When Defence discussions focus on strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific, conversations often centre on high-level diplomacy, force posture agreements, capability acquisitions, and government policy. These discussions are important, but they can unintentionally overlook something much smaller and often just as important: relationships.

Not the relationships built in ministerial meetings or strategic dialogues, but the relationships built on flight lines, during long exercise days, in briefing rooms, while troubleshooting problems together, or during conversations between personnel from different nations trying to achieve the same operational outcome.

During Exercise Pitch Black, I had the opportunity to work alongside and mentor international refuellers operating in a fast-paced multinational environment. Like most major exercises, the focus was naturally on interoperability, readiness, and operational capability. However, what stood out most to me was not simply the aircraft or the scale of the exercise. It was the people.

Despite differences in nationality, rank structures, procedures, and organisational culture, the exercise environment forced individuals to quickly build trust, adapt communication styles, and work collaboratively under pressure. Some of the most valuable interactions were not formal engagements or scheduled activities, but the everyday conversations and working relationships developed throughout the exercise. It made me realise that strategic relationships are often built long before senior leaders ever sit around a negotiation table.

Australia’s strategic documents consistently identify partnerships and regional engagement as central to maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. The 2026 National Defence Strategy highlights the importance of strengthening regional relationships, enhancing interoperability, and building collective resilience in response to an increasingly contested strategic environment (Department of Defence, 2026). However, these objectives are not achieved solely through policy documents or strategic messaging. They are also achieved through the day-to-day conduct of personnel operating alongside regional and coalition partners.

For many junior members, this reality can be easy to overlook. It is easy to view exercises as purely tactical activities focused on operational outcomes, qualifications, or procedural execution. Yet multinational environments also create opportunities to shape perceptions, build trust, and strengthen professional relationships at a very human level.

In many ways, junior personnel are often among the most visible representatives of Defence. For movement, mobility, and enabling workforces especially; interactions with international partners occur constantly. These interactions might involve coordinating aircraft movements, resolving logistical issues, supporting visiting personnel, or simply helping another team navigate unfamiliar procedures. Individually, these moments can seem minor. Collectively, they influence how partner nations experience working with the ADF.

Importantly, these relationships are not built through perfection. Some of the strongest professional relationships I observed during multinational activities were formed through problem-solving together. Shared challenges, operational pressure, fatigue, and adapting to unfamiliar environments often created stronger connections than formal engagement ever could. There is a level of mutual respect built when personnel recognise that despite different uniforms and nationalities, everyone is ultimately trying to achieve the same mission.

This is particularly important in the Indo-Pacific, where geography, regional diversity, and coalition operations will likely continue shaping Australia’s operational environment. Future crises – whether military operations, humanitarian assistance missions, or regional contingencies – are unlikely to occur in isolation. The ability to rapidly work alongside regional partners may prove just as important as technical capability itself.

That reality places greater importance on interpersonal skills than Defence sometimes acknowledges. Cultural awareness, adaptability, communication, and emotional intelligence are often discussed as “soft skills,” yet they can produce very real operational effects. A technically proficient force that struggles to build trust or communicate effectively with partners risks limiting its own operational effectiveness.

This does not mean every Defence member needs to become a diplomat or regional specialist. However, it does mean recognising that professionalism, attitude, and engagement at the tactical level contribute to broader strategic outcomes. In many cases, junior personnel are not simply participating in Defence engagement – they are actively shaping it.

Professional Military Education (PME) can help reinforce this understanding. Discussions surrounding strategic competition and regional engagement are often framed at institutional or political levels, but there is value in helping personnel understand how their day-to-day interactions support broader Defence objectives. Understanding the “why” behind multinational engagement can change how individuals approach coalition environments and partner interactions.

Exercises such as Pitch Black and Talisman Sabre already provide exceptional opportunities for multinational cooperation and interoperability. However, their value extends beyond tactical training outcomes alone. They also help develop familiarity, trust, and professional relationships that may become critical during future operations.

The Indo-Pacific will not be shaped solely by advanced capability, deterrence strategies, or military presence. It will also be shaped by the strength of relationships built between people operating together across the region.

And often, those relationships begin at the most junior levels.