Could you expand on how serious this species takes 'violence'? Would threats be psychological violence (Living next to super scary aliens will impact the well-being of the neighbors)? Would trade sanctions be violence (those can kill more people than some military engagement. Civilians to boot)? Are there restrictions on degree of culpability (Hire the guy that hires the mercenary)?

If this is a game, I presume there are some serious limitations on what is allowed? Such as, no blotting out the sun of offending players' home systems by employing Dyson swarms to non-violently harvest the energy (please mind the anti-flare anti-planetoid point defences when flying in the neighbourhood)?

Trade sanctions presuppose either an extremely orderly society, where almost all members voluntarily comply with sanctions imposed by authorities, or the threat of violence. Consider sanctions on Earth. Many companies will happily trade with sanctioned regimes or countries and are only deterred by possible legal action, which is ultimately backed by the threat of violence (i.e., of the police hauling you away and locking you up).

Well anything that has s detrimental effect can be viewed as a weapon. When Russian realist art was gaining popularity in the 20th century, the CIA covertly propelled Jackson Pollock into the mainstream spotlight to move popular opinion. Jackson Pollock's art was a weapon against Russian paintings, which were considered weapons

you are the technologically inferior party here. why would you ever want societies that had FTL millennia before you and are probably more advanced in other aspects too, to fear you? Show them you can fulfil some helpful role, and hope for the best.

BTW, your premise of "no weapons" is flawed. Everything is a weapon if used in a particular way. Ram the enemy with your spaceship. slice their heads off with a boning knife from the kitchen. Feed them your favorite berries which happen to be toxic to their species.

Are the other "communities" also "dozens of millenia" more advanced than you in all ways, or just FTL?

Be cute and cuddly puppies, no one wants to murder puppies!

@CarlWitthoft By weapon I meant any physical thing or energetic thing used to physically damage something.

Take away all their food and healthcare or control it such that they can only obtain it via you. All else matters little. "Food" may be energy for some beings "healthcare" parts for some etc.

Be Dutch (commodities) but act more like the Swiss (all the moneys; none of the gory glory), and have rules like the Church (the club you have to be in or you get neither of the aforementioned) where you can be excommunicated. If they show up, they hand you a letter that says you're cut off. No one wants that. You don't need violence if you can threaten their standard of living.

You ever see Debbie Downer sketches on SNL?

Also, the Tarellians in the episode Haven of Star Trek: The Next Generations

"The interstellar ships used are not built with weapons and weapons have not and will not be developed" - this does not compute. If your ships can travel interstellar distances in any less than millennia, they have so much kinetic energy, that they are planet-destroying weapons by themselves. If such a drive can propel a spaceship at such speeds, then that same drive can propel a piece of rock. No need for "developing" fancy weapons, your drives are weapons by themselves.

I would jokingly say that the ships technology could be made of some kind of explodium, such that damaging them significantly would cause a massive solar-system destroying event (presumably they would be shielded from accidental damage and space junk). But I am not sure if you would consider this violent, assuming it was not intentional and merely part of the technology.

If the explosives are triggered by the enemy it can't really be our fault can it? @Vality also having a core of antimatter in said ship would do pretty much what you describe :D as mentioned in shadow1024 's answer.

My world does not employ the use of physical violence Then you've got a lot of 'splainin' to do, starting with how society is organized without some sort of recognized authority in the absence of a completely self-disinterested species of creature that is an evolutionary contradiction.

Maybe the way lawyers do it? :-)

Why not be bestest buddies with the world's superpower, and your nation generally pacifist? No other country will dare attacking you, as long as you can throw around the world's biggest military as a threat. (Even if you can not order them directly to attack, they would surely come to your aid in the event of a siege).

What does your country do to deal with situations where other nations might resort to violence? Presumably when you started this nation, you had some idea of how you were going to solve the oldest problem in all of humanity. Knowing that will substantially color any answers because it will need to fit. A nation that operates like a Aikido practicioner, operating like a ghost, will need very different approaches than one which tries to make everyone laugh, like a class clown.

And why does this nation want to intimidate in the first place? It seems obvious to us, steeped in violence as we are. But for a nation without violence, that word is going to have some rather unique nuances.