The epistemic worth of humanness in the current milieu of International Relations is deficient. It is characterised by a jingoistic oratory in which politicians practice chauvinism by hyperbolising an aptitude for national superiority that dehumanises a segment of a nation’s demography. This study sought to decipher the groundwork laid in International Relations such as states’ conventional embracement of a realist ontology, political doctrines based on methodological nationalism, structural power shaping the phenomenon of economic globalisation, the usage of smart power in the form of “new diplomacy”, and finally, the enshrinement of legal positivism in International Law. By analysing the case of the Rohingya people of Myanmar, this study substantiated the realist dictum of political interests, power, and prosperity conditioning sovereign figures in deciding on the value of “threatening Others”. To further cement the argument that realist and positivist developments accenting International Relations and International Law attempt at disfiguring and erasing others from the human frame, the research conducted content analysis of news headlines and leads of two communication centres, namely, the BBC and Daily Star where it is shown that the treatment of Rohingya people is framed as political pragmatism rather than the necessity of International Relations and International Law dehumanising non-conforming others for Western epistemic coherence.