Hongli (she/her) is a PhD candidate in the Department of War Studies. Her research interests lie in the interdisciplinary field of feminist/queer International Relations (IR), discourse analysis, Orientalism, state sovereignty, and diplomacy. She holds an MSc in International Relations Research from LSE (UK), an MA in International Relations from the University of Melbourne (Australia), and a BA in Economics from the University of Queensland (Australia).

Prior to her doctoral research, she was an active member of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) in Melbourne, Australia. She participated in policy discussions on nuclear disarmament through the Hiroshima-ICAN Academy in 2021. She has also gained extensive administrative experience through her previous role as the British Conference of Undergraduate Research Administrator at LSE’s Eden Centre in 2024 and her ongoing position as the Executive MSc Programme Assistant at LSE IDEAS.

 

Research Interests

• Gendered and Queer International Politics
• Critical International Relations Theories
• Foucauldian Discourse Analysis and power-knowledge relations
• Statecraft and diplomacy, particularly in relation to China and India
• Digital Diplomacy and the use of AI tools in diplomatic work

 

Thesis title and abstract

Title: The Queer Sovereign Performativity of the British Empire in India, 1858 – 1919

Abstract: What does Leviathan look like for an empire? Drawing from Leviathan, Hobbes depicts a colossal and male sovereign figure, representing the essentiality of a unified and absolute sovereign power to maintain order (Hobbes 1964). However, existing studies, by treating imperial sovereignty as quasi and divisible sovereignty, pay most of the attention to the colonial and postcolonial states’ sovereignty, thereby leaving the sovereignty of the empire almost intact.

The imperial sovereignty is different from state sovereignty, because it underscores the “symbolic demonstrations of power and authority”, more than just control of borders and the creation of (juridical) institutions (Maier 2006, p.101). Showcased in nation’s virility and the representation of masculine power and dominance through expansionism, the British Empire was seen as “a project of masculinity” (Tosh 2005, p.193). Even though Britain was far away from India, an imagined picture of a gigantic and white male Leviathan policing both the territory of Britain and India (and numerous other colonial territories) seems likely during the British Raj from 1858 to 1919, due to a close association between colonial violence and masculinity (Condos 2017).

Weber defines queer as cross-dressing to describe the changing sovereign subjectivity of the state, as cross-dressing exposes and challenges cultural anxiety about gender, class, and race by blurring boundaries, creating a “category crisis” (Weber 2019 and Garber 1992). She argues that queer practices tend to be more noticeable during periods of crisis because when states traumatically confront the impossibility of being a sovereign, it reasserts the need for states to perform the act of recognition (Weber 1999).

By asking the questions of how was "Empire" performed by white, male British state representatives in India during the time of India's colonialism, I argue that the project of imperialism is not just about performing the strength and masculinity of the British Empire, but also about managing and hiding the colonial anxiety -- not only of the colonised, but also of the colonisers. In particular, I argue that it is the colonial anxiety of the colonisers that fuels the queer performative reading of imperial sovereignty.

Supervisors

• Dr Kiran Phull (Primary Supervisor)
• Dr Stephan Engelkamp (Secondary Supervisor)

 

Research centres or groups

• Research Centre in International Relations