common to mainstream Anglophone, North American and, to a lesser extent, British perspectives on the discipline. Intellectual paradigms such as realism and constructivism seem to have a particularly enduring hold on teaching, research and knowledge production, even though the awareness of Global IR and alternative viewpoints is relatively widespread. The reasons for this divergence between statements about a focus on Asia and adherence to more conventional disciplinary norms are varied. The internationalization of Singapore academia, which incentivizes publication in highly-ranked international journals and university presses dominated by Anglophone academia, seems to be a key reason. Other explanations include a need to conform to the preferences of state funders who tend to view the world in policy rather than conceptual terms, and the fact that IR scholars in Singapore predominantly receive their training from parts of the Anglophone world. Limitations on being able to study Singapore in-depth also mean that Singapore-based scholars tend to engage intellectually with work that examines disparate locations outside of the country—even if they are in Asia—rather than systematically consider Singapore’s position in the world.