E-International Relations
Download PDF
Jan 2 2026
Image by Astha Chadha
This interview is a part of a collection of interviews with teachers and practitioners at an early stage of their profession. The interviews talk about present analysis and initiatives, in addition to recommendation for different early profession students.
Dr. Astha Chadha is an Associate Professor on the College of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto and can be working as an adjunct lecturer at Doshisha Womens College (Kyoto) and Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University (Beppu). Her analysis focuses on South Asian safety, Japan-India relations, gender safety within the Indo-Pacific, and faith in international politics. She is the Communications Chair for ISAs Religion and International Relations part, Regional Research Associate on the Indo-Pacific Studies Center (Australia), Women, Peace and Security Fellow at Pacific Forum (Hawaii). She is the writer ofFaith and Politics in South Asia(Routledge: 2024). Her article,The Ghost of Gandhi, was the winner of the 2025 E-International Relations Article Award.
Where do you see essentially the most thrilling analysis/debates occurring in your subject?
Honestly, it’s a fascinating time to be concerned in International Relations (IR). Whether we’re speaking about safety research, overseas coverage, or pushing the self-discipline into new theoretical territory, there may be a lot occurring. But what actually excites me are the debates round post-Western epistemology and Global IR, particularly how faith and IR intersect. These discussions problem the long-standing Eurocentric, Westphalian fashions which have dominated the sphere, pushing us to rethink how we perceive historical past, worldview, and information itself. For instance, the transfer towards post-Western IR idea is reshaping core ideas like state, sovereignty, rationality, and anarchy. Instead of seeing them as mounted, Western-derived concepts, students are exploring how totally different cultural and historic experiences may enrich and even redefine these conceptstrying to maneuver them from a European-centric context to one thing extra common. I’ve been delving into non-Western cosmologies recently, which supply recent lenses for understanding international ordersometimes difficult mainstream narratives that overlook various voices.
I additionally discover the interaction between IR and faith deeply compelling. It pushes the sphere to query its secular, rationalist biases and take into account concepts like religious energy or long-term civilizational histories as authentic parts of idea. In my guideFaith and Politics in South Asia, I launched the thought of exegesiswhich I see as deciphering faith as a type of historic discourseshowing how non secular narratives affect state identification, collective reminiscence, and worldwide relations.
Another thrilling entrance is how students are exploring idea like spectrality and hauntology. How previous fears, traumas, and even non-human actors form our current is an attention-grabbing matter to ponder on. For occasion, the articleGhost of Gandhiuses hauntology to look at how Gandhis legacy continues to affect todays politics, lengthy after his time. This space is revealing that IR is commonly haunted by its personal colonial and violent histories. It reminds us that steady occasions are sometimes illusionary and that conflicts are cycles rooted in unresolved previous injustices. It is an moral name to see up to date conflicts as echoes of historic ache, not remoted incidents.
How has the way in which you perceive the world modified over time, and what (or who) prompted essentially the most important shifts in your pondering?
My journey has been a means of unlearning and difficult deeply ingrained assumptions. Early on, my understanding was formed by mainstream IR theories targeted on rational selection, strategic balances, and states as the first actors. But I quickly realized these frameworks couldn’t absolutely clarify the ability dynamics I noticed, particularly in South Asia, the place faith and native histories play an enormous position. I additionally struggled with the secular assumptions of IR. Concepts just like the church-state nexus or faith-based actions didn’t match neatly into the present fashions. That led me to query: Who actually defines a states pursuits? Where and the way do these pursuits situate non-human safety? I discovered myself pondering: why is there an excessive amount of focus in IR on discovering or defining an ordered and predictable world, when the observable worldwide system appears fairly chaotic with too many undefined variables?
I’m continuously idea after which discovering it at odds with my observations that has opened doorways for future analysis. I proceed to check the affective pressure and the position of perception over pursuits, of deep historic resentment fuelling conflicts, and most significantly, the secular bias and historic amnesia embedded inside mainstream IR. That disaster led me to the works of a number of students together with these I had the chance to attach with at ISAs Religion and IR Section. I’ve additionally been very fascinated with post-colonial thought and the affect of sure world leaders on worldwide politics: a type of is M.Ok. Gandhi. Reading Gandhis idea of Satyagraha (the pressure of reality) and Ahimsa (non-violence) compelled me to confront the existence of moral and religious energy as a type of company that transcends army would possibly or financial energy and operates on very totally different realm of self-suffering, truth-seeking, and ethical conviction. This contradicts, in some ways, the fundamental assumptions of IR. Similarly, there is a component of misinterpretation of caste in Gandhis writings and has been mentioned extensively by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. So, whereas Gandhi pushes the safety discourse in the direction of introspection and self-reflection, Ambedkar questions its applicability and its grounding in romanticization of the anti-colonial battle; Ambedkar posits that not all the time a battle for justice is a simply battle, and that the oppressed can be oppressors.
This, in actual fact, prompted my curiosity additional into faith and IR, and the way worldviews are constructed and formed. This additionally led me to analysis additional on how we are able to conceptualize beliefs of reality, non-violence or justice as lively political forces that in actual fact function by very particular and sacred language and historical past. These then develop into political forces that may reformulate the worldwide system as an ethical/moral battleground haunted by the failures of its emancipatory initiatives, a view I attempted to clarify by the hauntological method within the article. If you consider it, IR scholarship can be not simply an mental clarification of the world with its injustices, but additionally a recognition that new scholarship in IR generally is a type of discursive political intervention into the inherent biases of the self-discipline.
In your articleThe Ghost of Gandhi: A Hauntological Approach to Truth and Non-Violence, what led you to use Derridas idea of hauntology to Gandhis legacy? What distinctive insights does this framework provide that differ from these of conventional historic or political analyses?
The hauntological method aimed to deal with Gandhi not as a static determine however as an lively ghost, a spectral pressure that haunts the current by exposing the moral debt incurred by the established order. My article sought to use Derridas hauntology to deal with a really particular discontent I had with two essential, however contradictory, remedies of the Mahatma, i.e., one that’s hagiographical and different that’s positivist de-spiritualization. Hauntology helped tackle that hole it’s the undefined gray zone the place I believe Gandhi really operates as a ghost. The hauntological method presents a novel incorporation of Gandhi by permitting the mixing of his failures, the unfulfilled potential of his concepts, and the unaddressed moral calls for of his being, into the political evaluation of Satyagraha (the pressure of reality) and Ahimsa (non-violence).
The primary puzzle was that if Gandhi is a universally acknowledged historic determine of saintly perfection, his presence would stay confined to the previous the place he existed. If he was represented by his strategies for Satyagraha and Ahimsa, his relevance could be confined to virtually adaptable strategies of non-violent protests, as an example. This would suggest that Gandhi was both too good and idealistic, or too out of date, for todays politics, on condition that his strategies have been for a selected interval in historical past, in a selected context. This is exactly the place Derridas hauntology is effective in arguing that the spectral is an absent presence. Gandhi just isn’t historic, however an unresolved promise of justice, that disrupts the linear historic discourse and challenges the notion of an overwhelming, victorious, self-satisfied current. The idea helps mirror on why Gandhi (or his concepts) hold resurfacing be it the long-standing (mis)understanding of caste, IRs forgetfulness over its colonial roots, Black Lives Matter (BLM) motion, or within the very ethical language used to critique up to date conflicts just like the Israel-Palestine disaster (because the article explores). The hauntological method exhibits how and why the ghost of Gandhi refuses to be absolutely exorcised.
From the attitude of conventional analyses, the hauntological method presents a number of distinctive and essential insights which might be in any other case missed. One is the structural integration of the shadow of failure. Traditional hagiography sanitizes Gandhi and his life (his problematic views on caste or his failure to forestall a collection of violence associated to the Partition), whereas conventional political evaluation merely dismisses these as tactical errors by a key political determine. However, the Ghost of Gandhi necessitates that we embrace these shadows. The ghost just isn’t an ideal best, however certainly a painful reminder of the human price of a flawed however noble battle. By confronting and integrating these failures, the ghost forces a extra pragmatic, much less idealized, picture. The hauntological method allows extra empathetic engagement with Gandhis legacy, making his battle human and perpetually related.
Secondly, Ahimsa as an finish, not only a means by the hauntological method re-centers the moral core. Simply put, Ahimsa is not only a strategic means to attain political targets. The ghost calls for that Ahimsa be steady, inner, a religious dedication and a relentless moral reckoning, i.e., an finish in itself. The existence of the ghost challenges actors, whether or not states or people, to introspect and acknowledge their very own complicity in perpetuating structural violence. The persistence of the ghost signifies that this work of moral self-reform is unfinished and calls for an ethical, not only a strategic, intervention in international affairs.
The third avenue made out there by the hauntological method could be difficult the linearity of time, particularly when considered by the Indian philosophical/non secular thought, the place time is non-linear and cyclical. That helps uncover the disruption of historical past. Traditional historic or political analyses see Gandhis work as a closed chapter, or as an occasion that occurred and is previous. The ghost, nonetheless, exists in a non-linear realm of to come back, insisting that the potential for reality (Satyagraha) and non-violence (Ahimsa) is an unfulfilled promise that may be reborn at any second to confront injustice. This permits us to re-contextualize Gandhis rules in conflicts just like the Israel-Palestine rivalry, arguing that his beliefs are spectral forces that return cyclically, refusing to permit the current to settle. This presents a perpetually open-ended framework for justice.
What motivated you to undertake a comprehensivereview of how faith is theorised inside worldwide relations? Have you observed any persistent misconceptions or oversights in mainstream IR scholarship?
My motivation got here from how I considered IRs mental and empirical analyses from my regional concentrate on South Asia. So lengthy because the mainstream IR focuses on secular modernity, it will be tough to include or actually interact with faith as a key, somewhat than peripheral, political pressure in international affairs. For occasion, the significance of faith-based actions (whether or not violent or non-violent) as stirring regional and worldwide political change challenged the secular presumption that modernity would inevitably result in the privatization and marginalization of faith. My guide,Faith and Politics in South Asia, demonstrated that the state identities and overseas coverage decisions of countries like India, Bangladesh and Pakistan are deeply rooted in particular political theologies that predate, and sometimes supersede, secular-rationalist logic.
In a means, it highlights some persistent misconceptions like universalization of the church-state separation as a template for contemporary states. That is why there continues to be an absence of acknowledgement of perpetual existence and thriving of faith in political areas (and in some circumstances its overpowering dictation of politics) by use of phrases like resurgence or the return of faith. That may be the case from sure views, however it can’t be universalized as a typical expertise of all areas of the world. For giant elements of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, the political and the religious have all the time been deeply intertwined, and in-fact have sustained one another. IRs secular cage misdiagnoses the foundational variations in state ontology as anomaly or instability or deviation from the norm.
Another instance is how IR primarily treats faith as an instrumental variable, a instrument to be manipulated by rational political elites to attain secular targets. While faith can be utilized as a instrument, it’s questionable to label it as such and ignore it as a supply of identification, a type of legitimacy or as a framework for violence and peace that runs the ethical economic system of accountability. This is likely one of the the reason why Satyagraha, which can’t be decreased to a mere political approach as a result of its energy derives from an inner, religious dedication to Ahimsa, continues to be misunderstood. Similarly, by hyper-focusing on the extremities of faith as a violent pressure, IR ignores the potential of theGhost of Gandhias the moral and non-violent problem that religion can pose to the established order.
These have implications for analysis and coverage evaluation too. I may give you two examples. How can we operationalize Satyagraha or Nirvana (liberation) into secular IR variables? Fitting non secular ideas right into a secular framework typically renders them unrecognizable or politically neutered. This can have an effect on the analysis design and even result in misinterpretations. Often, non secular motivations might be dismissed as irrational. Similarly, the thought of company is evident in IR however complicated when considered by a spiritual lens. Where does the political energy lie? Who is a sovereign? Different religions give totally different solutions: for some, it’s the textual content; for others, the chief or prophet(s), typically the group; and it may well even be the divine itself. This challenges the state as a unitary actor. Moreover, faith is unbounded by state boundary or loyalty. It additionally forces IR to take care of the interior logic of religion and conviction, somewhat than simply the exterior logic of rational goal and pursuits. These ambiguities trigger evaluation paralysis for analysis in search of causal clarification, whereas for coverage, this creates issue in pointing to the levers of affect. For occasion, throughout battle decision, ought to a secular authorities rationally negotiate with political elites or additionally interact non secular figures with important ethical authority locally? That stays a problem for coverage.
In your evaluate, what do you establish as essentially the most important theoretical challenges when incorporating faith into IR frameworks? How do these have an effect on each analysis and coverage evaluation?
As I defined, one of many greatest challenges is that faith doesn’t match neatly into present IR frameworks, that are largely primarily based on rationality and state-centric assumptions. Religion includes interior logic, sacred language, and ethical claims which will transcend or problem state sovereignty and secular reasoning. It is tough to measure, predict, or incorporate these components into standard analyses.
This ambiguity complicates analysis: how do you quantify faiths affect? And it complicates coverage: ought to governments interact non secular leaders straight? Recognizing religions ethical and identity-building roles calls for a extra nuanced method, which isn’t all the time simple or comfy for policymakers grounded in secular rules.
How essential is the position ofIndia-Japan collaborations in countering Chinas Himalayan ambitions? What potential do such coalitions have in balancing Chinas affect and guaranteeing regional safety?
The position ofIndia-Japan collaborationis a vital multi-dimensional strategic, financial, and normative pillar within the Indo-Pacific structure. While it assists Indias place as an rising energy and a reputable voice of the Global South, it additionally addresses Himalayan safety and Himalayan connectivity to the broader area.
Chinas Himalayan presence is three-pronged: confrontational, comparable to alongside the Indo-Chinese border (which stays largely undecided and extremely contested); economically important when considered by the Belt and Road Initiative initiatives China has undertaken (BRI initiatives in Nepal, Pakistan and Bangladesh); and demonstrative of Chinas hydrological dominance in constructing dams in and past Tibetan rivers. Additionally, China workout routines important political affect amongst South Asian states (Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and many others.). TheIndia-Japan strategic partnershipoffers, to the area, another mannequin of improvement cooperation.
As a geo-economic counterweight, Japan and India have beforehand collaborated on infrastructure and strategic connectivity initiatives in Indias Northeast bordering the Himalayan area. Japans dedication to high quality infrastructure additionally serves as a normative counter to the BRI mannequin of opacity and monetary infeasibility.Indo-Japanese collaborationthrough frameworks just like the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue), maritime area consciousness, joint workout routines, and strategic communication, are geared toward deterring any energy focus by one actor within the area, and are marked by freedom of navigation, shared prosperity, and inclusivity.
Your ISDP transient,Tibets Climate Crisis: The Japanese Perspective,notes Japans longstanding recognition of Tibet as a part of China, whereas additionally highlighting considerations over human rights and environmental degradation. Given the intensifying geopolitical competitors within the Indo-Pacific, how do you foresee Japans coverage towards Tibet evolving within the coming years?
Japans Tibet coverage is a fancy balancing act between financial interdependence with China and normative dedication to liberal democratic values and human rights. Given the intensifying US-China geopolitical competitors, Beijings assertive actions within the South China Sea or near theSenkaku Islands, and the strengthening of the US-Japan safety alliance, I foresee Japans coverage towards Tibet evolving slowly however calculatedly from strategic silence on political points to cautious normative conditioning by the non-confrontational lens of environmental safety and local weather crises.
In reality, the environmental safety nexus may develop into a major vector of change, because the Tibetan Plateau is the Third Pole serving because the supply of Asias nice rivers. Extensive dam building and the accelerating results of local weather disaster pose an existential safety menace to the areas water safety. For most downstream nations, Tibets environmental disaster is seen not as a home situation however as a transnational safety problem. This framing permits nations like Japan to interact China on local weather points with out confrontation and lift these considerations at multilateral boards about shared environmental dangers with out evoking delicate political vocabulary.
Japan can be Indias strategic associate, and this bilateral alignment is essential to Indo-Pacific safety in some ways. Such environmentally delicate framing of Tibets local weather problem addresses Indias water safety, whereas additionally talking for the landlocked Himalayan nations of Nepal and Bhutan. Coordinating joint coverage and analysis efforts with India may subtly strengthen the Indo-Japanese strategic partnership on a non-military shared curiosity that additionally addresses the motion for Tibetan cultural existence.
On a wider scale, the intensification of Indo-Pacific contests has essentially shifted the political calculus. As decoupling from China is impractical for nations like Japan, de-risking stays the important thing. Japan will proceed to subtly leverage its rising strategic relationship with India and the Quad framework to craft a sustained and steady Tibet coverage of strategically signaling for mobilization of normative strain on China, to handle Beijings conduct and convey it to the dialogue desk on local weather points, all with out abandoning its foundational political commitments to the bilateral Japan-China relations. But total, there may be growing concern over the necessity to increase this situation by accountable interactional actors at multilateral boards, advert to interact with China on Tibetan safety as a result of it impacts not solely Himalayan nations however the wider Indo-Pacific. In reality, that was one of many key factors of dialogue at theSecond Stockholm Forum on HimalayaI was invited to take part in. There was consensus amongst audio system, which was additionally talked about within the Forums proceedings, that Tibet must be located in critical deliberations on local weather change on the UNFCCC agenda and COP 30.
Yourarticleunderscores the significance of direct inter-Korean dialogue free from exterior interference. Considering the present geopolitical complexities notably surrounding the nuclear situation what concrete confidence-building measures or coverage initiatives may facilitate such dialogue?
The precept of direct inter-Korean dialogue, unfettered by exterior interference, is in a means deeply aligned with the spirit of autonomy and inner moral reckoning (introspection) mentioned by the Ghost of Gandhi. The concept is for the 2 actors to confront their shared, painful historical past straight, and have interaction in a means of reality and reconciliation. But the complexity of the nuclear situation signifies that true freedom or doable evasion from exterior interference is tough to attain. Therefore, the simplest confidence-building measures (CBMs) have to be those who de-securitize non-political points whereas additionally creating channels for continued engagement that make exterior intervention much less obligatory. These measures should concentrate on assuaging human struggling and should search to revive belief and a shared sense of safety, that are more durable for exterior powers to intervene in or criticize. For occasion, the institution of a everlasting, non-political, demilitarized workplace to primarily facilitate reunification of households or connecting abductees with their family by video conferences, and finally bodily reunions, can de-securitize human struggling and make the dialogue ethically obligatory somewhat than politically handy. This is, in a means, a joint dedication to the Ahimsa precept, and might be a step in the direction of constructing and sustaining the belief. These can be the idea for additional joint motion on widespread challenges just like the local weather change or well being crises (like pandemic, air pollution and many others.), or joint analysis for catastrophe threat discount.
The CBM on the army aspect might be tougher, given the nuclear anxiousness. Moreover, the latest political developments concerning South Korean acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines may re-spark the classical safety dilemma. Any CBM in such a local weather of uncertainty would should be supported bilaterally. The conventional devoted army and political hotlines would should be regularized, and stored useful to lower the chance of misinterpretation, disinformation and distrust throughout a disaster. The intention of those CBMs is to make sure and present that the 2 Koreas can handle their shared challenges bilaterally. This may revise the worldwide notion from perpetually brewing battle managed by exterior powers to a bilateral negotiation primarily based on Korean autonomy.
What is a very powerful recommendation you can give to younger students of International Relations?
The most essential recommendation I can provide to younger students of IR drawn to the intersection of idea, historical past, and ethics, is to keep away from being confined to a single theoretical camp. Master the foundations however don’t draw back from crossing disciplinary boundaries.
The second could be to embrace the haunting. Examine the absent presence, search the marginalized histories, discover silenced voices and establish unresolved injustices that proceed to form our current.
The third could be, most significantly, to withstand the strain of fast response. It is price your time to learn and analysis deeply somewhat than superficially. It would possibly sound too time-consuming in todays day and age, however studying total books lets you interact in a psychological churning, very like the good churning of the cosmic ocean.
Developing worthwhile analysis capabilities requires labor, persistence, perseverance, and fixed in search of. It must be nurtured with (Satyagraha) self-reflection too.
Further Reading on E-International Relations
- Interview Navnita Chadha Behera
- Interview Ankit Panda
- Interview Kishore Mahbubani
- Interview Sarah Wolff
- Interview Sahil Mathur
- Interview Melissa Conley Tyler
Editorial Credit(s)
Ridipt Singh
Tags
AsiaGlobal IRHauntologyReligionTibet