OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024)
3
FROM ALLIANCE BUILDING TO STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS:
A HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF DEFENCE DIPLOMACY
FAIQ HASSAN KHALID
frana82@gmail.com
PhD Candidate in the Department of International Relations, University of Karachi (Pakistan). His
research interests include defence diplomacy, foreign policy and related issues in the
global south and north.
NAEEM AHMED
naeem@uok.edu.pk
Associate Professor, Chairman, Department of International Relations, University of Karachi
(Pakistan).
Abstract
Defence diplomacy within the sphere of statecraft is experiencing rapid growth due to the
geopolitical and geo-economic interests of rising power blocs around the world. This paper
aims to provide a comprehensive historical background of significant activities undertaken in
modern defence diplomacy. The central research question explores how the activities in
defence diplomacy have shaped the landscape of international relations. It is found that
defence diplomacy activities like military exchanges, exercises and cooperation with roots in
antiquity, have continuously adapted to shape history and remain relevant in today’s complex
international relations.
Keywords
Defence diplomacy, interoperability, joint military exercise, Defence Attaché, Defence
cooperation agreements.
Resumo
A diplomacia de defesa, no âmbito da esfera do Estado, está a registar um rápido crescimento
devido aos interesses geopolíticos e geoeconómicos dos blocos de potências emergentes em
todo o mundo. O presente artigo tem por objetivo fornecer um contexto histórico abrangente
das atividades significativas realizadas no quadro da diplomacia de defesa moderna. A questão
central da investigação explora a forma como as atividades de diplomacia de defesa moldaram
o panorama das relações internacionais. Verifica-se que estas atividades, como os
intercâmbios militares, os exercícios e a cooperação, com raízes na antiguidade, adaptaram-
se continuamente para moldar a história e continuam a ser relevantes nas complexas relações
internacionais de hoje.
Palavras-chave
Diplomacia da defesa, interoperabilidade, exercício militar conjunto, adido de defesa, acordos
de cooperação no domínio da defesa.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
4
How to cite this article
Khalid, Faiq Hassan & Ahmed, Naeem (2024). From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a
Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. VOL 15,
Nº.1, May-October, pp. 3-20. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.15.1.1
Article received on March 14, 2023, and accepted for publication on October 30, 2023.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
5
FROM ALLIANCE BUILDING TO STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS:
A HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF DEFENCE DIPLOMACY
FAIQ HASSAN KHALID
NAEEM AHMED
1. Introduction
States resort to their traditional diplomacy to achieve foreign policy goals. This traditional
diplomacy carries out its work under some fixed principles, norms, traditions, and laws,
which are recognized by all states. The primary goal of traditional diplomacy includes
peaceful coexistence, conflict prevention, peacemaking efforts and the protection of
economic and trade interests. If states add a few more goals in their foreign policy, such
as security and defence-related matters and support traditional diplomatic staff with one
or more uniformed people, who are associated with the country's defence institutions
and conduct diplomacy, then it will be termed as defence diplomacy. In simple words, it
can be said that the achievement of national foreign policy objectives through the
peaceful employment of defence resources and capabilities in international politics is
considered defence diplomacy (Drab, 2018).
Alliance building is the purposeful and strategic formation of cooperative connections
between two or more nations to achieve common aims or reduce perceived dangers in
the dynamic field of international affairs. Such alliances take many forms, including
formal treaties with specific military obligations and informal understandings based on
shared economic and strategic interests such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
European Union, BRICS, an informal grouping of emerging economies. Security dialogues
and contacts at the highest level, economic prosperity, pursuing strategic goals,
ideological alignments, joint military exercises and signing of treaties are all important
parts of alliance formation. It is this significant motive that alliance-building has become
a key instrument for governments to handle problems and pursue goals in the changing
fabric of international relations. These collaborations are motivated at their heart by a
shared understanding of interests, where states’ interests are being converged on
concerns of security, economic development, or ideological congruence. Alliances, which
are often codified through treaties, usually include a commitment to mutual defence,
ensuring rapid and decisive action against common dangers.
Strategic partnerships also provide a more adaptable framework for collaboration across
broader sectors such as trade, technological advancement, and other important
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
6
uncertainties. While alliances prioritize military and security-related cooperation,
partnerships offer a wide range of collaboration encompassing economic, environmental,
and technological areas and allow for a more multifaceted strategy that also leverages
the combined resources of participating states for mutual gain. This complicated interplay
between alliance and partnership enables states to navigate a difficult global landscape
while ensuring both immediate security and pursuing shared prosperity.
As for the origins of the concept of defence diplomacy, according to Koerner Wolfgang,
it originated as a systematic notion after the end of the Cold War, when the British
Ministry of Defence, in the name of security sector reforms, began to help states seceding
from the Soviet Union in 1991 (Koerner, 2006). One goal of this assistance was to have
a peaceful environment of international security.
Although alliance building and strategic partnerships are often seen as critical parts of
defence diplomacy, however, to understand the various dimensions of this relationship,
we argue that specific initiatives and selected key activities performed under the umbrella
of defence diplomacy, need to be examined in historical terms. By doing so, we may
show how their origins extend beyond the defined idea of defence diplomacy itself.
Defence diplomacy can involve a range of goals and activities, so it can be considered a
multitasking process. These activities include military exchanges and training programs,
as well as using military assets to support foreign policy-related matters. Defence
diplomacy also involves using military presence and capabilities to deter potential
adversaries and promote stability in a region (Forster, 2004). The primary goal of defence
diplomacy is to use military resources to support and advance diplomatic goals, rather
than only for military purposes.
To present a historical analysis, we shaped a foundation by creating a purpose-built table
of activities within the scope of defence diplomacy. A historical comparison of the
activities involved has been offered. Hence, the authors suggest a research question:
What is the historical evolution and enduring significance of the top four activities in
defence diplomacy, and how have these activities shaped the landscape of international
relations over time?"
2. Literature Review
The material on defence diplomacy is extensive. But we find no particular writing about
its evolution or its historical context. Most of the writings on defence diplomacy have
discussed either the activities carried out under the realm of defence diplomacy; or the
significance of such activities to attain the foreign policy objectives. The highly cited work
has been presented by Andrew Cottey & Anthony Forster who have mentioned various
activities and described them as military cooperation and assistance. It is also held that
the appointment of a defence attaché, an important part of defence diplomacy, emerged
as part of nineteenth-century European diplomacy. The authors have acknowledged ten
actions, which the countries perform mutually, as defence diplomacy activities which
include; bilateral and multilateral contacts between senior military and civilian defence
officials, the appointment of defence attaches to foreign countries, bilateral defence
cooperation agreements, training of foreign military and civilian defence personnel,
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
7
provision of expertise and advice on the democratic control of armed forces, defence
management and military technical areas, contacts and exchanges between military
personnel and units, and ship visits, placement of military or civilian personnel in partner
countries defence ministries or armed forces, deployment of training teams, provision of
military equipment and other material aid, and bilateral or multilateral military exercises
for training purposes (Forster, 2004). These activities can be carried out by the army,
navy and air force of a state, under the auspices of its Ministry of Defence. Apart from
this, defence cooperation has also been kept in this context and it happens between two
countries.
A different view on defence diplomacy, arguing it as an investment in relationships and
a means to create strategic partnerships, is emphasized by John, notably through military
exercises to foster mutual understanding and military collaboration (Blaxland, 2014). For
this, the author provides an example, of when Thailand showed willingness for Australia’s
support, on East Timor. The author argues that Australia's position on the East Timor
crisis would not have succeeded if it had not been for decades of Australia's cooperation
with Thailand in the shape of exchanges, partnerships, and bilateral military exercises.
Therefore, effects like bilateral and short-term military engagement and cooperation in
aid projects are reasons for strengthening measures through defence diplomacy.
Juan Emilio traces the origins of defence diplomacy to the classic military diplomacy that
has been practised since ancient times and was revived in the Napoleonic era. He notes
that the concept of defence diplomacy remained largely unchanged until the end of the
Cold War, focusing primarily on military relations within the classic military field (Cheyre,
2013). Juan also highlights that the 1990s marked the dawn of a new era in international
affairs, characterized by complex interdependence, the rise of new global actors, and the
emergence of public diplomacy. These developments paved the way for a new conception
of defence diplomacy as an expression of network diplomacy, linking the implementation
of foreign policy objectives to those of the defence sector. Juan underscores the potential
of defence diplomacy to be a valuable instrument of statecraft when managed effectively,
leveraging both soft and hard power dimensions on any given issue.
Gregory considers that defence diplomacy is a strategic use of soft power to integrate
conceptual paradigms. This indicates that states use defence diplomacy to influence other
countries' perceptions of security issues, thereby furthering their strategic objectives. In
addition, he presents a new concept of defence diplomacy based on how states pursue
their interests in the global arena. This improved explanation eliminates the historical
conceptual uncertainty around the term, providing a clearer understanding of how
defence diplomacy functions as an instrument of statecraft (Winger, 2014). The author
claims that the study of defence diplomacy is still in its initial stages, demanding
additional scholarly research to uncover its complex uses and measure its success. This
emphasizes the continued need for more research to fully understand the complexities
of defence diplomacy and its multidimensional role in international relations.
Cooperation to form alliances and create partnerships is a specific part of broader forms
of security cooperation around the world. Its notable structures are the Shangri-La
dialogue, the Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC), the annual meeting of defence
ministers of ten ASEAN countries and its dialogue partner countries i.e., ASEAN Defence
Ministers Meetings (ADMM), Western Pacific Naval Symposium (WPNS), small bilateral
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
8
efforts and bilateral military-to-military contacts (Bisley, 2014). The most important
advantages of defence diplomacy, according to the author, are its potential to deliver,
and then it can reduce stress and is helpful in crisis management. Second, it gives the
benefit of improving the flow of information and enhancing mutual understanding of
states' capabilities, interests, and red lines. Third is the ability to improve the strategic
environment by fostering personal connections between senior defence officials through
high levels of trust and joint communication.
In international affairs, diplomacy is how countries advance their national interests. If
diplomacy fails, the same interests are achieved through force. In terms of national
security, diplomacy is a soft power, while the military is a hard power (Leahy, 2014). In
the current rapidly changing international situation, this difference is not so clear today.
This is the reason defence diplomacy is proving to be a beneficial way of achieving
national interests less than conflict.
Table 1
Sr
Activities under the ambit of defence diplomacy
Defence & Military Officials’ Bilateral/multilateral contacts
Defence attaches
Joint military exercises
Defence cooperation agreements, provision of military equipment, MoUs, treatise
Sub Activities
Interoperability among all branches of armed forces
Education and military training
United Nations Peacekeeping operations
Humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations, Search and rescue operations
Participation in events organized by military institutions, conferences, parades and
(tattoos, is a new trend and on the rise, the UK termed it cultural defence diplomacy).
Source: Purpose-built table created by the authors during the literature review
It is argued that the activities above, from serial 1 to 4 give a systematic form to defence
diplomacy. These are the basic actions and features through which states conduct mutual
defence diplomacy. Sub-activities are the results and outcomes of the above four
activities. A historical analysis of the top four activities from the above table will be
presented to argue the research question.
3. Defence & Military Officials Bilateral/Multilateral Contacts
Military and defence officials have long engaged in bilateral and multilateral contacts to
achieve diplomatic goals and promote international security. Bilateral contacts refer to
interactions between two countries, while multilateral contacts involve two countries.
Because of such engagements, military and strategic alliances are formed. These are
formal agreements between two or more countries to provide mutual defence against
external threats. Defence and military professionals' bilateral and multilateral
interactions are significant because they facilitate diplomatic communication and
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
9
government collaboration. These encounters are critical to defence diplomacy, enhancing
mutual understanding, trust, and strategic partnerships. Bilateral connections also allow
governments to engage in direct discussions, exchange perspectives on security-related
matters, and explore mutually beneficial endeavors. Multilateral contacts, on the other
hand, are frequently held within the context of international forums and alliances, and
they help to build collective policies and actions to address common security challenges
and threats. These activities strengthen military-to-military partnerships and play an
important role in developing larger diplomatic relations.
3.1 Genealogy
Ancient civilizations have a long history of bilateral and multilateral interactions between
armed forces. For instance, city-states like Athens and Sparta, joined forces in Ancient
Greece to coordinate military actions and for mutual defences (Martine, 2013). Athens
and Sparta’s alliance against Persia during the Greco-Persian Wars is a well-known
instance of bilateral cooperation. In Ancient Greece, the Delian League, led by Athens
and the Peloponnesian League, led by Sparta represented multilateral alliances (Larsen,
1940). Military alliances were also formed between various city-states, tribes, and
kingdoms in ancient Rome, for instance, in the First Macedonian War, 215-205 BCE
(Bunson, 2014). During the Middle Ages, military alliances were formed between feudal
lords and monarchs to defend against invaders and to expand their territories. Military
alliances and interactions between nations have evolved more formally and institutionally
in recent history (Clausewitz, 1950).
In the years leading to World War I, many military alliances between European nations
were formed, including the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente. The 20th century saw
the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949, which is a
military alliance of several North American and European countries that was formed as a
response to the threat of Soviet expansion during the Cold War. Since its end, NATO has
expanded its mission beyond collective defence to include crisis management operations.
This includes peacekeeping missions, peacebuilding activities and interventions to
prevent or stop conflicts. Since 1999 the Kosovo Force (KFOR) in Kosovo and the
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2014 was a
NATO-led alliance aimed at stabilizing the country and supporting the Afghan government
in building a secure and democratic state (NATO, 2023). While not formal allies, Australia,
New Zealand and the US security treaty (ANZUS) and NATO also collaborate. Beyond
participating in large-scale military exercises like Talisman Sabre and Rim of the Pacific
(RIMPAC), they also share intelligence and develop joint training programs. This
cooperation extends to regional security concerns, especially in the Indo-Pacific.
While the end of the Cold War saw a surge in UN peacekeeping operations, the UN
emerged as a central player in peacekeeping, alongside regional organizations like the
African Union and multilateral alliances like NATO. The UN Mission in South Sudan
(UNMISS) established in 2011 to support and protect civilians in South Sudan and the
UN Interim force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) since 1978 face varied degrees of success,
grappling with challenges. Such peacekeeping efforts are carried out through UN Security
Council resolutions, which play a key role in shaping international security policy as well
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
10
as peacekeeping efforts (UN, 2023). So, it can be assumed that bilateral and multilateral
contacts between military forces have a long history and existed for centuries, but it has
become more formalized and institutionalized in the modern day. North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) and Australia, New Zealand, and United States Security Treaty
(ANZUS) are a few prominent examples.
4. Defence Attaché
A defence attaché is a military officer assigned to a foreign embassy or consulate to
represent their country's defence interests and military capabilities. Defence attachés are
typically responsible for promoting military-to-military relationships and cooperation with
the host country, as well as providing information about the military capabilities and
intentions of their own country. They may also be responsible for coordinating military
exchanges and training programs, and for providing help and support to their country's
military personnel who are stationed abroad (Masland & Radway, 1957). Defence
attachés often work closely with their country's embassy staff and with the military
officials of the host country to meet their goals.
Moreover, he also gathers intelligence while serving as a diplomatic representative of his
country, but as globalization progresses, more complex technology emerges, and
Attaches’ role and scope are also becoming more complex. This role is the name of any
nation's ability to know what kind and how much important information they can get
about another country.
Furthermore, states spend a lot of capital on the training, deployment, etc. of defence
attachés, and this is the reason their performance and capabilities are closely monitored.
It is difficult to estimate the value of the Attaché system, especially in terms of efficiency
when countries are spending their resources on them. One thing is certain many actions
assigned to the defence attachés prove to be beneficial for the achievement of foreign
policy goals. Because of the desire to achieve great power, the acquisition of strategic
intelligence has become very important. Timely assessment of the war capability of
foreign governments or countries is now becoming a guarantee of survival and security
for the country. The reason for this is that at no other time in the history of civilization
did a man have such great abilities to destroy his fellow man as they do today (Vagts,
1967).
4.1 Genealogy
In Roman history, military personnel were used for the special purpose of espionage.
Frontinus (40-103 AD) included espionage as an instruction among other services in the
work of an officer (Erdkamp, 2011). It is also mentioned that when Scipio sent Caius
Lilius to the camp of Syphax under the pretext of the embassy, he took many military
officers with him in the disguise of his domestic servants and gathered expert soldiers.
In this way, the task of appointing generals to diplomatic posts in 17th-century Persia
began so diplomatic reports could be checked. There are many mentions of appointing
Generals as Ambassadors by Napoleon (Freke, 1854). Due to their historically strong
role, most European powers had also employed military officers as foreign
representatives by the mid-nineteenth century. The official nomination and regular
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
11
position and name were given in 1857. In the same way, the United States came out of
the period of isolation and in 1888 officially started appointing military attachés
(Kupchan, 2020).
5. Joint Military Exercises: Enhancing Interoperability and International
Relations
It refers to a large-scale activity in which more than one country exercises its military
capabilities under an explicit purpose at a specific location by mutual consent. These are
training exercises that involve military staff and equipment to practice and improve
military skills and capabilities. These exercises can take place at various levels, ranging
from small unit-level training to large-scale and multinational exercises involving the
participation of multiple countries (Clem, 2018). Such exercises have a variety of
objectives, which include improvement in the readiness and capabilities of military forces,
testing of new types of equipment and tactics, and demonstration of military strength to
deter potential adversaries. They are also used to build and strengthen relationships with
allies and partners, and to foster cooperation and interoperability between military forces.
Military exercises can take many forms, including field training exercises, which involve
live-fire ranges and simulated battlefield conditions, and computer-simulated exercises,
which use advanced computer technology to simulate military operations. They also
include a range of activities, such as air, land, and sea drills, as well as cyber and space
operations (Caton, 2018). Joint Military Exercises (JME) are an important part of
maintaining the readiness and effectiveness of military forces and are a critical part of
national defence strategies. They also serve as a signal for military opponents by showing
the level of unity between the forces involved and their ability to coordinate. In this way,
without actual combat, the army gets a good idea of what the effects of a possible war
would be and will the strategy be correct and so on (Levy J. S., 1998). Defence
policymakers get first-hand information on several issues such as scenario preparation,
analysis, training for wartime decisions, the consequences of possible decisions taken
during the war, and mobility can also be reiterated. According to a 2021 study, joint
military exercises conducted within a defined alliance have the potential to deter
adversaries without creating moral hazard (Dylan R. K., 2022). The reverse can also
happen, and it can lead to an increase in conflicts, but this is extremely rare (Dylan R.
K., 2021).
JME’s promote brotherhood, and camaraderie among the forces involved. Along with
expressing the spirit of goodwill, it can also show the soft power, culture, language,
customs and lifestyle of the nation. The professional skills of the staff emerge through
exercises. It is a fact that the effectiveness of any defence equipment can be known only
because of the skill of the person using it. This is the reason for weapons manufacturing
companies and countries, such exercises, where equipment is also tested, are an
advertisement of their advanced technology and equipment. If we talk about the
implications, the subtlest aspects that are part of the war strategy can be decoded and
many things can be revealed (Sukin, 2020).
Military exercises often involve the participation of multiple countries and military forces,
which lets them practice and improve their ability to work together and coordinate their
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
12
efforts. This is important for making sure military forces can effectively run together in
multinational operations. Similarly, military exercises help to build and strengthen
relationships between countries, particularly when they involve the contribution of
multiple nations. This can foster greater cooperation and understanding between military
forces, and help to promote regional stability and security. Another important feature of
JME is deterrence. It is argued that military exercises are an important tool for improving
the readiness and capabilities of military forces and for building and strengthening
relationships with allies and partners.
5.1 Genealogy
The history of military exercises can be traced back to earlier civilizations. For instance,
Greek city-states like Athens and Sparta engaged in regular phalanx training in ancient
Greece to practice battle and test out new tactics and techniques (Martin, 2013). This
involved synchronized marches, manoeuvres, and weapon drills which helped to improve
discipline, cohesion and effectiveness in battle. To increase cooperation and
interoperability, the Roman military conducted joint exercises with allied tribes and
kingdoms in antiquity (Southern, 2007). To increase their armies' readiness and
coordination, feudal lords and kings also remained engaged in combined military drills
during the Middle Ages, the medieval warfare often involved the combined forces of
multiple lords and kings. These forces held regular “war games” and tournaments which
served as military training.
Persia has a rich and ancient military history, with training procedures evolving.
Achaemenid army (550-330 BCE) relied largely on mounted archers called Aspeis and
Dastana, who were trained in mounted archery, riding and battle tactics (Archer & Ferris,
2002). Foot troops, sometimes recruited from conquered lands were trained in spear and
swordsmanship, shield formations and marching drills. Persian soldiers were known for
their strict discipline and steadfast loyalty to the king. Strict obedience, physical exercise
and shared meals were used in training to establish these ideals.
6. Defence Cooperation Agreements
The Defence Cooperation Agreements (DCAs) are formal agreements between countries
that set a framework for military cooperation and collaboration. These agreements cover
a wide range of activities, including the exchange of military personnel and equipment,
joint training and exercises, sharing military technology and information, alliance against
common threats and military assistance. The DCAs help states in the achievement of
several important foreign policy objectives which include, strengthening military
relationships, improvement of military capabilities, enhancing interoperability and
promoting regional stability (Kinne, 2018).
The DCAs also help to improve the capabilities and readiness of military forces which is
important for developing countries, as they have limited financial and other resources
and need to rely on external support to modernize and improve their defence capabilities.
In the same way, DCAs let military forces of different countries work together effectively
by improving their ability to run together in an environment other than war. This is also
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
13
very important for developing countries that intend to participate in peacekeeping or
other international missions under the auspices of the United Nations or any other formal
international coalition.
In recent years, DCAs have become an efficient tool among states to address their
common defence threats, border problems and internal security challenges, such as
terrorism, piracy, and other transnational maritime threats. Developing countries are
already vulnerable to these threats and benefit from this cooperation with other countries
to address them. The opportunities for collaboration and innovation help military forces
of states to learn from each other and share best practices and access to new markets
and technologies, providing the opportunity to countries willing to share or sell military
equipment and technology as part of the agreement (Swedish Defence research agency,
2019).
Defence cooperation agreements are also useful for economic gains as well. These have
the potential to attract investment and support from other states which may include the
coproduction of military equipment, arsenals, and training, again this is crucial for
developing countries without many resources to invest in their military-industrial or
manufacturing capabilities and seek cooperation at international level to strengthen their
defence.
6.1 Genealogy
Defence cooperation partnerships have a long history. Although the structure and
complexity of these agreements have evolved throughout time, the basic concept of
many groups working together for mutual defence predates recorded history. In Ancient
Mesopotamia, city-states such as Lagash and Ur formed alliances in reaction to common
challenges, which likely included mutual military support. Treaties and pledges,
frequently invoking deities to confer binding authority, helped to strengthen the
consolidation of these accords (Richardson, 2012).
In Egypt, Pharaohs formed alliances with neighbouring countries to combat nomadic
tribes and rival powers, with documented examples of cooperative military operations
and troop transfers reaching back to the New Kingdom period (Langdon & Gardiner,
1920). During the Persian Wars in ancient Greece, city-states formed intricate alliances,
with Athens leading a maritime confederacy against the invading Persian Empire. This
concerted endeavor, which featured shared military resources and coordinated plans,
demonstrated the effectiveness of the collective defence. In ancient Rome, regular treaty
engagements with allies and client states required military assistance during times of
crisis. The Roman army incorporated auxiliary troops from conquered countries, resulting
in a diversified and multicultural force (Phang, 2011). Examining the historical
foundations of such accords provides essential insights into their current significance and
potential.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
14
7. Concluding Analysis
There is an increasing need for defence diplomacy to promote collaboration between the
global north and the global south. Within this framework, defence diplomacy emerges as
a critical tool for promoting international peace and security, increasing communication,
and encouraging state collaboration. Its application not only reduces the likelihood of
conflict but also contributes to the development of trust and understanding among
governments. Defence diplomacy continues to be a dynamic force in navigating the
changing global scene. The entire essence of diplomacy is changing; the emergence of
new technology, notably the influence of social media, creates new communication
channels.
This transition involves diplomacy's adaptation to new forms and organizations. It
necessitates the integration of a variety of statecraft tools to effectively traverse and
address these difficulties. Against this backdrop, the historical evolution and enduring
significance of bilateral and multilateral contacts between defence and military officials,
assignments of defence attaches, joint military exercises, defence cooperation
agreements, and the establishment of Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) for military
equipment provision and treaties all play a role in shaping the ever-evolving landscape
of international relations.
Defence diplomacy, which consists of some important activities, has an old history. The
historical evolution of defence diplomacy activities, encompassing military exchanges and
training programs, joint military exercises, and cooperation in various fields of mutual
interest, reveals a persistent and dynamic engagement that predates contemporary
international relations. Military exchanges, serving as conduits for knowledge transfer
and fostering relationships between nations, have been traced back to ancient
civilizations, which show their enduring importance in building alliances and helping with
understanding. Joint military exercises, a cornerstone of defence diplomacy, have
evolved from traditional manoeuvres to complex multinational operations. Historical
instances, such as joint military exercises during the World Wars, underscore the
enduring significance of collaborative military training in enhancing interoperability and
promoting collective security. Additionally, cooperation in fields like technology exchange
and tactics has roots in historical alliances, showcasing the continuing nature of
multifaceted defence diplomacy activities. These defence diplomacy activities, shaped by
geopolitical shifts and technological advancements, have played pivotal roles in alliances
like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and strategic partnerships, leaving an indelible
mark on the international relations landscape. Their historical continuity underscores
their adaptability and relevance, illustrating how they have consistently contributed to
shaping diplomatic interactions, enhancing security, and fostering stability across
different epochs. In modern times it has become more organized and institutionalized.
Today, defence diplomacy has evolved to encompass a wider range of activities, including
joint military exercises of bilateral and multilateral level, humanitarian missions, and
peacekeeping operations. As technology continues to transform the way militaries
operate and interact, the future of defence diplomacy is likely to see even more
innovative approaches, such as the use of artificial intelligence in strengthening military-
to-military interactions and greater cooperation between military and civilian agencies.
The challenges and opportunities of defence diplomacy will continue to be shaped by
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
15
broader geopolitical trends and global security challenges, such as rising nationalism,
regional conflicts, and the ongoing threat of terrorism.
It is a fact that throughout modern history, the change from historical alliance formation
to contemporary strategic alliances in defence diplomacy has had a substantial impact
on governments' ability to achieve their national aims and interests. This progress has
seen a shift away from rigid and static partnerships and toward more flexible,
collaborative, and nuanced methods. Strategic defence diplomacy alliances have proven
useful in resolving multidimensional global concerns, encouraging information sharing,
and responding to non-traditional security threats. Governments have improved their
ability to handle geopolitical challenges by adjusting to this changing landscape, ensuring
a more effective pursuit of national goals and interests on the international stage.
The global community encounters complex and multidimensional problems that no single
state or institution can manage alone. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the collective
vulnerability of governments, demanding coordinated measures on both internal and
foreign fronts. The implications go beyond health crises; challenges like terrorism, the
widespread influence of the Internet, and the inexorable march of modernization have
changed the global security landscape. Combating international terrorism, for example,
is no longer an individual's job, but rather a shared concern that transcends national and
organizational boundaries.
References
Archer, C., & Ferris, J. (2002). World History of Warfare. University of Nebraska Press.
Bisley, N. (2014). The possibilities and limits of defence diplomacy in Asia. Canberra:
ANU strategic and defence studies center. Retrieved from
https://sdsc.bellschool.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publications/attachments/2016-
03/cog_17_web.pdf
Blaxland, J. (2014). Defending defence diplomacy. Canberra: Strategic & Defence Studies
Centre Australian National University. Retrieved from
https://sdsc.bellschool.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publications/attachments/2016-
03/cog_17_web.pdf
Boulding, K. E. (1977). Twelve friendly quarrels with Johan Galtung. Journal of Peace
Research, 47(5), 75-86.
Buhaug, H., Cederman, L.-E., & Gleditsch, K. S. (2014). Square Pegs in Round Holes:
Inequalities, Grievances, and Civil War. International Studies Quarterly, 58, 418-431.
Bunson, M. (2014). Encyclopedia of the roman empire. Facts on file incorporated .
Buzan, B., & Hansen, L. (2009). The evolution of international security studies.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cabrera, I. (2016). Conflicto armado, criminalidad y violencia en la frontera colombo-
panameña: elementos críticos para buscar una transición. In A. Molano, Fronteras en
Colombia como zonas estratégicas: análisis y perspectivas (p. 221). Bogotá: Konrad
Adenauer Stiftung - Instituto de Ciencia Política "Hernán Echavarría Olózaga".
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
16
Caton, J. L. (2018). The land space and cyberspace nexus evolution of the oldest military
operations in the newest military domain. Pennsylvania: US Army war college. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep17662
Charters, S. P. (1983). War Games and Military History. Journal of contemporary history,
567-582. doi:https://www.jstor.org/stable/260304
Cheyre, J. E. (2013). Defence Diplomacy. In The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy
(pp. 369-382). Oxford University Press.
Clausewitz, C. v. (1950). On War. Infantry journal press.
Clem, R. (2018). Military excercises as geopolitical messaging in the NATO Russia
dynamic. The strategist, 130-143. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/865
Collective, C. (2006, December). Critical Approaches to Security in Europe: A Networked
Manifesto. Security Dialogue, 37, 443-487. doi:10.1177/0967010606073085
Collier, P. (2004). El desafío global de los conflictos locales. The International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank , 39.
Collier, P., Hoeffler, A., & Rohner, D. (2009). Beyond Greed and Grievance: Feasibility
and Civil War. Oxford Economic Papers, 61, 1-27.
DCAF. (2007). Defence attaches. Geneva: Geneva centre for the democratic control of
armed forces. Retrieved from https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/38583/dcaf-backgrounder-
defence-attaches.pdf
Doyle, M. (2005). Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace. The American Political Science
Review, 99(3), 463-466. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/30038953
Doyle, M. W. (1983, Summer). Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs. Philosophy &
Public Affairs, 12(3), 205-235.
Doyle, M. W. (1986, December). Liberalism and World Politics. The American Political
Science Review, 80(4), 1151-1169.
Drab, L. (2018). Defence Diplomacy an important tool for the implementation of foreign
policy and security of the state. Security & Defence Quarterly, 57-71.
doi:https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.5152
Durkheim, E. (2001). Las reglas del método sociológico. México D.C.: Fondo de Cultura
Económica.
Dylan, R. K. (2021). Deterrence and restraint do joint military excercises escalate
conflict. journal of conflict resolution, 84-151.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027211023147
Dylan, R. K. (2022). Deterrence and Restraint: Do Joint Military Excercises Escalate
Conflict? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 3-31.
Eck, K. (2008). An Overview and Typology of Conflict Data: The Advantages of Data
Diversity. In M. Kauffmann, Building and Using Datasets on Armed Conflicts (pp. 29-40).
Amsterdam: IOS Press.
El Espectador. (2016, Diciembre 14). Así son los cinco jefes de las Farc que se declararon
en disidencia. El Espectador. Retrieved from
http://www.elespectador.com/noticias/judicial/asi-son-los-cinco-jefes-de-farc-se-
declararon-disidenci-articulo-670457
El Espectador. (2016, Diciembre 16). ONU advierte de vacío de poder en zonas que
abandonan las Farc. El Espectador. Retrieved from
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
17
http://www.elespectador.com/noticias/paz/onu-advierte-de-vacio-de-poder-zonas-
abandonan-farc-articulo-670697
Elwert, G. (2003). Intervention on markets of violence. In J. Koehler, & C. Zürcher,
Potentials of Disorder: Explaining Conflict and Stability in the Caucasus and in the Former
Yugoslavia (pp. 219-242). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Erdkamp, P. (2011). A companion to the roman army. Wiley.
Forster, A. C. (2004). Reshaping Defence Diplomacy new roles for military cooperation
and assistance. New York: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from
https://www.defence.lk/upload/ebooks/Reshaping%20Defence%20Diplomacy_%20Ne
w%20Roles%20for%20Military%20Cooperation%20and%20Assistance%20(%20PDFDri
ve.com%20).pdf
Freke, W. (1854). Englands battles by sea and land. London: London printing and
publishing company.
Fukuyama, F. (1989, Summer). The End of History. The National Interest, pp. 3-18.
Fundación Paz y Reconciliación. (2015). Lo que hemos ganado. Bogotá: Fundación Paz y
Reconciliación. Retrieved from http://www.pares.com.co/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/Descargue-Informe-Completo.pdf
Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace and peace research. Journal of peace research, 6(3),
167-191.
Galtung, J. (2008). Galtung - 50 years with peace studies. (J. Oberg, Interviewer)
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siSLNNBCA3E
Galtung, J. (2010). Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution: The Need for
Transdisciplinarity. Transcultural Psychiatry, 20-32. doi:10.1177/1363461510362041
García, A. (2017, Mayo 25). La violencia ni se crea ni se destruye: Teoría general de la
violencia natural, política, social y doméstica. . Retrieved from
http://perso.unifr.ch/derechopenal/assets/files/tribuna/tr_20080616_20.pdf
Gates, S. (2014, March 27). Journal of Peace Research 50th Anniversary Presidential
Roundtable. ISA Conference. Toronto, Canada.
Gleditsch, N. P. (1989). Focus On: Journal of Peace Research. Journal of Peace Research,
26(1), 1-5.
Gleditsch, N. P. (2008, June 3). An irreverent history of peace research. Berlin.
Gleditsch, N. P., Nordkvelle, J., & Strand, H. (2014). Peace research - Just the study of
war? Journal of Peace Research, 145-158.
Hassan, F. (2022). United Nations counter terrorism strategy a theoretical analysis.
Journal of nautical eye and strategic studies, 43-55.
Heron, J., & Reason, P. (1997). A Participatory Inquiry Paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry
September, 274-294. doi:10.1177/107780049700300302
Hooker, C. A. (1987). A Realistic Theory of Science. Albany, N.Y.: State University of
New York Press.
Hudson, H. (2011). La violencia de la construcción de la paz neoliberal en África:
analizando sus "trampas" a través de un lente de género. Relaciones Internacionales, 73.
Huntington, S. P. (1993, Summer). The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72(3), pp.
22-49.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
18
Kaldor, M. (1999). New and old wars: organised violence in a global era. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Kaldor, M. (2013). In Defense of New Wars. Stability, 2(1), 1-16.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/sta.at
Keohane, R. O. (1988). International Institutions: Two Approaches. International Studies
Quarterly, 32(4), 379-396. doi:10.2307/2600589
King, G., Keohane, R., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Kinne, B. J. (2018). Defence cooperation agreements and the emergence of a global
security network. International organization, 799-837.
doi:https://www.jstor.org/stable/26569498
Koerner, W. (2006). Security Sector Reform Defence Diplomacy. Ottawa: Parliamentary
Information and Research Service. Retrieved from
https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.560898/publication.html
Kriesberg, L. (2009). The Evolution of Conflict Resolution. In J. Bercovitch, V. A.
Kremeniuk, & I. W. Zartman, The SAGE handbook of conflict resolution (pp. 15-32). Los
Angeles: SAGE.
Kupchan, C. A. (2020). Isolationism A history of americas efforts to shield itself from the
world. Oxford university press.
Langdon, & Gardiner, A. (1920). The Treaty of Alliance between attušili, King of the
Hittites, and the Pharaoh Ramesses II of EGYPT. The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology,
179-205.
Lapid, Y. (1989, September). The Third Debate: On the Prospects of International Theory
in a Post-Positivist Era. International Studies Quarterly, 33(3), 235-254.
doi:10.2307/2600457
Larsen. (1940). The Constitution and original purpose of the Delian League. Harvard
Studies in Classical Philology, 175-213.
Leahy, P. (2014). Military diplomacy. canberra: ANU strategic and defence studies center.
Levy, J. S. (1998). The causes of war and the conditions of peace. Annual Review of
political science, 139-165. doi:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.139
Levy, J. S. (2000). Reflections on the Scientific Study of War. In J. A. Vasquez, What Do
We Know About War? (pp. 319-327). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Levys, J. (2011). Theories and Causes of War. In C. J. Coyne, & R. L. Mathers, The
Handbook on Political Economy of War (pp. 13-33). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
López, M. (2011). Teorías para la paz y perspectivas ambientales del desarrollo como
diálogos de imperfectos. Luna Azul(33), 85-96. Retrieved from
http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=321727235008
Martin, T. R. (2013). Ancient greece from prehistoric to hellenistic times. Yale University
Press.
Martine, T. R. (2013). Ancient Greece from prehistoric to hellenistic times. Yale University
press.
Masland, J., & Radway, L. (1957). Soldiers and Scholars Military Education and National
Policy. Princeton University Press.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
19
Melander, E., Pettersson, T., & Themnér, L. (2016). Organized violence, 1989-2015.
Journal of Peace Research, 53(5), 727-742.
Mouffe, C. (1999). El retorno de lo político. Comunidad, ciudadanía, pluralismo,
democracia radical. barcelona: Paidós.
Muñoz, F. (2004). Paz Imperfecta. In M. López, Enciclopedia de Paz y Conflictos (p.
1227). Granada: Editorial Universidad de Granada.
NATO. (2023, Jul 10). North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Retrieved from Operations and
missions: Past and Present: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52060.htm
Oliveira, G. C. (2016). Pacifist approaches to conflict resolution: an overview of pragmatic
pacifism. JANUS.NET e-journal of International Relations, 7(1), 3-18.
doi:http://hdl.handle.net/11144/2619
Palma, D. (2017). Definición del concepto de discurso político: algunas aproximaciones
teórico-prácticas. In Dulfary Calderón, Gina Enciso, & Claudia Árias, Manual de márketing
político. Estrategias para una campaña existosa (pp. 53-73). Bogotá: Universidad Santo
Tomás.
Pearson, K. (1892). The Grammar of Science. London: J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd.
Pfetsch, F., & Rohloff, C. (2000). KOSIMO: A Databank on Political Conflict. Journal of
Peace Research, 37(3), 379-89.
Phang, S. (2011). New Approaches to the Roman Army. Recent Directions in the Military
History of the Ancient World, 44-105.
Pureza, J. M. (2011, December). O desafio crítico dos estudos para a paz. Relações
Internacionais(32), 5-22.
Rabasa, Á., Boraz, S., Chalk, P., Cragin, K., Karasik, T., Moroney, J., . . . Peters, J. (2007,
agosto 12). Ungoverned territories: understanding and reducing terrorism risks.
Retrieved from RAND Corporation: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG561
Ramsbotham, O., Woodhouse, T., & Miall, H. (2011). Contemporary conflict resolution:
The prevention, management and transformation of deadly conflicts. Cambridge, UK:
Polity.
Reed, M. (2012, Mayo 13). Desarrollo minero y mercados de la violencia. Retrieved from
El Colombiano:
http://www.elcolombiano.com/historico/desarrollo_minero_y_mercados_de_violencia-
JVEC_181778
Revista Semana. (2016, Diciembre 17). Los disidentes de las Farc. Revista Semana.
Retrieved from http://www.semana.com/nacion/articulo/desercion-de-cinco-mandos-
medios-de-las-farc-en-el-guaviare/509760
Richardson, S. (2012). Early Mesopotamia: The Presumtive State. Past & Present, 3-49.
Rogers, P., & Ramsbotham, O. (1999). Then and Now: Peace ResearchPast and Future.
Political Studies(47), 740754. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.00229
Rosato, S. (2003). The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory. American Political
Science Review, 97(4), 585-602.
Russett, B., & Kramer, M. (1973). New editors for an old journal. Journal of Conflict
Resolution, 17(1), 3-6.
Serge, M. (2011). El revés de la nación: territorios de salvajes, fronteras y tierras de
nadie. Bogotá: Universidad de los Andes.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 15, Nº. 1 (May 2024 October 2024), pp. 3-20
From Alliance Building to Strategic Partnerships: a Historical Analysis of Defence Diplomacy
Faiq Hassan Khalid, Naeem Ahmed
20
Sharp, G. (1971). Politics of Nonviolent Action. Porter Sargent Publishers.
Singer, J. D. (1961). The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations. World
Politics,, 14(1), 77-92.
Sola-Morales, S. (2014). Imaginarios sociales, procesos de identificación y comunicaciòn
mediática. Prisma.com(25), 3-22. Retrieved from
http://revistas.ua.pt/index.php/prismacom/article/view/3044/pdf_26
Southern, P. (2007). The roman army a social and institutional history. Oxford university
press.
Sukin, J. b. (2020). Joint military excercises and crisis dynamics on the korean peninsula.
journal of conflict resolution, 855-888. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002720972180
Sundberg, R., & Melander, E. (2013). Introducing the UCDP Georeferenced Event
Dataset. Journal of Peace Research, 50(4), 523-532.
Swedish Defence research agency. (2019). Advantages and risks of regional defence
cooperation. Stockholm: SDRA. Retrieved from https://www.foi.se/en/foi/news-and-
pressroom/news/2019-04-01-advantages-and-risks-of-regional-defence-
cooperation.html
Tan, S. S. (2016). Military Diplomacy. In The SAGE handbook of diplomacy (pp. 591-
600). SAGE Publication .
The Guardian. (2015, Junio 3). El Salvador's 'most violent month': homicide rate hits
record high in May. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/03/el-
salvador-homicide-killings-gangs
Tromp, H. (1981). Introduction: Changing Perspectives in Peace Research. In UNESCO
Yearbook of Peace and Conflict Studies 1980. Westport, CN: Greenwood Press.
Ulmer, W. (2010). Military Leadership into the 21st century: Another bridge too far? The
US Army War College QUarterly, 21.
UN. (2023). United Nations. Retrieved from UN Peacekeeping Operations, special political
missions: https://www.unmissions.org/
Vagts, A. (1967). Military Attache. Princeton University Press.
Waldmann, P. (1999). Sobre la asimetría existente entre la dinámica de la violencia y la
dinámica de la paz utilizando como ejemplo las guerras civiles. Eguzkilore: Cuaderno del
Instituto Vasco de Criminología(13), 201.
Wallensteen, P. (1973). Structure and War. On International Relations, 1920-68.
Stockholm: Rabén & Sjögren.
Waltz, K. N. (1959). Man, the state, and war; a theoretical analysis. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Wiberg, H. (2005, Junho). Investigação para a Paz: Passado, presente e futuro. Revista
Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 71, 21-42.
Winger, G. (2014). The velvet gauntlet a theory of defense diplomacy. What do ideas do
IWM Junior visiting fellows conference. XXXIII, pp. 1-14. Vienna: IWM. Retrieved from
https://files.iwm.at/jvfc/33_10_Winger.pdf