In Mao¡¦s era , Mao Zedong had a dominant leadership role, and PLA political role was affected by Mao¡¦s authority. PLA had to subordinate to Mao¡¦s order. PLA only played a role as a tool. After the 1978 reform, Deng Xiaoping promoted military modernization in the 1980s to reduce the political influence of the military. After Deng¡¦s death, Jiang Zemin lacked the personal authority and military background. As a result, Jiang had to grant concessions to PLA in order to ensure its support. One concession had obviously been the unprecedented participation of military chiefs in foreign affairs decisions that were of concern to PLA, including issues related to Taiwan and relations with the United States. Besides, in Jiang¡¦s era, the opportunities and channels which PLA participated in foreign policies increased. PLA influence in foreign policy was stronger than Mao¡¦s era and Deng¡¦s era. The research motivation of this essay is to expect that can understand the change of PLA political influence. The research aims of the essay include the following: 1. exploring the factors that affect PLA political influence; 2.probing into PLA participation in foreign policy, and realizing PLA political influence; 3.analying military diplomacy, and understanding the cooperation between PLA and Ministry of Foreign Affairs; 4.probing into the conflict between PLA and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and understanding PLA strong attitude; 5.analying the decision model, Party-Military relations, political situation, the issues related to the national security, and deducing PLA political influence in the future.

冷戰後，中共外交作為上已有重視軍事外交的趨勢，一方面是由於軍事關係原本即為雙邊關係的一環；另一方面，軍事上的交流與合作同樣會有戰略上的意涵，可供中共加以運用。 本論文研究目的在對中共軍事外交做一全面的認識，從中了解其在中共總體外交作為上扮演何種角色。論文首先對「軍事外交」此一概念做出釐清，解釋其在冷戰後發展之原因。並對中共軍事外交做一回顧與介紹中共執行軍事外交的組織架構，且分析其目的。其次，了解冷戰後中共外交政策上的思維與軍事戰略，藉此觀察中共軍事外交在外交政策與軍事戰略中的角色，對中共軍事外交有一背景上的認識。並從儀式性的軍事交往深入到戰略層面行動，以及長期的職業軍事教育交流、非傳統安全領域之合作與參與聯合國維和行動，從中探究出其發展上的機遇與挑戰，並以外部衝擊與內部限制作為分析的分水嶺。最後綜合歸納出中共軍事外交對內外的影響。 研究發現中共軍事外交日漸蓬勃有其國內外大環境配合，但同時也受其制約，而冷戰後中共軍事外交更趨靈活，在發展的層面日漸擴大，並融合進中共的中長程目標，對我國的威脅將與日俱增。

軍事外交關係國防戰略，是國防戰略的對外延伸，軍事外交也是國家總體外交的重要組成部分，代表著國家安全和利益的國際軍事交往。中共在「2004年中國的國防」白皮書中，首次將「開展軍事合作與交流」置放於戰略層次，列為國防政策重點項目之一。期間積極參與地區和國際政治活動，並於此基礎上同時推動軍事交流與合作，其作為包括；聯合軍事演習、與軍事強國建立高層互訪和磋商機制、軍官培訓規模急劇擴大、軍艦外交範圍擴大等，使共軍開放程度越來越大，並且呈全方位發展的態勢，間接促使各國逐漸正視中共軍事影響力，積極與共軍進行對話與合作。 海軍為國際性兵種，軍艦一出海即代表國家，也意味著國土的延伸。軍艦出（互）訪向來被認為是軍事外交的一個重要組成部分，也是一個國家海上實力的綜合表現。中共的軍事外交固然是舉起「和平」旗幟，但從不掩飾對國際先進軍備和先進技術的追求，也不隱藏其所擁有的軍事威懾力及參與多邊安全對話、武器管控等措施。 / The military diplomacy associates with the military defense strategy. It is also an extension of national defense strategy. The military diplomacy plays an important role in overall national foreign policy, as it represents the interests of national security and international military relationships. "Developing military cooperation and international relationship," was first placed at the strategic level in PRC’s white paper, "China's National Defense in 2004". It became one of their national defense policy priorities. Since then, PRC aggressively participated in regional and international political events. In addition, PRC actively promoted international military exchanges and cooperation which includes joint military exercises, military commanders’ summit meetings and strategies consultation, officers’ international training in large scale, and increasing scope in naval diplomacy. PRC military has the grown dramatically in International level. PRC’s overall military diplomacy development situation enhance of the PRC’s international military power indirectly. Therefore, many countries established dialogue and cooperation with PRC at present. Navy is an international arms force. Naval ships at sea represent the nation’s authority and it is an extension of territory. Warships visits not only always have been considered an important component of the military diplomacy, but also represent the strength of a country's overall performance at sea. As PRC’s military diplomacy is certainly held up "peace" banner in appearance, they openly pursue the advanced arms force and advanced technology, expend their own military deterrent force and participate in multilateral security dialogue, arms control measures.

La France, durant la détente, mena une politique étrangère qui mit à profit les déviations internes de la Hongrie et internationales de la Roumanie par rapport à l'URSS. La politique française poursuivit des objectifs à la fois bilatéraux et multilatéraux : elle inscrivit son action dans un cadre hérité du passé, mais aussi dans un processus mouvant, celui d'Helsinki. Cette époque s'avéra une transition d'un point de vue aussi bien international que national : de la crise tchécoslovaque en 1968 au regain de tensions dans la seconde moitié des années 1970, les vecteurs d'influence de la France dans l'ancienne Europe centrale et oriental évoluèrent et s'enrichirent. Un partenariat difficile fut mis en place avec la Roumanie, qui avait entretenu de liens politiques étroits avec la France avant sa satellisation par l'URSS. Quant à la Hongrie, un dialogue naquit avec elle. Les limites des relations culturelles et militaires furent à l'inverse patentes. Ces deux démocraties populaires furent en effet perçues en France à travers tout un spectre de représentations, qui allait de l'adversaire militaire et idéologique au partenaire diplomatique pouvant converger avec l'Ouest. A contrario, les rapports économiques acquirent une signification croissante et furent encadrés par l'État. Ils répondirent à la volonté politique de développer les industries de haute-technologie en France, de s'opposer l'hégémonie des États-Unis en la matière, et de mettre à profit l'asymétrie de développement entre l'Est et l'Ouest pour saper la domination de l'URSS sur son glacis. En dépit de divergences au sein de l'État l'ouverture française fut ainsi menée de manière globalement cohérente. / France, during the "détente", led a foreign policy which took advantage of Hungary's and Romania' peculiarities compared to the USSR, Bucharest as for the international and Budapest as for the domestic policies. The French aims were both bilateral and multilateral. The French policy was developed in framework inherited from the past, but in a more fast-changing framework too, the Helsinki process. The period appeared to be a transition from the international and national points of view: from the Czechoslovak crisis in 1968 to the new tensions du ring the second half of the 1970s, the French way to influence former Central European countries changed and was enhanced. A difficult partnership was set up with Romania which country France had politically influenced before 1945, and a dialog created with Hungary. However concerning cultural and military relations, limitations were obvious. Indeed, these two people's democracies were seen in France through a whole spectrum of representations, from a military and ideological adversary to a diplomatic partner which was maybe able to converge with the West. On the contrary, economic relation became more and more important and were strongly supported by the government. Those relations were linked to a political determination to develop high-technology industries in France, to resist the United State hegemony in those fields and to undermine the Soviet rule on its empire by taking advantage of the asymmetrical level of development between the East and the West. Therefore, in spite of differences am on the state's administrations, the way the French relations were opened up to the East proved to be mostly consistent.

[pt] Esta tese, fundamentada, principalmente, na Escola Inglesa, analisa o papel na sociedade internacional das práticas sociais relacionadas com o uso não coercitivo dos recursos do âmbito da Defesa entre os Estados e outras entidades que atuam na política internacional. As características, institucionalização, internacionalização, os fatores culturais e as críticas e tensões concernentes com essas práticas são descritas e examinadas, permitindo concluir-se que o fenômeno se constitui um tipo específico de diplomacia: a diplomacia de defesa, considerada como uma instituição da sociedade internacional. / [en] This doctoral dissertation, based, mainly, on the English School, analyzes the role in international society of the social practices related to non-coercive use of Defense s resources between states and other entities with standing in international politics. The features, institutionalization, globalization, cultural factors and criticisms and tensions related to these practices are described and discussed, allowing to conclude that the phenomenon is a particular kind of diplomacy: defense diplomacy, regarded as an institution of international society.