The project to decolonise the curriculum revolves around rethinking margin and centre of the discipline. To the extent that the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is at the margin of international political economy (IPE), it is the ideal entry point to decolonise the curriculum. I conduct a summative content analysis of the six most commonly used IPE textbooks. To what extent do they reproduce or challenge Eurocentric tropes in their treatment of MENA? The region is largely absent from IPE textbooks, suggesting it is accorded little agency in the making of the global political economy. To the extent that it is ‘brought in’, it is ‘ghettoised’ in a specialist chapter. A qualitative content analysis suggests the authors avoid overt orientalism but exceptionalise the region as a failure with too little democracy and economic growth and too much war. They acknowledge the role of continued colonialism in these failures but also deny agency of the colonised. They miss an opportunity to de-provincialise the Middle East by fostering ‘ecologies of knowledge’. The article provides an analytical framework for research on how IPE textbooks treat other world regions and of syllabi.

非殖民化课程的项目围绕着重新思考学科的边缘和中心。由于中东和北非 (MENA) 处于国际政治经济学 (IPE) 的边缘，因此它是非殖民化课程的理想切入点。我对六本最常用的IPE教科书进行了总结性内容分析。他们在处理 MENA 时在多大程度上复制或挑战了以欧洲为中心的比喻？IPE 教科书中基本上没有该地区，这表明它在全球政治经济的形成中几乎没有参与。就其“引入”而言，它在专业章节中是“贫民窟”。一项定性的内容分析表明，作者避免了明显的东方主义，但将该地区视为民主和经济增长太少以及战争太多的失败者。他们承认持续的殖民主义在这些失败中的作用，但也否认被殖民者的能动性。他们错过了通过培育“知识生态”来使中东去省域化的机会。这篇文章为研究 IPE 教科书如何对待世界其他地区和教学大纲提供了一个分析框架。