THIS discussion of law, diplomacy, and peace is focused on the connection between these three different systems of ideas. As the essay's title indicates, the relationship is conceived along hierarchical lines in the sense that peace is the controlling or dominant reference whereas law and diplomacy appear as secondary or adjunct notions expected to serve the goal of peace. Furthermore, the phrase implies that the meanings carried by each of the three words, and therefore also by the associations within this triad, are unambiguous, perhaps even self-evident, thus allowing easy discourse and communication not just within the United States but also in the further reaches of the wider world. For is not the technically unified world of the 20th century also a morally unified world in which it is reasonable to expect separate yet interdependent nations to join in building what spokesmen for recent administrations in this country have been referring to as "structures of peace"?

Before taking issue with this and related formulations, and before addressing the theme's specific challenges, I would like