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