If Member States do not have sufficient ex ante confidence (i.e. before the contract is signed), cooperation efforts may fail. Footnote 42 It is not surprising that the language of trust permeates the ACF negotiations. In 1995, the DCA disputed by Australia with Indonesia reflected the new reality that Australia “no longer saw Indonesia as an expansionist threat.” Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating said bluntly: “This is a declaration of confidence.” Indonesian President Suharto agreed with the assessment and said: “If there are still suspicions against Indonesia, they should be eliminated.” Footnote 43 Since trust is a necessary condition for defence cooperation, the creation of a DCA is a reassuring signal of the intention of cooperation with attentive third parties. The DCAs study promises a fruitful insight into contemporary international security. I think three future avenues of research are particularly promising. First, the impact of DCAs on the substance is worth considering. There is overwhelming anecdotal evidence that governments are taking DCAs very seriously – an awareness that has been reinforced by the dramatic spread of DCA over the past two decades. And DCAs often advocate ambitious goals, such as coordinating all the defence relations of their respective signatories. However, we are not sure how the DCAs achieve these goals.

Chart 2 shows that the potential effects of DCAs are significant in terms of arms trade, defence spending, joint military exercises, training and exchanges, and militarized conflicts. The lack of agreement between the Spanish Ministry of Defence and representatives of local staff should not be the subject of an arbitration or judgment decision. The United States Armed Forces reimburse the Spanish Ministry of Defence for its agreed share of the costs of the work carried out after it has been accepted and approved by these forces. The parties enter into written agreements on the terms of payment that are subject to the approval of the standing committee. 2. Japan will carry out all its actions within the framework of its Constitution and in accordance with fundamental positions such as maintaining its exclusively defence-oriented policy and its three non-nuclear principles. After the fall of the Soviet Union and the decline of the communist threat in the 1990s, bilateral aid to the Mutual Defence Treaty took a rollercoaster ride; especially in the Philippines. In general, the Philippine government has remained supportive of the treaty since its inception and has often relied on the United States to rely on its defence, as it has done since World War II. This was highlighted during the Cold War by the many U.S. military bases operating in the Philippines.

The most notable and controversial of these bases are the Clark Air Force base outside the Angeles City subway station and the U.S. Subic Bay Naval Station. The bases were occupied for nearly 40 years after the end of the Second World War until the early 1990s. In 1991, the anti-American atmosphere in the Philippines forced the Philippine Senate to reject a new basic agreement that subsequently forced the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Philippine soil. [5] Faced with the rise of global terrorism with the events of 11.9. However, as china`s economic boom and militant expansion, the United States strengthened relations with its Asian allies, particularly the Philippines. [6] Governments are increasingly turning to DCAs to improve their military capabilities. For example, since the 1990s, Bulgaria has been waging a modernization campaign involving dozens of DCAs which, according to US diplomats, “are based on the premise that Bulgaria is facing new asymmetric security threats and not traditional threats to its territory.” Footnote 57 In 2011, Indonesia sued the DCA with a large number of partners, including Russia, South Korea, China, Serbia and India – to “modernize the country`s most important weapons system.” P stocking note