Power rarely announces itself. Usually when we think about International politics, we often imagine military power or economic pressure. At least, that’s what I used to thing before I started studying International relations properly. But in today’s world, especially in regions like the Indo-Pacific, I realized that influence can work in much quieter ways. This is basically what public diplomacy is about, it’s even becoming one of the most interesting tool states are using, and I find it genuinely interesting to look at hoe Australia is using it. Public diplomacy is about how a country presents itself not just to governments but to the people in other countries. It includes things like education, cultural exchange, media and development work. For Australia, this has become a really important part for how it engages with the Indo-Pacific. From what I have observed, Australia does not depend only on traditional diplomacy anymore. Instead, it focuses a lot on building connections with people. One of the most clearest examples is Education. Every year, a large number of students from countries like India, Indonesia, Vietnam and various Pacific Island states go to Australia to study. These students don’t just get a degree. They spend years living in Australia, meeting Australians and experiencing the culture firsthand. That kind of exposure leave a lasting impression. When these students go back home they don’t just leave with qualifications, they take back memories, networks and sometimes even a sense of attachment to Australia. I think this is actually a very smart strategy. Overtime, some of these students end up in government, journalism, business or academia. The way they perceive Australia will, at least to some extent, affect how they approach bilateral issues later in their career. So in a way, Australian universities are doing diplomatic work without even trying to. I think that’s pretty powerful idea. Apart from education, Culture is another tool that Australia uses. In many Pacific Island countries, Australian sports and media content are quite popular. I know that might sound like a small thing but I think it actually matters. When people grow up watching Australian content or following Australian sports teams they develop a sense of familiarity with the country. It’s not the same as a formal alliance or a trade agreement but it create a kind of soft connection that formal diplomacy alone cannot achieve. Another area where Australia’s public diplomacy is visible is development assistance. Especially in the pacific region. Through various programs, Australia helps with things like healthcare, infrastructure and climate-related issues in smaller pacific nations. Now, I’m aware that this is partly strategic, Australia is clearly trying to maintain its influence in a region where China is also becoming more active. But I don’t think that makes the assistance any less real or meaningful. If a hospital gets built or a school gets funded, that benefit exists regardless of the geopolitical motivation behind it. And people in those communities notice who is helping them. That said, I don’t want to paint too rosy a picture. Australia’s public diplomacy has real limitations. The Indo-Pacific is a very competitive region right now, with multiple countries trying to expand their influence. Also they have their own interests, their own histories and their own ways of thinking about the world. So Australia cannot just assume that its efforts will automatically translate into influence. It has to constantly adjust and stay relevant. There’s also the issue of Credibility. Public diplomacy only works if a country’s image matches its actual behavior. And Australia has had some issues on that front. Its policies on immigration and asylum seekers, for instance, have drawn a lot of criticism. If there are contradictions, for example, in domestic policies or political statements then it can affect credibility. People today have access to a lot of information, so it’s harder to maintain a certain image if it doesn’t align with reality. I also think Australia needs to invest more in Digital diplomacy. This is something I feel is not discussed enough. So much of how young people form opinions today happens online, through social media, YouTube, podcasts and so on. If Australia wants to connect with younger audiences in the Indo-Pacific, it needs to be present in those spaces. But it has to be done carefully. Authentic storytelling, real exchanges and genuine engagement work much better than polished official campaigns. What I find most interesting about Australia’s approach is that it leans into being a middle power rather than trying to compete directly with China or the United States. This makes its approach more acceptable, especially in smaller countries that may feel uncomfortable with more aggressive forms of influence. One thing I’ve come to appreciate while studying this topic is how slow public diplomacy really is. It doesn’t produce results in a year or even five years. The student who moves to Sydney today might not be in a position to influence any major decision for another fifteen or twenty years. That makes it hard to justify in terms of immediate political gains. But if you take a longer view, the case for it becomes quite strong. Relationships built over years and decades tend to be more resilient than those built on purely transactional interests. To sum up my thoughts, I think Australia’s public diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific is a genuinely smart strategy, even if it’s not without problems. In a region where hard power competition is intensifying, the ability to build real human connections is becoming more valuable, not less. Australia isn’t doing everything right, and there are areas where it clearly needs to do better. But the basic instinct is that influence built through relationships lasts longer than influence built through pressure, seems right to me. And as someone studying public diplomacy, I find Australia’s approach a useful and thought-provoking case to learn from.
Arooj Khalid
Arooj Khalid is a student of International Relations at Fatima Jinnah Women University. Her academic interests include public diplomacy, regional politics, and the role of education and culture in shaping international perceptions. This work reflects her engagement with contemporary discussions on how middle powers like Australia use soft power and people-to-people connections to build long-term influence in the Indo-Pacific.
Leave a Reply