Tuesday 26th of November 2024
Home » Blogs » Gus Leonisky's blog

time to take a cold shower.....

Keep Calm and Carry On” posters should be put up in all Canberra government departments. The British Ministry of Information produced the original of this meme in 1939 to prevent public panic about widely predicted German air attacks. A new version is needed in Australia in 2023 to counter fears of imminent invasion and subversion by China.

 

By Jocelyn Chey

 

 

The current panic can be traced back to fears of a “silent invasion” that circulated in 2017. The coalition government for whatever reason aimed for political mileage by whipping up anti-China hysteria. This peaked in 2020 when former Prime Minister Scott Morrison demanded an international inquiry into the origin of the Covid pandemic. This in turn provoked tit-for-tat trade measures from China and belligerent responses from wolf warriors. Then events spiralled almost out of control, Australia got caught up in a worsening US-China relationship, and all sides resorted to the slogan, “Now Panic and Freak Out”.

At the National Congress of the Communist Party of China late last year and the National People’s Congress recently concluded, important new policy directions have emerged. President Xi Jinping has consolidated his leadership position, brought a new broom to the management of international relations, and ended domestic isolation policies originally introduced to control the spread of the pandemic. He is also determined to revive a flagging domestic economy.

Since then there have been many signs of these changes taking effect. Leaving relations with the US on one side in the too-hard basket, Beijing is seeking to open up to the rest of the world. There have been top-level visits from Spain, Singapore, Malaysia, France and Brazil, among others, all shoring up friendly relations that do not depend on American support. Brokering a peace plan between Saudi Arabia and Iran and outlining a peace plan to settle the Ukraine war has presented China to the world as a potential solution to global problems rather than a cause of conflict. The Global South, with which China aligns itself, is not preoccupied with the adversarial US-China relationship but rather focusses on the urgency of resolving global economic problems.

Meanwhile in Australia, our economy has suffered major damage from the downturn in relations with China. Beijing has cracked down hard on Australian trade and reacted strongly to measures such as the 2018 foreign interference laws. Until recently, when Australia was mentioned in Chinese media, it was painted as an unfriendly country. However, even though some people in Canberra and some sections of the national press outdid their counterparts in Beijing in animosity, there were already signs last year that the Chinese side was ready for change. The change of government presented such an opportunity, and the new Ambassador, Xiao Qian, was quick to take advantage of the situation.

Speaking at the Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney, in June, and later in a speech to the National Press Club in August 2022, Xiao Qian extended an olive branch to the Australian government and referred to both sides “meeting halfway” to resolve outstanding problems. These overtures were reinforced in meetings between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and President Xi in Bali in November, and between Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi in Beijing in December. This last meeting resulted in a Joint Outcomes Statement that has set the parameters for continuing exchanges in 2023, resurrecting the concept of a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership.

The Australian mainstream media line on China all along was uniformly negative. None of these speeches and meetings was reported in a positive light. Words were twisted and taken out of context. China was depicted as aggressive and expansionary, and any friendship gestures were regarded as duplicitous. The slogan was Now Panic and Freak Out.

Disproving this negative press, positive results from these meetings quickly emerged. Chinese students have returned to our universities, business delegations are resuming, and tourist organisations are gearing for an influx of Chinese visitors over the northern summer holidays. Chinese Australian families have been able to visit and re-establish contacts. Talks on overcoming trade impediments were held at China’s Boao Forum in March, reconvening after a long break due to the pandemic. Temporary reprieve has now been given to barley exports, one of several major trade issues awaiting resolution. Trade Minister Don Farrell seems set to visit China in the near future, and there is talk of a Prime Ministerial visit later in the year.

Relations are still rocky. Communication between China and Australia having been cut off for many months, has to be restarted. Trust has been lost on both sides. At this sensitive time, the important thing is not to avoid uncalled-for negativity while also not going overboard with too much enthusiasm. Neither side should smooth over differences, which are certainly substantial. Both should listen to experienced and knowledgeable advisors. Policy should be based on reason, not on panic.

Hugh White has consistently warned of the dangers of picking sides in the US-China dispute, and he repeats this in his essay in the latest Monthly. He proposes instead that we should focus on desired outcomes. He frames his argument in terms of geopolitics, strategic equilibrium, and the need to boost regional alliances and reduce the risk of conflict. These are important, but there are also direct, more immediate, and more solid benefits to our economy and society in prospect, if we can just Keep Calm and Carry On.

 

You might also be interested in China’s big foreign policy plays leave Australia in the cold

 

READ MORE:

https://johnmenadue.com/china-has-put-the-us-in-the-too-hard-basket/

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

sneakers on the ground....

SNEAKERS, TRAINERS OR BOOTS ON THE GROUND? SHOES ARE SHOES.....

 

China-US tensions over Taiwan are centered around Beijing’s concerns that Washington may try to nudge the island into a unilateral declaration of ‘independence’ instead of gradual reunification with the mainland. US leaders have not done much to alleviate these anxieties, ramping up arms sales and enhancing ‘informal’ diplomatic ties with Taipei.

Sino-US tensions received another major boost this week amid media reports that Washington plans to sell over $1.1 billion-worth of Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Taiwan and revelations that the US military has dispatched some 200 advisors to bases across the island to support the training of Taiwanese troops and reserve forces.

Both actions are illegal under treaties which underpin Sino-US relations. In 1982, the two countries signed a communique which requires Washington to gradually whittle its arms sales to Taiwan down to zero. Forty years later, the US has failed to live up to its commitments.

More significantly, under the 1979 Shanghai Communique on the establishment of diplomatic relations, the US acknowledged “that there is but one China” and that “Taiwan is part of China.” That makes the deployment of any US troops on the island illegal – basically the equivalent of the People’s Republic deploying its military on US territory without Washington’s authorization.

“Clearly, the US military investment is growing – and it may be shifting to a ‘dug in’ scenario,” says Karen Kwiatkowski, a former US Department of Defense (DoD) analyst and retired Air Force lieutenant colonel.

 

“If this number of military advisors represents an increase, this is not a good sign, because in the US history of overseas conflicts, those military advisors tend to come with contractors and a logistical tail, and plan or precede a buildup of forces,” Kwiatkowski, who famously blew the whistle to expose political influence on military intelligence in the run-up to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, explained in an interview to Sputnik.

 

READ MORE:

https://sputnikglobe.com/20230419/us-missile-sales-advisors-on-taiwan-signal-death-throes-of-empire-1109664848.html

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

chinese people.....

 

By Lim Teck Ghee

 

US and British arms industry companies and their little mentioned but crucial support cast of Taiwanese military, lawmakers and government official counterparts are opposed to China-Taiwan reunification, because the current situation acts as their ATM, generating billions of dollars in profit. 

The recent visit to China by former Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou – the first time a Taiwanese president has visited the country since the defeated Republic of China government retreated to Taiwan in 1949 – has set off shock waves in the United States, Australia and other countries bent on a non-peaceful resolution of the China Taiwan stand-off.

According to reports on the under-reported but closely watched visit by western media, Ma stressed that China and Taiwan must do everything possible to avoid war.

Accompanied by a delegation of academics and college students, Ma in comments provided by his office noted:

“People on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are Chinese people, and are both descendants of the Yan and Yellow Emperors.”

Despite the common history and ancestry, Ma acknowledged the magnitude of the reunification challenge.

“We sincerely hope that the two sides will work together to pursue peace, avoid war, and strive to revitalise China”.

“This is an unavoidable responsibility of Chinese people on both sides of the Strait, and we must work hard.”

More alarming to the US are the comments of French President Macron to the French media following his recent visit to China and meetings with Chinese leader, Xi Jinping. In his interview conducted with Les Echos and Politico, Macron told the reporters that “Europe faces a great risk” if it “gets caught up in crises that are not ours.”

“The paradox would be that, overcome with panic, we believe we are just America’s followers,” Macron said. “The question Europeans need to answer… is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the US agenda and a Chinese overreaction.”

Much stronger words on Taiwan and the need for Europe’s “strategic autonomy” were in fact expressed by Macron in the posted redacted interview so as to avoid a bigger controversy with Taiwan, the US and US allies.

The French position on China and Taiwan especially should be required reading for Australians, especially those who have not given thought to or have dismissed outright, the possibility of a China Taiwan rapprochement or reunification. 

Anti reunification forces

Left unsaid by Ma and Macron is that the forces opposed to reunification of China and Taiwan are at their most virulent and most hostile point in history. Led by the United States, Australia and a supportive cast of suppliant allies, the anti reunification forces are using Taiwan to confront and subvert China and forestall any prospect of peaceful reunification.

What matters for the anti reunification forces is not the fate of Taiwan or the opinions of the Chinese and Taiwanese population. What is at stake is to win the US effort to contain and isolate China and to repulse any challenge to the US monopoly of power, wealth and dominance taken for granted in a US led unipolar world in which any attempt to resist American hegemonic control is portrayed as an assault on a ‘democratic’ ‘rules-based’ international world system defined by the US and backed by Australia but not agreed to by the great majority of the world’s countries.

High stakes behind forestalling reunification

Australian and other western media and policy makers will not admit it but reunification of China and Taiwan will dramatically change the world order from the current Western dominated one to a new one which will more fairly reflect the diverse interests and values of the international community; and not that of China alone.

This is the existential fear which has driven Trump and Biden, and western media, to engage in what has been described as the “relentless”, “off the chart”, anti China “mass hysteria” taking place on a daily basis. Australian leaders and media are not very far behind the American propaganda and war mongering curve.

Thus the resort to the Tibet card; the Hong Kong card; the Uygher card; the South China Seas card; and the Taiwan anti-reunification card.

The strength of the anti reunification forces should not be underestimated. It is not only western media, politicians and ‘democracy’ lovers in the US and Australia that are intent on making Taiwan the sacrificial pawn in a proxy war to ensure that China – and the rest of the world – remain subordinate and shackled to a western dominated world system.

Behind the political theatre and publicity grabbing actions of Nancy Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy, and other anti China newbies from US Democrat and Republican parties, and Scott Morrison, Peter Dutton, et. al. in Canberra, stands the US military industrial complex and a cohesive and vociferous array of anti China interest groups looking at their positions and pocket books, and spooked by the loss of US leadership in the global economy and geo-politics.

Especially noteworthy are US and British arms industry companies who have Taiwan, and now Australia, as their ATM generating billions of dollars for them and their little mentioned but crucial support cast of Taiwanese military, lawmakers and government official counterparts.

Table 1: US – Taiwan recent military sales

Biden administration – $3.506 billion

  • March 1, 2023, $619 million for hundreds of missiles and other F-16 munitions
  • April 5, 2022 – $95 million for contractor technical assistance to support Patriot systems.
  • February 7, 2022 – $100 million for support services for Patriot systems for five years 

Trump administration – $18.27 billion

  • 2018 (all on Sept 24) – $330 million: Foreign Military Sales Order II ($330 million)

From 1979 to 2020, 77% of major conventional arms imported by Taiwan were of U.S. origin, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)’s arms transfers database.

Note: The data here does not include direct commercial sales.

Source: https://www.forumarmstrade.org/ustaiwan.html

Together, they are inflaming tensions in the Taiwan Straits and South China Sea whilst deluding Taiwan into the belief that the US is willing to go to war over Taiwan, and that Taiwan is able to defend itself should China abandon its bid for peaceful reunification.

Should this happen Taiwan will definitely become the scorched-earth battlefield that Washington’s war hawks have long been preparing for.

Is this what Australia is committing itself to for the present and coming generation?

 

READ MORE:

https://johnmenadue.com/china-taiwan-reunification-what-will-it-mean-for-australia/

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

adrift.....

 

Australia adrift and a foreign minister all at seaBy Joseph Camilleri

 

On Monday, Penny Wong delivered her much awaited address to the National Press Club. What a disappointment! So many words, and so little substance. One could dismiss the episode as just another case of a minister who’s not up to the task. Unfortunately, the speech points to a deeper ailment – a government oblivious to the dangers ahead, and incapable of steering the ship to safer waters.

Three catchphrases dominate: regional balance of power, national interest, and strategic competition. All three terms, used repeatedly and without explanation, are out of an outdated vocabulary far removed from the present international reality.

The underlying narrative is obvious enough. Penny Wong finds much that is wrong with the world: “Coercive trade measures; unsustainable lending; political interference; disinformation; and reshaping international rules, standards and norms”. For each of these she has one culprit in mind: China.

In case of any lingering doubt in the minds of the audience, she goes on to spell out China’s other misdeeds: its rapidly rising defence budget, its militarisation of disputed islands in the South China Sea, its ballistic missiles falling in Japan’s exclusive economic zone, and its military drills and blockades around Taiwan.

Strangely missing from the narrative is any reference to America’s longstanding containment of China. No mention of America’s overwhelming military presence in the Asia-Pacific region, its alliances with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, and Australia or its extensive security arrangements with Taiwan, Singapore, New Zealand, and Pakistan.

Nothing said about the stationing of US troops on foreign soil, including 25,000 troops in South Korea and close to 54,000 military personnel and some 8,000 civilian employees in Japan, to which must be added the 5,000 troops and multiple military bases stationed in Guam.

Thirty years after the end of the Cold War the United States still has well over 750 bases in at least 70 countries. Since 2000, it has engaged in at least 11 wars, the equivalent of one every 2 years, often without UN authorisation, and continues to carry out periodic foreign assassinations. None of this, it seems, is worthy of mention. It is simply accepted as normal, and in keeping with an international rules based order.

China does not even begin to match this global projection of military power. Its decision to militarise islands around several reefs in the disputed Spratlys is an unwelcome development. But so are America’s ‘Freedom of Navigation Operations’ in the South China Sea, and the steady expansion of its naval and aerial presence in and around the Taiwan Strait, actions the Australian government actively supports.

Wong speaks glibly of balance, but the intention is clear. It has little to do with balance, and everything to do with maintaining an overwhelming US military presence in the region. Regardless of America’s excesses, and the heavy costs these have inflicted on many nations, not least in Asia-Pacific region, the United States is described as “our closest ally and principal strategic partner”. It is only US engagement, we are told, that guarantees the stability, prosperity and security of our region. It has been and remains the “indispensable power”.

The inescapable conclusion is that Australia remains comfortable with its deepening integration into US strategic planning. And equally comfortable with its overriding objective which is to maintain regional and global dominance in an international order where it sets the rules that others must dutifully obey.

This one-sided view of the world provides the setting for the minister’s fascination with the “national interest”. After all, how can a government be taken to task for its strong commitment to the national interest? Governments everywhere defend their actions, however ill advised, by strenuously arguing that they serve the national interest. Was it not Trump’s mantra to “make America great again”?

If talk of the national interest is to be at all credible, it has to be invested with real meaning. Penny Wong’s address is replete with such terms as “our interests”, “our values”, “stability”, “security”, “prosperity”. But these are little more than platitudes unless they are carefully defined, and the means by which they are to be pursued are clearly explained.

The foreign minister tells us “We need to harness all elements of our national power to advance our interests”. But which interests and with what kind of power? The government, she goes on, wants to “avert war and maintain peace.” A war over Taiwan, we are told, would be “catastrophic”, and must be avoided. At first sight, these are laudable aims, except that they are mired in confusion and contradiction.

There is no serious discussion of the Taiwan problem, no analysis of the sharply rising tensions and nothing about ways of easing those tensions. We are simply left with the impression that it’s all the fault of China’s “unilateral” and provocative actions.

No mention of Nancy Pelosi’s provocative visit to Taiwan last August or of her successor’s equally provocative meeting with Taiwan’s president Tsai Ing-wen just two weeks ago. No suggestion either of any discomfort with Biden’s repeated pledge to use military force should China decide to intervene in Taiwan, even though such intervention remains unlikely unless provoked by a unilateral declaration of Taiwanese independence.

What are we left with? A policy of confrontation through strength. China’s ‘aggressive rise’ is to be contained by US military might, with Australia’s active and enthusiastic support. What this involves is now well known:

  • Rapidly expanding joint military exercises with the US, Japan, and the Philippines
  • Establishment of the AUKUS security partnership
  • Increasing emphasis on Quadrilateral security dialogue (QUAD) which links Australia, India, Japan and the United States
  • The decision to purchase a fleet of eight nuclear powered submarines at a conservatively estimated cost of $368 billion
  • An increasing US military footprint in northern Australia
  • A substantial rise in military spending likely to be accelerated in the upcoming national budget.
  • Frenetic efforts to ensure the Pacific Islands remain firmly within the US/Australian strategic orbit.

What will these policies achieve? Will China feel intimidated? Not likely.

Will it abandon its reunification objective or its territorial claims in the South China Sea? Will it refrain from using force should Taiwan declare its independence? Will it retreat from developing its Belt and Road Initiative into a vast economic and geopolitical Eurasian zone of influence? Not likely.

The address to the National Press Club leaves us none the wiser as to the government’s plans for promoting peace and stability in the region. Are there any plans to breathe new life into existing multilateral institutions, notably the UN Security Council, the G20, and importantly the Asia-Pacific security architecture?

If this were the case, Australia would be acting in concert with other small and middle powers, especially in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. It would be engaged in active listening to what they are saying. It has much to learn.

For the Pacific Island nations, two demands stand out: much bolder efforts on climate change and decisive action to eliminate nuclear weapons. There is no hint here that Australia is about to commit to either. On the phasing out of coal in our economy and signing up to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, we have deafening silence.

When it comes to our engagement with Asia much emphasis is placed on the lure of increased trade and investment, but remarkably little about active consultation with neighbours, notably Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, let alone China. The possibilities for joint initiatives in conflict resolution, mediation, peacekeeping, peace building, disarmament or arms control are conveniently ignored.

It is clear that for now our engagement with Asia remains tied to the emotional vestiges of Western dominance and the psychology of dependence on the US military alliance. This is not a government that feels comfortable outside the Anglosphere, that wants to connect with the histories, cultures, languages, and aspirations of our neighbours, or that is in any way attuned to political dialogue across the cultural and civilisational divide.

 

Postscript: 

Conversation at the Crossroads

Professor Camilleri is hosting a forum for Conversation at the Crossroads on these issues: “Australia Adrift in the Turublent Seas of China-US Rivalry” with Dr Scott Burchill as guest speaker. TUESDAY 2nd MAY. Full details here.

Special Webinar on the Rising Danger of Nuclear War with DANIEL ELLSBERG

Readers are also warmly invited to a timely and remarkable event this Friday 21 April 2.00 pm (PDT), New York 5.00 pm, London 10.00 pm  Saturday 22 April 7.00 am (AEST).

Register here.

A timely event: Remarkable because of the gravity of the situation we are facing. Some would say “alarmist talk”. Perhaps. But the warnings issued by UN Secretary-General António Guterres have been consistent and direct. Humanity, he tells us is “just one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear annihilation”.

Recently diagnosed with inoperable cancer and given only only a few months to live, he will deliver the keynote address on our options as we respond to a world fraught with tension and uncertainty.

He will be joined by eminent scholars Professor Richard Falk and Dr Zia Mian.

An event not to be missed – that will long stay with you.

To join us, please register here, and extend the invitation to friends, colleagues and others in your network. All are welcome.

Richard Falk, Joseph Camilleri and Chandra Muzaffar
SHAPE Co-Conveners

 

READ MORE:

https://johnmenadue.com/australia-adrift-and-a-foreign-minister-all-at-sea/

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

anzacs....

WATCHING THE PARADE OF ANZACS, IT WAS REFRESHING TO SEE SO MANY ORCHESTRAS PLAYING WALTZING MALTIDA. WE WOULD HAVE TO KNOW THAT THE NEXT WAR(S) WON'T BE FOUGHT WITH SOLDIERS, BUT MOST LIKELY WITH AI MACHINES AND NUCLEAR BOMBS. 

WELCOME TO THE FUTURE. THE MACHINES WILL LOVE A BIT OF MILITARY MUSIC ON THE REMNANT OF THE PLANET, IF THE AMERICAN EMPIRE GETS ITS WAYS. 

OF COURSE, THE GUS FAMILY WOULD BE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY, SHALL WE TAKE IT BACK TO THE ROMAN EMPIRE... 

THE RUSSIANS WERE NOT INVITED I BELIEVE... THEY WON WW2 BY LOSING 20 MILLIONS MEN... AND BY INFLICTING 10 TIMES MORE CASUALTIES ON THE GERMANS THAN THE REST OF THE "ALLIES"... THIS IS POSSIBLY WHY THE GERMANS ARE SUPPORTING THE KIEV NAZIS...

BUT ENOUGH ABOUT WAR...WE NEED PEACE:

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

lest we forget....

AS AUSTRALIA REMEMBERS ITS DEADS FROM WARS, WE SHOULD ALSO NOT FORGET THE CULPRITS OF THE BUTCHERIES...

SEE: https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/35884

 

VIDEO AT:

https://www.corbettreport.com/wwi/

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

ambiguous sacrifices....

 

By Richard Llewellyn

 

The ‘Anzac Cloak’ smothering any matter of opinion that does not adorn the ‘Anzac Spirit’ has become pervasive. Too often, this appropriation of one facet of development of a uniquely ‘Australian’ character – rooted by the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia – has at least one of two perverted purposes: political or commercial.

The political uses the Anzac Cloak to sanitise, purify, or even sanctify government decisions to send Australian forces into combat (or combat-like) situations unjustified by national security concerns or international treaty obligations. Commercial appropriation embraces armament manufacturers’ contributions to the Australian War Memorial – for nowhere is the Anzac Cloak more tangible and hence more negotiable – and the rantings of populist media narrators.

However, the ‘Anzac Story’ has ended. It started around dawn on 25/04/1915 at what we call Anzac Cove and ended at about 1100.07 hours on 11/11/1993 at the Hall of Memory of the Australian War Memorial.

The ceremony of the entombment of the Unknown Australian Soldier was scheduled to be completed by exactly 1100 hours on that day. ‘Last Post’ was to commence at the click of 1100 with the Soldier laid to rest and the soil from Pozieres sprinkled on the coffin by a veteran of the First World War – Robert Coomb.

Unplanned by us, Robert had something personal to say to the Soldier.

‘You’re home, mate’. A greeting to a fellow soldier, one who had died at the Western Front. A few seconds of comradely connection with a vast weight of history attached.

With those words, he drew the curtains on the Anzac story. It has taken me many years to realise this and it remains absent from any discussion as far as I am aware. We had not appreciated it at the time, let alone planned for it – which would have been self-defeating. Befittingly, it came from the heart of an Anzac, unprompted and unanticipated. No one but an Anzac had the right.

Australians had gone ‘over there’ – not as Anzacs but as First Australian Imperial Force troops. Anzac was a convenient shorthand term coined for use in communications. The remains of those who died overseas were determined to be the concern of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (‘CWGC’); not one returned until 1993.

The literal embodiment(s) of the Anzac story, sacrificed for the strategic purposes of ‘The Commonwealth’, whose sacrifice is the essence of a definitive ‘Australian’ persona, were effectively deprived of their legal Australian identity. They were, and were intended to forever be, ‘Imperial’ citizens. This is not to discredit the care and attention given all the war dead in CWGC custody, without which we would likely not have had a verified Unknown Australian Soldier to entomb.

Those invoking the Anzac Cloak are rarely profound and more often abhorrent in their casualisation of the lives of troops who were – realistically- cannon fodder. The use of the Anzac Cloak to embellish populist rant or cant is highly offensive and in most cases appallingly ignorant.

We had not considered the return of the Soldier in terms of the ‘Anzacery’ that was even then beginning to emerge; we did have a guiding empathy for the significance of the occasion. The powerful Eulogy delivered by Paul Keating was written by the Memorial’s Dr. Micheal McKernan and lightly polished by Keating and his speechwriter, Don Watson.

‘You’re home, mate’.

The Anzac legend circle was closed. The soldiers went ‘over there’; they came back in the person of one who is all of them. They do not deserve to be used as an increasingly fouled carpet under which generations of politicians shuffle their complicity in sending yet more Australians on stupid, ill-considered, unnecessary military/quasi-military operations.

Those who do the sending are never amongst those whose body might lie under the stone. The (then) PM Abbott famously said, on being told of the death of two soldiers in Afghanistan: ‘shit happens’. Unsaid: ‘To other people’. Yet successive governments, including the current one, adhere to denying the right of Parliament as a representative body to determine engaging in overseas military operations.

There is something else from that day in 1993 that carries context never imagined by users of the ‘Anzac Cloak’. Divulging too much of the detail would ignite purposeless controversy.

Before the actual ceremony commenced, I met with the small band of WWI veterans who had been bought in by Veterans Affairs. The purpose: to explain what was to happen, how they would fit in with the ceremony, answer questions.

One veteran was sitting quietly, seemingly not really engaged; his demeanour suggested he was seeing things from somewhere else. I asked him if he was OK.

He looked up and in a quiet, ineffably sad voice, said: ‘We shot [him], you know. We had to, every time he [was tracked by the enemy] they shelled us and killed dozens of us. He wouldn’t stop’.

Please don’t conjecture about whom this was stated. Nobody alive today could categorically verify or disprove; I cannot disbelieve. That old Digger needed to say it – to somebody – after so many years.

The point: in reality, stripped of all the bullshit, being Anzac was mostly a matter of survival. Not dying for King and Country but saving your mates and yourself – if you could.

So many could not.

It is incumbent on us to excoriate the abuse of the sacrifice of some 62,000 people and the vast injury done to our (then) emerging nation of Australia for sensationalist, populist political and commercial expediency. And further, to recognise properly the death and destruction our involvement wrought on many who were not, in any true sense, Australia’s enemy.

Give the Anzacs due respect, by truth in commentary.

 

READ MORE:

https://johnmenadue.com/time-to-accept-the-truth-about-the-legend-of-anzac/

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

AS AUSTRALIA REMEMBERS ITS DEADS FROM WARS, WE SHOULD ALSO NOT FORGET THE CULPRITS OF THE BUTCHERIES...

SEE: https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/35884

 

VIDEO AT:

https://www.corbettreport.com/wwi/

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....