The Exchange Program Long Look is a unique initiative to strengthen the British Army and Australian Army’s relationship. This annual reciprocal exchange exposes participants to military cultures, operational practices, and geopolitics – providing invaluable insights into leadership, teamwork, and international collaboration.

During my time attached to the 19th Regiment, Royal Artillery in Larkhill, I participated in the following key activities that significantly broadened my geographical and professional perspectives:

• Exercise TARTAN REFLECT – A World War I battlefield study through Belgium and France.
• Exercise DYNAMIC FRONT 25 – The largest multinational field artillery exercise across multiple European countries, including Finland, Estonia, Germany, Poland, and Romania. Led by the 56th Artillery Command from Wiesbaden, Germany, and hosted by Finland, the exercise focuses on standardising artillery fire and enhancing interoperability between U.S. forces, NATO allies, and partner nations.
• Exposure to Operation INTERFLEX (AS Operation KUDU) – The British-led multinational military operation providing training and supporting the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

In addition to these professional experiences, I travelled extensively throughout the United Kingdom, visiting historical sites that deepened my understanding of military strategy and geopolitical context. However, beyond the technical and strategic learning, the most insightful lessons came from the people I worked with and the cultural insights I gained.

In my view, these experiences highlighted the complexities of multinational operations, where success relies on strategy and the ability to connect with and inspire individuals across diverse cultural and geopolitical landscapes. Reflecting on these experiences, I believe the true value lies in military strategy, the human connections we forge, and the cultural understanding we gain through collaboration. I argue that this is where the lasting impact of such exchanges is found.

Working With Allies and Partners: Understanding Culture, Communication, and Geopolitics

In today’s globalised military landscape, effective cooperation with allies requires more than tactical alignment. It necessitates a deep understanding of the cultural and geopolitical factors that shape each nation’s priorities and strategies. While the British and Australian forces share a joint commitment to global security, our approaches to training, communication, and problem-solving can differ, influenced by our respective histories and geopolitical contexts.

The Influence of History on Military Culture

One pivotal moment in deepening my understanding of these differences was during the battlefield study, Exercise TARTAN REFLECT. As an Australian, I saw how WWI holds different significance for each nation. For the British, WWI is inextricably linked to their imperial legacy, as it was fought to protect the interests and integrity of the British Empire. In contrast, the war represents the birth of an independent national consciousness for Australians, marking a defining moment in the country’s emerging identity. Walking these historic sites was a powerful reminder that war experiences are never neutral; they shape how nations and their armed forces view themselves and their roles in the world. We know that the way these events are remembered is often influenced by the victors, who control the narrative and define the legacy of war.

These historical differences, I realised, aren’t confined to the past; they directly influence how we operate today, particularly in multinational military settings. Leadership styles, communication practices, and decision-making approaches can differ dramatically based on how countries understand their place in the world. Understanding this historical context is crucial because it allows us to navigate these differences with empathy and adaptability, fostering stronger collaboration.

The Importance of Understanding Geopolitical Context in Multinational Operations

The geopolitical context plays a critical role in shaping modern military operations, as I observed during Exercise DYNAMIC FRONT 25 in Finland. Finland’s transition from an independent defence posture to becoming part of NATO’s collective defence structure is a relatively recent shift, and it affects how Finnish forces approach cooperation with NATO allies. Their military culture, informed by decades of being non-aligned, retains a degree of independence that must be understood and respected when working with them in multinational settings.

This is where understanding historical and geopolitical contexts becomes essential for effective leadership. Just as history shapes how nations view themselves and their roles in the world, so do the current geopolitical realities influence how they approach collaboration. In exercises like Dynamic Front, understanding the 'why' behind different approaches is as critical as mastering the 'how’. For example, by recognising the unique historical and geopolitical motivations driving Finland’s military culture, we were able to adjust our communication strategies, ensuring smoother cooperation and reducing the risk of misunderstanding.

As leaders, we must first understand these contextual factors to avoid undermining cooperation and jeopardising mission success. In multinational settings, where each nation brings its own historical baggage, priorities, and strategic needs, a leader’s ability to navigate these differences by respecting both past legacies and current realities becomes pivotal in fostering collaboration and ensuring that operational goals are met effectively.

The Power of Human Connection in Leadership and Multinational Cooperation

While leadership is often viewed through the lens of operational success, my experience during Long Look reinforced a critical lesson: leadership is fundamentally about people. Effective leadership is grounded in human connection, trust, and shared purpose, irrespective of nationality. Leadership transcends borders and is shaped more by an individual’s character, intellect, and presence than by their military background.

Shared Human Experience Across Military Cultures

While each nation brings its own history, culture, and strategic priorities to the table, the shared human experience of service unites us all. The shared hardships, camaraderie, and understanding of what it means to serve are bonds that transcend national boundaries. I’ve shared laughter and moments of mutual respect with British soldiers no different from those of my Australian peers.

One experience that mainly reinforced the importance of human connection was my time observing Operation INTERFLEX, where British soldiers supported the training of Ukrainian forces. Engaging with Ukrainian soldiers undergoing basic infantry training deepened my understanding of modern warfare and conscription's emotional and moral implications. Unlike the professional soldiers I had worked alongside, many conscripts were compelled to serve, highlighting the vulnerability inherent in military service.

This contrast became particularly clear when I compared the conscripts, who were motivated more by duty than personal choice, with the professional soldiers, who often possessed intrinsic motivation due to their voluntary commitment. Leadership in conscripted environments is more complex; it requires a flexible approach to connecting with and motivating soldiers, especially those who may not have chosen to serve but are still facing the same dangers and stresses as those who volunteered.

This experience forced me to reconsider my military service and appreciate the privilege of voluntary enlistment. I was reminded that every soldier, whether conscripted or voluntary, carries an emotional and moral burden. The conscripted soldier embodies the vulnerability of all service members and the willingness to serve despite personal reservations or lack of intrinsic motivation. This insight deepened my understanding of leadership, underscoring the responsibility leaders must connect with their teams on a human level, regardless of whether they have chosen to serve or been compelled to do so.

We may approach leadership and teamwork with a different lens, but the shared experiences of service, the physical and emotional challenges, the sacrifices, the triumphs, and the losses are identical. This shared bond allows us to integrate well, even across vast geographical and cultural distances. However, to achieve affective integration it must be reinforced through clearly defined vision, values, and expectations.

The Importance of Vulnerability in Leadership

One of the most insightful lessons I learned from working with the British Army was the role of vulnerability in building trust and fostering collaboration, especially in multinational settings. Vulnerability, admitting uncertainty, acknowledging mistakes, and being open to learning from others all humanise a leader and create a more cooperative and resilient environment.

Vulnerability as a Tool for Building Trust

During my time working alongside British and Finnish forces, I realised that acknowledging gaps in knowledge or asking for clarification helped bridge cultural gaps and facilitated smoother cooperation. A key lesson was never to approach a situation with arrogance; leaders must recognise that their way is not the only way. Remaining open to learning and understanding the perspectives of others creates space for collaboration. This is especially crucial when operating in a foreign country, where entitlement can hinder effective cooperation.

Vulnerability, in this context, is not a weakness but a strength. By showing openness and admitting limitations, leaders invite respect and strengthen relationships. This openness allows leaders to create stronger, more effective teams. I witnessed this firsthand when working with Finland, a country that has only recently joined NATO. Finland demonstrated vulnerability by acknowledging its geopolitical challenges and the gaps in its military capabilities and integration with NATO’s command structure. This transparency in trust fostered a collaborative atmosphere where all nations, regardless of experience, were valued partners in strengthening the alliance.

Vulnerability and Human Connection in Multinational Operations

Vulnerability extends beyond emotional openness; it’s also about actively listening to allies' concerns and understanding their strategic priorities. Leaders who embrace vulnerability engage with the geopolitical factors that shape military decision-making, improving the quality of multinational engagements. Whether seeking input or acknowledging areas of difference, vulnerability strengthens bonds and fosters a more cohesive, collaborative team.

Conclusion

My experience during Exchange Program Long Look has been more than just professional development; it has reshaped my understanding of leadership, human connection, and international collaboration. The lessons learned from working with the British Army have impacted how I approach leadership, teamwork, and my role in multinational operations. Ultimately, the lessons learned from working in multinational teams apply to any collaborative setting. By understanding each other’s roles, building trust, and embracing diverse perspectives, we can work together more effectively and achieve our shared goals with greater success.

This exchange has reinforced that leadership, loyalty, and the human connection forged through collective struggle resonate beyond the context of war, symbolising the strength of unity and mutual respect in any challenging situation. The people I have met, the places I have been, and the lessons I have learned during this experience will stay with me for the rest of my life, continuing to shape how I approach leadership and collaboration in the future.