Decentering Hegemony and “Open” Orders: Fifteenth-Century Melaka in a World of Orders

Abstract

Abstract I explain the differences between centered and decentered systems (world orders) by adopting a relational approach to international relations. I argue that centric systems have three characteristics: most meaningful social relations are oriented toward one center; this center establishes the practices governing social relations; and the center recognizes no peers. Conversely, if these attributes are not the chief hallmarks of a social system, then it is decentered. More specifically, I analyze fifteenth-century Melaka to show that simultaneous participation in multiple world orders is a distinct response to hegemony that decenters it. Melaka recognized Ming hegemony but decentered it by also participating in the Persian cosmopolis, and by emerging as a (mini-)center in maritime Southeast Asia. My analysis has two main implications. First, I make the case for “open” orders—multiple, (partially) overlapping orders as viable and long-lasting systems—in contrast to the realist and liberal logics of orders of exclusion/inclusion. Second, this has implications for contemporary Southeast Asian “choices” in the context of the US–China rivalry as these states are likely to “openly” participate in the American and Chinese world orders simultaneously instead of choosing between them. My relational perspective rooted in global history argues against treating historical East Asia as “closed” for such a view is prone to both Sinocentrism and Eurocentrism. Instead, I emphasize the pivotal role played by Melaka—that pursued the strategy of attraction to manage its unequal world—and make the case for “open” orders without flattening power hierarchies or cultural differences.