# Diplomacy and the Study of International Relations/Part 2/Chapter 1

Layout 2
London: Oxford University Press, pages 85–88
THE LITERATURE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
I
Introductory
'La diplomatie, traitée théoriquement, peut être ramenée à des principes fixes, parce qu'elle est fondée sur des préceptes plus ou moins positifs, et qu'elle a un objet précis et distinct, celui de régler les rapports qui existent ou doivent exister entre les divers États: dans son acception la plus étendue, c'est la science des relations extérieures ou affaires étrangères des États, et, dans un sens plus déterminé, la science ou l'art des négociations. La diversité et la mobilité de ces rapports dépendent de la formation et de l'origine des États, des principes constitutifs des gouvernements, de l’appréciation de leur puissance, réelle ou présumée, des variations de leur position relative, de leurs affinités, de leurs discordances, de la vicissitude des événements, etc., etc. Or, toutes ces données reposent sur autant de faits, dont la recherche, la comparaison et l'enchaînement peuvent très-bien devenir un objet d'étude; et les nombreux ouvrages historiques, les collections de mémoires, de traités et de correspondances diplomatiques, sont autant de moyens d'instruction qui ne laissent que l'embarras du choix à celui qui se voit appelé à prendre part aux négociations et aux affaires. …
'L'étude de la diplomatie proprement dite exige la connaissance spéciale:
Charles de Martens: Le Guide diplomatique, 4th ed. (1851), i. 1–2, 6–7.
Deffaudis: Questions diplomatiques (1849); see Extract in Le Guide diplomatique, i. 335–67.
For such mastery as is attainable of problems of international policy at any point of time and contact in the relations of State to State particularity of knowledge is indispensable, and ​that must be sought in special works and in the sources that bear upon each problem. The aim in what follows is to help towards forming the habit of mind that is required for appreciating questions of foreign policy. Rousseau, in a letter to the Marquis de Mirabeau, said of Politics that it is 'une science des calculs, des combinaisons, et des exceptions, selon les lieux, les temps et les circonstances'. In no region of politics have these words more pertinence and force than in that of international relations. In none is it more imperative to understand, and in none more difficult to allow for, the measure of prudence and the measure of justice contained in the means that are adopted for ends that have been sought or for such as have been attained, in varying degrees of achievement. 'Le grand art du diplomate' has been very aptly expressed as 'bien dire dans l'ordre convenable tout ce qui doit être dit, et rien au delà'. It is a condensation of the art almost violent in its terseness; and its assumption of the possibility of a nice adjustment, by a stroke of genius, of means to end must not be allowed to obscure the fact that, while the schooling in le style diplomatique may be precise and correct—while it may be possible to unite to 'la précision des idées la propriété des termes et la concision du style'—yet the fields of action and conduct are spacious and of mixed soils, and the cultivators are many and of many minds. The definition of the art of diplomacy which has been cited is one which is suggested more especially by the requirements of what is termed le style diplomatique, le style de cour, or le style de chancellerie. The art of writing letters and notes and of producing other compositions, whether they be merely polite or be sternly pertinent to the business on hand, is not the whole of the art of diplomacy. Even, however, within the exercise of that ​more particular art there are lessons of guidance that may serve as lessons of caution and warning to the student of history in his survey of international relations. There are, said the elder Charles Francis Adams, three sorts of diplomatic composition which are habitually resorted to, in accordance with the traditional diplomacy, in meeting particular necessities. One is used when hostility is intended. 'The language is then courteous, but short, every word covering intelligible offence.' The second is used when dissatisfaction is to be expressed but no action is to follow. 'Then the notes are apt to be long and full of argument, with abundant citation of authorities, yet terminating with nothing but assurances of the highest consideration, et cetera.' The third is used when there prevails a sincere desire for harmony. 'Then the phrases are less studied and the intent more directly signified—the whole sense conveyed in brief notes.' The effect of the difference between a letter in the first person and a note in the third is greater, it has been observed, than would be surmised by any one who has not been habituated to both modes in diplomatic intercourse. 'The third person, "The Undersigned," is stiff, cold, formal, and dignified; it is negotiation in court dress, bag wig, sword by side, chapeau de bras, white silk stockings, and patent shoe-buckles. Letters in the first person are negotiations in frock coat, pantaloons, half-boots, and a round hat.'
The student of international relations needs precise as well as vast equipment in knowledge, but, not less, he needs equipment in a habit of mind.
* ↑ Charles de Martens, Le Guide diplomatique (4th ed.), ii. 5.
* ↑ Son of John Quincy Adams, and grandson of John Adams; United States Minister to the Court of St. James, 1861–8.
* ↑ Quoted by W. V. Kellen in Henry Wheaton: An Appreciation (Boston, 1902), p. 31—a high and finely sympathetic tribute.
* ↑ J. Q. Adams' Memoirs, iv. 327, quoted by J. W. Forster, Practice of Diplomacy, 76, and thence by Satow, A Guide to Diplomatic Practice, i. 69.
Footnotes