Diplomacy is conventionally regarded as an aspect of an international system, society, or community, or as an institution necessary to their effective functioning. Within the diplomatic tradition, in contrast, international systems, societies and communities are seen as different ways in which the terrain is organized upon which relations of separateness are to be conducted. Before exploring some of the implications of this insight, however, I want to take another look at the international society idea and some of the arguments that lie behind it. This is useful for a number of reasons. First, doing so provides an opportunity to map out the terms in which international societies vary from one another and change within themselves. Secondly, such a mapping illuminates the shifting character of the terrain upon which diplomats operate and helps us identify the extent to which diplomacy is a trans-historical and ubiquitous practice. Last, but not least, re-visiting the international society idea will allow me to make a case for jettisoning the clumsy triumvirate of system, society and community, and for referring to all as international societies from there on.

International systems, societies and communities

The general distinctions between systems, societies and communities elaborated above apply in principle to their international equivalents. We can imagine international systems characterized only by frequent and regular contacts between their members but little else. We can see international societies whose members are bound by shared understandings of the rules about what is and ought to be going on.