‘Come Together’ may be pressed to explain systemic integration in two slightly distinct ways. One might emphasise coming together in the process of making, interpretation, and application of international law. And one might also emphasise the normative element in the systemic preference for the direction of coming together, providing nudges, pushes, and presumptions that guide the development of the system. I cannot do justice to the subtlety of pluralism/universality debate here, but I will state my preference for the first emphasis over the second one, expressed in caricatured form as they both are. The modest thesis of this paper, paralleling in structure the title of the panel, is twofold: first, there is no systemic preference for coming together; secondly, there may be a danger in an excessive focus on Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (‘VCLT’), if that leads to an overshadowing of other techniques for introducing rules of international law into the interpretative argument. The thesis will be examined in relation to two case studies: the techniques of treaty interpretation and other rules of customary law, and the presumption against conflict with other rules of international law.