 another edition of Islamabad today on Think Tech Hawaii. I'm your host Hamdor Afsand. Today, we're going to be getting an academic perspective on a very valuable contribution towards international relations as a theory, as a concept, and as a practice. We're talking about a scholar who's based in Islamabad in Pakistan. He's the associate professor at the School of Politics and International Relations at Khaydeh Azam University, Dr. Farhan Hanid Sadiq, and his particular book, which has been published by the Oxford University Press. He co-authored, of course, with Dr. Nadeem Mirza, is known as International Relations, Concepts, Theories, and Practice. So how does this book, number one, you know, when we look forward to the prospect of ensuring that the discourse is actually enriched, how does this book, which is published by the Oxford University Press, how does this enrich the discourse? Dr. Farhan, thank you so much for joining me on the show. Thank you, Hamdor, for your very kind invitation. It's an absolute pleasure to be with you here. Likewise. So let's start off. Yes. Yes, please go ahead. Yes. So, you know, when Nadeem and I started to conceptualize about an introductory IR textbook, which was tailored primarily to Pakistani undergraduate and postgraduate students. And that goes way back in 2016. That's when we started writing the book, started thinking about it. It's primarily based on the three fundamental elements that you spoke about in the introduction to the book. So it's there in the title itself. So it's called Introducing International Relations, Concepts, Theories, and Practices. So what we wanted to do, and this is what we've done in the book, is to have 16 different chapters on 16 different themes. And all chapters, they basically start from defining what basic concepts are. From there on, we do the theories, mention theories for each of the topics that we've outlined in each of these chapters. And then the crucial element in all of this is the third one, which relates to practices. So often in Pakistan, you know, I've been teaching for more than 25 years now, that we mainly rely on Western author textbooks. And all of them are absolutely important and critical to understand the basic elements and foundations of international relations. But one of the lags, if you will, in these textbooks is, is that they take the reference points from Western examples. And our book is primarily tailored to situating practices, primarily from Pakistan, but also from South Asia and the Global South. Okay, all right. So I mean, that was going to be my next question. It's almost like you're trying to indigenize the entire narrative with regard to international relations. Now, there are certain concepts, for example, the stability and stability paradox, it might be completely alien to many Western scholars, but it's something which is actually a practical reality in South Asia. So when you were actually drafting the book, did you encounter any challenges with regard to this? Because I mean, I've gone through the contents of it, it's actually quite comprehensive. And I'm pretty sure that many Pakistani students, once they actually invite this book, they'll be far more educated. But did you face any challenges while writing this book? I think one of the major challenges, you know, when you write a textbook, is that you have to write on each and every topic under the sun. So it's different, for example, from a previous book, which was about the politics of ethnicity in Pakistan, and I was focused primarily on the Baloch and Mahajir ethnic movements. And that is what I basically wrote on. But when Nadeem and I started writing the textbook, so there were some areas which are our core competence and that we can write, that we could write easily on. So for example, Nadeem wrote in foreign policy, he wrote on strategic strategies, arms control, proliferation, disarmament, all of these chapters. Also a very important chapter on research methodology, which you generally do not find in most of the western-authored textbooks. And that is one area that we instituted within this textbook, so that it could make sense also to be a Ph.D. student in this country. So for me, chapters on identity, conflict resolution, you know, nationalism, these came, you know, theory is a fact of IR and the introduction. But there were some other challenges. So most of the challenges was writing a chapter on political economy or writing a chapter on international law, writing a chapter on feminism and gender, all the environment, all the non-state actors. So I think one of the core challenges was to write on subjects and topics which Nadeem and I do not normally teach or have not taught in our entire academic careers. But we had to read it upon it, you know, in length in order to write it down. And of course, it makes sense to the students, you know, who would read this book. Okay, so obviously being an associate professor at Guy Dalton University School of Politics and International Relations has actually ranked the best department for international relations in the country. You must have disseminated this book amongst your students and, you know, your colleagues as well. First of all, what sort of feedback did your students actually give to this book? Oh, the meaning of feedback has been absolutely brilliant all across Pakistan. So my Twitter feed, you know, was almost full of, you know, likes and retweets and comments. I also received a comment like yesterday about, you know, school, I think it's from Bahawalpur, if I'm not wrong, who just messaged me, you know, saying that he liked the book, Nadeem has received a number of messages. So yes, yeah, so in terms of the dissemination, in terms of the feedback from students, it has been absolutely brilliant. And I think one of the ways in which they've liked the book is that it's easy to understand in the sense of the language that we've instituted. They've also praised us on the fact that each chapter has what Nadeem and I worked on were specific student thinking exercises. So every chapter has these student thinking exercise where we motivate or incentivize the student to think on some important questions. For example, the 18th Amendment or, you know, questions of foreign policy or questions of identity or questions of electoral politics in the chapter on feminism and gender. So students have really liked these, you know, student thinking exercises, you know, they've given us this comment that this has made them more inquisitive, if you will, in terms of understanding, you know, the implications of international relations current affairs and politics. And the other thing that we have in each of these chapters is that we end every chapter with 10 summary points. Then we have five, you know, questions for each of these chapters. And then we have an additional reading list, which is besides the references and, you know, citations that we use. Yeah, so on all of these comments, you know, students have really liked, you know, what they've said is a very coherent and structured way of writing. And the books book helps them understand and motivate them about this subject. And we are absolutely humbled and honored by the feedback that we've received all across Pakistan. Okay, now let's come to the feedback from your colleagues, because Kaidiazim University is known as a university A as, you know, the best institution in the country in the general category, also an institution which, you know, promotes freedom of thought, freedom of expression, the ability to say things which might actually be taboo in other quarters, but you can actually say them quite homely in that environment. So what about, you know, feedback from your colleagues? What did they have to say? Was anybody, you know, critical of the book? Was anybody, you know, I'm sure there must have been a lot of praise, but were there any critiques of the book? Yeah. Yeah, we're still waiting on the critical feedback from the faculty, both within Kaidiazim and outside. So we've received a couple of them, like a faculty member recently told me something about, you know, the chapter on history, how could it have been structured in a better way? Plus we are doing, Nadeem and I, we are doing some promotion publicity to us. So we went to the Fath Majinah Women's University in Ramon 20. Then we also went to the other, which other universities I went to, I can't recall the name, not plus we went to other universities planned. And the thing that we asked students in faculty both is to give us that critical feedback and comment, so that we can use it and make the book more better, you know, when the second edition comes out. So for the first edition, and this is linked to your first question, the book has already sold out. So yeah, so the Oxford University Press, you know, they printed about 2000 copies. So all of them sold out in, you know, in the nine months, you know, since March. So they're now going in for reprints. So yeah, so in terms of sales it's been good, but we're still waiting on some more critical feedback from the faculty and also from students. And this is, we ask them anytime, every time that we meet them, this is what we ask them to, you know, prices of our critical feedback so we can improve the second edition of the book even further. Okay, so when we talk about narratives having a trickle down effect on the local population, I think given Pakistan's massive diversity, you have, you know, Balochistan, Sindh, Faber-Khuban, Punjab, different languages, different abilities to grasp certain concepts. Now, for example, a student from Balochistan might have a completely different view on international relations as compared to somebody from Punjab. Have you ever thought about, you know, having this book printed in the vernacular press, maybe in Urdu or in Baloch, or in Bashto or in Sindhi in the regional languages so that it could have even more traction? Yeah, that's a very good question. I have one from which it was based in Fadbo and he was my student at the University of Karachi where I wrote previously and he, you know, came up with this idea recently that if we could, you know, translate this book into Sindhi and I said, why not? Many of you can, you know, do it. We'll be very happy for the book to be translated into the vernacular languages if the more people read it in any sort of language, language, you know, it helps, you know, in people understanding, you know, the foundations and basic elements of the discipline. The only thing in Pakistan, Hamza is that, you know, when people sit for their civil service exams or even the provincial commission service exams or whatever, you know, most of these exams are in English. So, you know, an English textbook, you know, aids them better. And this is, again, one feedback which I received from one of the students and she said that she really liked the writing style and she said that, you know, I can use this in my CSU exams. So, you know, so yeah, so I think, meaning we'll welcome any opportunity for the book to be translated into the vernacular. But yeah, but again, depends on who is available to do, you know, the translations and yeah, but we'll be very happy to have it in the vernacular as well. Has this book been received well or has it been exported to neighboring India as well? Yeah, meaning the global edition came out only recently. So the good thing with, you know, that was the initial motivation to publish with the Oxford University Press because they have a brilliant, you know, department which disseminates books all across the world. So the global edition came out in October. And that's very recent. So the faculty and contacts that I know in India, and even other places in Sri Lanka, Nepal, other places. So I've sent them the link for this global edition so they can buy the book through the global edition. So that's another, you know, area that we're looking forward to the kind of feedback that we receive from, you know, audiences in India. But again, on LinkedIn and Twitter, I've received messages from India and other South Asian countries that would really want to see the book. So I think they have the opportunity to buy it now, and especially like this. So, you know, universities like JNU or other, you know, in India, they have the opportunity to buy the book through the POINV Press, you know, the global edition. I'm just going to add a little bit of a political twist to this Indian question. I mean, were there any Indian academics who were extremely critical of the book, or did they actually receive this pretty well, as you know, a Pakistani scholar? Because I've gone through the contents of the book, I think it's pretty comprehensive, and it does appeal to the common man. There's criticism which comes from India that, you know, most books tend to be, you know, pro status quo. And the same can also be said about criticism from Pakistan, which actually, you know, brandishes Hindutva or Indian Hindu supremacist politics as something which is acceptable for, you know, the common India. Both, both categories are wrong. But have any Indian scholars been critical of the book? Yeah, again, still too early, because I'm not sure if many academics in India have, you know, actually received a copy of the book. So I'm sure through the dissemination, so they know that the book is out. So I'm sure within the next six to eight months over here, when academics in India and other places, you know, use this book in their classroom teaching, and I hope that they do, that they find some value. And again, the purpose of a textbook is to disseminate information as objectively as possible. So for example, we have the Kalbushan Yadav case, an entire box for the Kalbushan Yadav case in the non state actress chapter. And all we did was that we picked up, you know, the entire judgment proceedings from the ICJ website, and we just put it out there for leaders to read and make up their mind, you know, as opposed to, you know, engaging in, you know, slogans such as who won and who lost or India won or Pakistan lost or Pakistan won or India lost. So, you know, just read the judgment and decide for yourselves, you know, what is out there. So in terms of, you know, the messaging, the content, and that should be the purpose of any academic exercises to be as objective as possible. And this is what you've tried to do. But again, we would love to have, you know, critical comments and feedback from India, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives, whatever, you know, the book goes through it, you know, and then, you know, have it included in our second edition. Well, it's interesting because when you mentioned international relations theory, I mean, being a student of peace and conflict studies myself, I've actually noticed that when we talk about certain theories, they have more traction in certain parts of the world. When you talk about the United States, for example, neorealism and realism is, you know, with pro-capitalism, you know, as something as a rejoinder, that's something which has a lot of traction. In Europe, constructivism is considered to be, you know, the way to go about it. And in Africa, you talk about it's not an international relations theory, but neocolonialism, which is actually, you know, weaponized through neorealism. That is something which has a lot of traction. And we talk about realism in South Asia's context with Pakistan and India, both nuclear western states, and non-signatories to the end. We do have a situation where conflict can actually take place and there are other factors which underpin that. And then you have neorealism again in the Asia Pacific, but you know, the United States and China actually vying for influence. So it's interesting when you actually go through the book, you do see lots of these theories actually being mentioned, but since you've tried to indigenize the narrative to a large extent, have you by any chance bypass constructivism or, you know, some of the other theories, which also apply in certain contexts and also has a lot of traction in different parts of the world? So we have, you know, in the theory chapter, we have a section on constructivism that spells out the entire theory. And the final chapter is where we bring what you speak about as non-western or global IR theory, you know, very bizarre Amitabh Vajray and others. And we use that and list it among other theories as well or other perspectives, if you will, the newer perspectives. So there's some interesting work, for example, in quantum theory that Fiennes mentioned in the final chapter. There's some interesting work on, you know, post-international politics, man's back and figures, and that again Fiennes mentioned in the final chapter. And then there are elements of how culture, you know, manifests itself in international relations, because international relations, you know, is such a materially oriented search, power, balances of power, you know, deterrence and acquisition of nuclear weapons or economic growth or business in finance. So culture is making a very strong comeback in IR theory. And that also finds mention in the final chapter. So what we've done is to point at the end towards these new ways of thinking or these new theories, if you will, you know, that are getting traction within international relations, so as to direct the attention of, you know, the students to new material. Yeah, and that is how we've done it for the most part of it. So yes, so it's there, constructivism, global IR, a bit of, you know, non-western IR and, you know, elements of culture in the old days. Okay. So I mean, now there's this broader question that many scholars have written on international relations theories and there are many seminal books, and there are also books which have actually made an original contribution as well. So did that in any way motivate you to try and make sure that, you know, you can come up with something even better, or maybe something on par with some of the, you know, leading scholars of the world? Because when you look at your book in general, yes, it's very detailed. It allows students and, you know, people who are actually interested in international relations of the subject to actually exercise the theories that are actually, you know, enlisted. So we talk about that. Do you think that this was an added motivation for you that, yes, there is like voluminous work that has been done on international relations, and here is where me myself and Dr. Nadeem Mirza would make an original contribution. Yeah. You see, the question of originality is important. But originality is not what the textbook is about, because what you're doing in the textbook is basically restating material that has already been spelled out by others. So, yeah, so the academic books beside textbooks are where you find the original material. For us, the most important question Nadeem and I was to how to tailor the book and make it accessible to students. So when they read, they can find the connect, let's say, between concepts and theories. So when they read the book, they can find the connect between theories and practices that they could actually differentiate between concept theories and practices as a whole. And when they read the book, they can apply these, you know, theories and concepts to examples from Pakistan. Right? So that was the most important question for us. So the originality question, you know, for a textbook is a non-question because you're already restating material. So the most important task for a textbook is to restate the already stated material in a way that makes sense to students. So that when they read the book, they can say, okay, this is something that we did not speak about. You see, one of the, you know, one of the challenges in Nadeem and I speak about this a lot that one of these challenges for the IR subject, it's a very dynamic subject, you would agree. But it's also very banal subject, meaning you can watch CNN and BBC or see what's happening on Twitter or what the Americans are doing, what these Israelis are doing and what the Russians are doing in Ukraine. And those reading of events, you know, will make anyone and everyone an expert in international relations. That's true. Right? So that's the banality of the IR discipline that we have to confront. So this is what I tell my first year students that your parents or your brothers or your sisters who do not have an IR degree will comment on, you know, what these Israelis are doing in Palestine or what the Russians are doing in Ukraine or what the Americans are doing in the rest of the world or what is happening between India and Pakistan. So what is it that makes you distinctive as IR students? And that is where I bring in, you know, and the book brings in the dimension that the, so the authenticity, let's say, or the value, you know, of an IR student is a great in the fact that they can speak about concepts and theories and related to practice that a common man who's not done an IR degree, you know, cannot do. And that is what this is how we did at the book so that students could actually think on these questions. So hypothetically speaking, if we look at, you know, emerging dynamics in the Asia Pacific, you know, all this attention between China and the Philippines, and then you have the United States expanded footprint in the Asia Pacific, where you put military bases in Guam and, you know, obviously in direct confrontation with China. And China believes that basically the nine dashed line is something that belongs to China for that matter. So here's a comment. If any layman would take a look at this, they wouldn't know what the nine dashed line is or why the U.S. has decided to deploy so many military forces or why is China deciding to respond back. They would just go by the standard narrative that, okay, this is the U.S.-China rivalry. But an IR student would look at it as and place it, you know, compartmentalize it into either neorealism, realism, or is there anything constructive happening? Is there any dialogue which is taking place? So you make a very valid point here that if you take a look at a news story, it's very easy to take news, a news story as unfazed value. And that's something we journalists do a lot of the time. But an IR expert, if he's a journalist, that would be an added, you know, advantage. But an IR expert, if he takes a look at the story, they can dissect those, you know, variables very, very quickly. You would agree to that? Yeah, meaning they would look at, you know, the lack, you frame it in the terms of what is happening in terms of, you know, the structural properties, you know, the international system, your realism, if you will, they would look at their domestic, you know, political conditions in the U.S. and China, how that is, you know, shaping the U.S.-China rivalry. They would look at economic indicators, you know. So they look at a number of factors, you know, in a more theoretical sense in order to make, you know, a more value-added judgment of what is happening between the U.S. and China and what are the reasons for it, if you will. And again, they would look at the discourse, you know, they would look at ideas, they would look at normative elements. And that would give them the added value, you know, to the analysis of what is happening between the U.S. and China. That would make it distinct, you know, from, again, an analysis from a person who watches news televisions and reads news, but cannot give us those in-depth insights that a person who studies higher can. Now, as an IR scholar yourself, and also being based from one of the leading universities in the country, which theory do you personally, you know, find as a personal favorite? Okay, that's a meaning. Generally I've been drawn, you know, more towards the elites which emphasize cooperation. So I've been drawn more towards neoliberalism. I find the elements where states tend to cooperate with each other, where states sign agreements with each other, where states come closer to each other, as more fascinating, as more motivating as opposed to context where states fight wars with each other. So that's, you know, the personal motivation or inclination, if you will. So I'm drawn closer to constructivism, which speaks about ideas, which speaks about how states, you know, develop norms or institutionalized norms that leads to, you know, regional security frameworks, you know, where states come together to do conflict resolution, to manage conflicts in ways that go beyond zero-sum, thinking zero-sum situations. So that is what keeps me more motivated, you know, when it comes to international politics, as opposed to context when states fight wars with each other. I mean, that's a very sharp detraction for what I find very fascinating, because for me, it's all about Kenneth Waltz and neoliberalism. I'm a realist, you know, in terms of my orientation towards life as well. And you know, when you take a look at, you know, you know, concepts such as U.S. military industrial complexes, or the rise of China, or, you know, India's, you know, illegal annexation of Indian illegally occupied Java and Kashmir, I mean, realism is something which is, or NATO's buildup, you know, in Ukraine suddenly prompting Russia to basically, you know, respond in tit-for-tat, and then there's an entire crisis. So realism and neolilism, you would agree, is something which is, you know, they're like real-life examples, which are actually taking place in the 21st century. Yeah, meaning not denying that realism and neolilism, you know, are frameworks which are, you know, less useful, let's say, in understanding international politics. The only point is that, you know, the world is a mixture of both conflict and cooperation. You know, meaning we focus, you know, again, I focus, I try and focus more on when states cooperate. You know, that's, again, that, that's what motivates me. But I'm not denying the fact that there are no conflict between states. So I'm realist in that sense, you know, otherwise I would be an idealist. So that is why, you know, I like the conflict resolution and peace studies, you know, literature, because when they make the argument for peace and conflict resolution, they start from the assumption that conflicts will never end. Yeah. Right? Gohan Galtun, for example. Yeah. Yes, exactly. Galtun, others, you know, bolding. So they start from this assumption that conflicts will burden, that conflicts will continue to persist. The only thing that we have to work towards, right, academically and, you know, in a more activist sense is to see that these conflicts evolve in a non-violent manner. So, yes, so, so you can be persuaded by realism, your realism, and that is absolutely fine, right? It's how we look at the world and how we perspectiveize the world. Everyone has their own lens to see how the world works. Well, your book is definitely a valuable addition to the entire international relations discourse. Dr. Paranani, the associate professor at the School of Politics and International Relations at Cardinal University. Thank you so much for joining me on the show. Thank you, Hamza. Thank you for having me. I really enjoyed this conversation. Yeah, it's great. And, you know, I'm sure you've enjoyed this conversation as well. That's all from Islamabad today on Pink Tech Hawaii. You can follow us on our social media pages, including Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Do provide us with your feedback, and we'll get back to you as soon as possible. Until next time, take care.