ABSTRACTThe question of ontology in thinking about global order(s) remains largely unexplored in International Relations (IR) theory. By reviewing the Heideggerian ontological difference and Laclauian postfoundational outlook, this article reconstructs how to conceive of global order(s) from an ontological perspective. The logical conjunction of the strictly philosophical and the political in Heideggerian-Laclauian postfoundational thought leads to two central claims:An ontology of order is impossible because order has not per se a factual side or an essence. Rather, order is always only a contingent manifestation of the historically specific investment of its ordering function.There can be no ontologically prior universal order. Yet an always already failing structuration is not necessarily a failure in its negative connotation. Going beyond the confines of ontological fixity, the failing global order(s) come(s) to terms with challenges of politicization, decision, responsibility, and the need for political contestation.