The diplomatic tradition of international thought suggests that how international societies are configured and might best be configured matters less than how relations are conducted in the midst of the arguments to which these questions give rise. This seems at once to be a big claim that relegates a great deal of international theorizing to the background, and one that does not seem to let us say a great deal. Relations of separateness require special skills. Peoples absorbed and driven by the content of those relations will be unlikely to exercise those skills. Hence, diplomacy and diplomats, or at least people equipped with a diplomatic understanding, are needed to make the world, any plural world, run more smoothly. Often, it will do so if peoples, or their representatives, keep talking and do not worry if the talks do not seem to be getting anywhere. Anyone who has read this far might be forgiven for thinking these insights dearly purchased and not particularly useful. They may seem at best platitudinous, mere exhortations for people to be good and wise in unspecified ways. And at worst, they may seem harmful, promoting a complacent and unwarranted quietism that aggravates those who see the existing order of things as threatening and those who see it threatened in equal measure.

Accordingly, in this final section of the book, my argument shifts from what a diplomatic understanding can tell us about international societies and how we might live in them, to what diplomatic thinking can tell us about particular international problems and issues that worry people.