The Case for (Neo)Colonialism: Neotrusteeship in International Relations as the ‘Imperial Mind’ of the ‘Colonial Present’

This article takes stock of the neotrusteeship scholarship in international relations by connecting the logics buttressing colonialism with the contemporary call to deal with failed states, thus underlining the imperial mind of the colonial present in contemporary international relations, echoing the work of Crawford Young and Derek Gregory, respectively. This article tackles how colonialism departs from the same postulate as the failed states agenda – one of emptiness, lack or deficit – as well as a structure around distinct ordering of world politics – one specific system for ‘developed’ or ‘civilised’ states, and another system for the world to be colonised. Colonial and post-colonial logics of interventions are inherently connected through the justification for interventions. The neotrusteeship scholarship is quick to portray the colonial state as effective in contradistinction with the post-colonial successor, thus legitimising the setting-up of neotrusteeships over the former colonial territories. This article directly questions all these premises, whilst also pointing out how resistance to imperial logics – from colonial to post-colonial times – has always been present, even if generally silenced in the literature.