Book Review: Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules in International Relations

Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, Air University Press --

Book Cover
Book Cover: Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules in International Relations, by Kyle M. Lascurettes. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 353 pp.
Book Cover: Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules in International Relations, by Kyle M. Lascurettes. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 353 pp.
Photo By: Dr. Ernest Gunasekara-Rockwell
VIRIN: 210914-F-YT915-001

Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules in International Relations, by Kyle M. Lascurettes. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 353 pp.
 

Orders of Exclusion combines the disciplines of international relations and history to explain why powerful states “defend or advance such different order visions across space and time” (p.3). Lascurettes contends that the primary motivation of great powers is the exclusion of particular actors from world politics during times of order change opportunity, which are unique windows of time where the international order can be adjusted. He explains this throughout the book by using a theory called “ordering-to-exclude.” Lascurettes tests this concept by analyzing nine historical cases spanning three centuries, ranging from the 1648 Westphalian settlements to the 1990 diplomacy that brought about the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Lascurettes’ Ordering-to-Exclude concept is built upon four hypotheses that form the core arguments of the book. First, great powers aim to rewrite the prevailing geopolitical order’s rules because they want to inhibit the rise of a powerful adversary that threatens their supremacy and security. This means that when great powers recognize a looming threat “on the horizon,” the dominant power will seek to combat the challenging power with an objective of preserving a status quo that favors the dominant power. Second, the dominant power would amend the principles of the international order to curtail the rise of the ascendant competitor. An example of this would be a great power’s endorsement of rules that attack and denigrate the threat’s internal political organizations. Third, great powers can pursue two distinct responses depending on the nature of the challenge they face. If the challenge is a state-level, conventional military threat, then only shallow changes limited to behavior rules will be advocated. However, if the threat is ideological, unconventional, and unpredictable, profound alterations to the status quo order targeting both behavior and membership rules will be enacted. Fourth and finally, in the absence of any novel or significant threat, great powers will advocate for order continuity. If great powers have continuously benefitted from a system that has served their interests for an extended period, there is no reason to propose significant alterations to the prevailing order.

Aside from these hypotheses, Lascurettes’ Order-to-Exclude Theory also postulates three tangible pathways for “excluding” a perceived adversary. These are 1) “Commonalities for Contrast”, which is when a great power collaborates with other states that share similar characteristics and advocate behavior or membership rules inimical to a perceived threat; 2) “Triggering Tripwires, in which a great power appeals to allies by invoking specific ideas in an effort to gain support for a revision of the current order in a way that will curtail an adversarial power’s opportunities to challenge the status quo order; and 3) Severing Social Power, a great power’s initiation of new foundational order rules to subvert the “social sources” of the threat’s power.

Out of numerous profound characteristics of Lasurettes’ work, historiographical, historical, and ideological aspects of his theory, in particular, carry importance in the field. At the historiographical level, the book is an artful application of Hegel’s dialectical method. More than the mere mention of specific works, Lascurette’s work cunningly harmonizes elements of the thesis and antithesis—the IR theories of realism, constructivism, institutionalism, and liberalism—which eventually found their culmination in Lascurettes’ Order-to-Exclude Theory. While readers may notice similarities with other theories, “Ordering-to-Exclude Theory,” in reality, “both embraces and rejects elements of the major paradigms in IR theory” (p.11). Moreover, while other works “have focused on the consensus-driven origin of order,” its greatest departure from these is “the pride of place it affords to competition and conflict in the production of international order.” Exclusion is “the propelling motivation for foundational rule-building at important historical junctures” (p.8).

Speaking of history, the historical narrative of Orders of Exclusion is admirable for its frankness and interpretation. Although Lascurettes is no historian, he understands the importance of getting straight to the point, which has made the book an enjoyable read. Because his work looks at great power competition and the origins of order from an exclusionary viewpoint, revisionist arguments on different order change opportunities in history have naturally emerged.

Finally, and perhaps his most outstanding innovation, is his argument that ideology is comparable to—or even more significant than—state-level threats. Because contrary ideologies “can come to inflict costs on even the most dominant of actors materially,” Lascurettes says, they “have often felt threatened at least as much by contrary ideologies . . . as they have by other traditionally powerful states” (pp. 9, 43).

The 21st-century great power competition between the United States and China has brought about Ordering-to-Exclude efforts between these two powers, leaving the Indo-Pacific Region conflicted. While China sees the American decline in relative power as an order change opportunity, the US is is using its significant influence and vast alliance network to preserve the current order and maintain America’s superior position in it.

Under the status quo, President Biden’s moves to consolidate US power, preserve the stability of the global economy, and reassure allies of America’s commitment to upholding international law and the freedom and openness of the Indo-Pacific (pathway #1) has partly succeeded in excluding China. Moreover, President Biden’s utilization of international law (e.g., UNCLOS) to highlight China’s frequent violations of accepted norms compels other states to unite with them in opposing China (pathway #2), which in turn helps to preserve American power in the current system.

Unfortunately for Washington, most nations in the Indo-Pacific are leaning towards the Beijing. They are resisting American pressure, thereby allowing China to continue leveraging its partnerships in Asia and Africa. China’s advancement of an “agnostic capitalist” order is increasingly expanding China’s bilateral relationships worldwide. Under this vision, the liberal order’s foundational rules of great power supremacy, economic openness, and collective security are retained. However, domestic conditions for membership (e.g., government welfare of its citizens, recognition of human rights, and maintenance of free and representative political institutions) are no longer requisite factors for being an accepted member of the international order. What makes this vision so dangerous, especially to American power, are the numerous benefits an “agnostic capitalist” system provides to governments and rulers that are inconvenienced by the liberal norms promoted by the United States.

John Jethro L. Manangan

Mr. Manangan is defense research analyst with the Philippine Army and a graduate student majoring in history at University of Santo Tomas.


 

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed or implied in JIPA are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government or their international equivalents.


 

USAF Comments Policy
If you wish to comment, use the text box below. AF reserves the right to modify this policy at any time.

This is a moderated forum. That means all comments will be reviewed before posting. In addition, we expect that participants will treat each other, as well as our agency and our employees, with respect. We will not post comments that contain abusive or vulgar language, spam, hate speech, personal attacks, violate EEO policy, are offensive to other or similar content. We will not post comments that are spam, are clearly "off topic", promote services or products, infringe copyright protected material, or contain any links that don't contribute to the discussion. Comments that make unsupported accusations will also not be posted. The AF and the AF alone will make a determination as to which comments will be posted. Any references to commercial entities, products, services, or other non-governmental organizations or individuals that remain on the site are provided solely for the information of individuals using this page. These references are not intended to reflect the opinion of the AF, DoD, the United States, or its officers or employees concerning the significance, priority, or importance to be given the referenced entity, product, service, or organization. Such references are not an official or personal endorsement of any product, person, or service, and may not be quoted or reproduced for the purpose of stating or implying AF endorsement or approval of any product, person, or service.

Any comments that report criminal activity including: suicidal behaviour or sexual assault will be reported to appropriate authorities including OSI. This forum is not:

  • This forum is not to be used to report criminal activity. If you have information for law enforcement, please contact OSI or your local police agency.
  • Do not submit unsolicited proposals, or other business ideas or inquiries to this forum. This site is not to be used for contracting or commercial business.
  • This forum may not be used for the submission of any claim, demand, informal or formal complaint, or any other form of legal and/or administrative notice or process, or for the exhaustion of any legal and/or administrative remedy.

AF does not guarantee or warrant that any information posted by individuals on this forum is correct, and disclaims any liability for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on any such information. AF may not be able to verify, does not warrant or guarantee, and assumes no liability for anything posted on this website by any other person. AF does not endorse, support or otherwise promote any private or commercial entity or the information, products or services contained on those websites that may be reached through links on our website.

Members of the media are asked to send questions to the public affairs through their normal channels and to refrain from submitting questions here as comments. Reporter questions will not be posted. We recognize that the Web is a 24/7 medium, and your comments are welcome at any time. However, given the need to manage federal resources, moderating and posting of comments will occur during regular business hours Monday through Friday. Comments submitted after hours or on weekends will be read and posted as early as possible; in most cases, this means the next business day.

For the benefit of robust discussion, we ask that comments remain "on-topic." This means that comments will be posted only as it relates to the topic that is being discussed within the blog post. The views expressed on the site by non-federal commentators do not necessarily reflect the official views of the AF or the Federal Government.

To protect your own privacy and the privacy of others, please do not include personally identifiable information, such as name, Social Security number, DoD ID number, OSI Case number, phone numbers or email addresses in the body of your comment. If you do voluntarily include personally identifiable information in your comment, such as your name, that comment may or may not be posted on the page. If your comment is posted, your name will not be redacted or removed. In no circumstances will comments be posted that contain Social Security numbers, DoD ID numbers, OSI case numbers, addresses, email address or phone numbers. The default for the posting of comments is "anonymous", but if you opt not to, any information, including your login name, may be displayed on our site.

Thank you for taking the time to read this comment policy. We encourage your participation in our discussion and look forward to an active exchange of ideas.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed or implied in JIPA are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government or their international equivalents. See our Publication Ethics Statement.