The enterprise of international law, in both its classical and modern forms were, in essence, an enterprise to expand and entrench the hegemonical narrative. One cannot divorce the conceptualisation and understanding of the authoritative institution from its colonial history. Insofar as the present available literature has provided conceptualisations on how the European colonial powers have structured global governance, this dissertation attempts to be an aperture through which the hermeneutics of the traditions of the Eurologocentrism – that is, the logic of Western European thought, which includes a Greco-Roman and the JudeoChristian tradition – and international law intersect. In this dissertation, I problematise the conceptual framework of modern international law in examining the normative vocabularies which gives structure to the law of nations. A major contention of this dissertation is that prior examinations have obscured important, if not necessary, factors which are relevant to producing alternative approaches to the discipline. In neglecting the historiographies and genealogy of thought, one inadvertently succumbs to the essentialist representations of Western Europe and the Orient. By employing a deconstructive hermeneutical genealogy approach, I provincialize the colonial historiography to invert the continuous narratives and demonstrate the diverse conditions in which imperial settings had operated and continues to persist. Given the historical context, a fundamental element to be found in Eurologocentrism is a Judeo-Christian tradition. In my attempt at reconciling the body of international law with the Sinosphere, I will elucidate many parallels between ancient China and early modern Europe. Hence, contrary to mainstream scholarly perspectives, I contend that a reconciliation with the Sinosphere is feasible. I conclude with policy recommendations to generalise the international legal body to even wider applicability.

How can we comprehend and make sense of the epistemic space and ‘grey zone’ between the traditional understandings of the ‘Global North’ and ‘Global South’ through relational approaches? Various concepts have emerged in the last years to frame post-soviet lived experiences – Eurasia, Global East, Central- and Eastern Europe, Transperipheral –, but so far none of them seem to be widely accepted. Why is it so particularly difficult/challenging to address this epistemic 'grey space'? How can we explore and understand the spaces opened by the sudden rupture caused by the fall of the Soviet world? This chapter examines the challenges of addressing the legacy left by the disintegration of the former Second World through a relational approach to imperiality within postcolonial and decolonial contexts. It explores the temporal, spatial, and epistemic dimensions of understanding the former ‘Second World’, focusing on the potential links between (post)socialist, (post)communist, and (post)colonial perspectives. By situating these approaches within the concepts of global easts and imperiality, it highlights the ways coloniality and imperiality are interconnected through mutual influences and reciprocal dynamics, revealing how they shape contemporary identities, knowledge systems, and geopolitical relations. As a main contribution, the chapter discusses how a relational contextualisation of imperiality and an epistemology of global easts can contribute to and deepen decolonial and deimperial thought and praxis, enriching our understanding of a shared global history that continues to inform current structures of power.