International Order Redefined

Current conceptions of international order define it through means of order. The menu that lies before scholars and pundits when discussing international orders typically includes balance of power, concert of powers, hegemony, and multilateralism.

John Ikenberry, in his After Victory, recognizes three variations of order: balance of power, hegemonic, and constitutional.

Patrick Morgan in the volume Regional Orders edited by David Lake and himself provides a typology of regional orders based on the question "how to achieve order," which includes: balance of power, concert of powers, collective security, security community, and integration.

More eclectic writers like David Shambaugh in the volume Power Shifts distinguishes between models of order such as: hegemony, major power rivalry, hub and spokes, concert of powers, condominium, normative community, and complex interdependence.

These variants are, to borrow the insights from Muthiah Alagappa in the volume Asian Security Order, "pathways to order," which is rooted in distribution of power (instrumental order), principles, norms, and rules (normative-contractual order), and trust and obligation (solidarist order).

Clearly, current conceptions of order emphasizes the how but not the who of order. They focus on the question "how to achieve order" but not "who is in" or "who controls the order."

In reality, the "who" question is primary while the "how" question is secondary. The former refers to the goal, the latter to the way.

International order must be defined in relation with the issue of regional and global leadership.