Download - LSE Theses Online - London School of Economics and ...

domestic welfare arrangements and foreign policy is not as stark, for one. A secondis the divergent views on state sovereignty and non-intervention. The concept ofinternationalism in the foreign policies of countries of the Global South hascoalesced around four key tenets, namely: solidarity, multilateralism, non-interference andrespect for sovereignty, and non-violent means of conflict resolution.Southern internationalism, cultivated since the early decades of the last century, hasbeen shown to be more than mere ideology, serving instead as an enduringcornerstone of foreign policy for many developing states of all sizes. Southerninternationalism may be a potential successor to Western internationalism, whichhas endured a crisis since the end of the Cold War: a crisis of legitimacy andimplementation. The Southern response is an internationalism of accommodationrather than coercion, and internationalism as a mechanism for the coexistence ofdivergent values and national cultures, rather than a vehicle for the propagation ofspecific values.However, this stance is far from unproblematic. One of the main tensions involvedin the analysis of internationalism in the foreign policies of developing countries isthat the attendant cosmopolitan assumptions that such policies rest on areconsidered to be the products of modern outlooks on international life. Countriesof the developing world are typically considered to be grappling with theestablishment of the first modernist principle of international life, sovereignty orstatehood, and the strengthening of their jurisdiction over clearly delimitedgeographical territories. There is also still much scepticism attached to theattribution of internationalism to the foreign policies of the developing world.With growing domestic resources, large developing countries that projectcosmopolitan foreign policy goals, such as the democratisation of multilateralinstitutions, the equity of the international financial architecture, and the respect fordiversity in international relations, increasingly square up to pressures of self-interestand power, pillars of the realist domain of international relations. How to maketheoretical sense of these tensions – and a proposed solution – are the subject ofthe following chapter.77