from memorial to theme park

​From Memorial to Theme Park
Approval has been granted by the National Capital Authority for the governing body of the National War Memorial in Canberra to turn the Memorial into a theme park and further the myth that values undergirding Australian identity were and are primarily forged in war on foreign lands. There has been a signing off on what are called ‘early works’ of this half billion dollar plus redevelopment.
All this is occurring despite overwhelming public submissions in opposition. These include an almost who’s who of eminent Australians. Opposition focusses on the scandalous attempt to further glorify war and display the apparatus of war. Global armament production has become, a reported 2 trillion USD industry annually, of which more than 70% is reported to be generated and exported by the US.
Why is the Australian War Memorial redevelopment such a bad idea?

1. The AWM is first and last a memorial to those who have sacrificed their lives in war.  This will no longer remain its main feature, this solemn role being replaced through a display of military hardware on a grand scale. The facts of the matter are that, except for the 2nd world war (itself the consequence of failing to deal adequately with the aftermath of the “Great’ War) all the other wars Australia has been engaged in including World War 1, the Vietnam War, the Gulf Wars, and the Afghanistan war have all been fought without proper cause and without resolving whatever it was the war was intended to resolve.

 

1. The ANZAC myth with origin on the Gallipoli shore is indeed a myth.  Australian identity is complex with key elements still awaiting resolution.  The place of the continent’s indigenous people, their culture, language and history, is central to whatever identity Australia and Australians ultimately own.  Australia’s rapidly expanding multi-culturalism and our place in Asia rather than Europe is a key factor.  Add to that, coming to terms with dry and dusty plains and flooding rains, early white settlement, ties to Britain’s imperial past etc makes Australian identity and any values that might be considered unique to us, quite complex and far more nuanced than a simplistic reference to the ‘Anzac myth’.

 

1. The intended massive expansion of this iconic building pays no attention to Australia’s frontier wars.  For decades Australia’s first nations people fought and died to safeguard their lands, culture, and livelihood, many were massacred.  If this is to be a place of memorial worthy of the name for lives lost in war, it must give due recognition to and remembrance of first Australians who fought to be recognised with rights on the land of their birth. Why is it that we glory in the prestige of fighting on foreign lands to safeguard human rights, freedom, and dignity, while denying we have stamped out the very same rights at home?

 
 

1. The proposed development gives unwarranted and undesirable space to the arms industry. The display of its wares and acknowledgement of its donations, bestows honour and esteem where no such honour is due. I am not naïve enough to think there are no alien forces that wish us harm. But the reality is this harm will be inflicted through trade, infiltration of digital platforms and electronic destruction of infrastructure. Ill fortune throughout the globe will also mean thousands, with or without invitation, will seek to call Australia home. Future enemies are not going to be kind enough to hold off until we have working submarines in the late 2030’s that will supposedly enable us to fight a ‘conventional’ war on equal terms.  

 

1. This expansion will not feature the less than desirable, even criminal activity, of Australian forces in times of conflict, as tragically unveiled through the Brereton Report. Of course, the vast majority of past and serving military are gallant, exemplifying a high standard of ethical behaviour.  Nevertheless, no institution least of all one that is honoured as Australia’s most iconic, should be immune from total transparency.

 

1. In November 2019 the outgoing head of the War Memorial, Dr Brendan Nelson said the intended expansion would assist war veterans with their PTSD!  What sort of nonsense is that?  The cause of PTSD is trauma.  The tragic reality is that we do not look after our veterans when they return, too many suffer from PTSD, significant numbers end up ‘on the street’ and far too many commit suicide. If a small proportion of the money to be spent on this outrage was spent caring for veterans, the burden of PTSD might be lessened. Australia’s gallant military pay an exceedingly high price for what too often have been commitments of misguided, ill-informed, political grandstanding.  Legislation should be passed which would make any decision about going to war a decision of the joint houses of parliament, not a decision of the Prime Minister of the time, together with his or her cabinet.

 

1. It is architectural vandalism.  The intended redevelopment includes the demolition of the ANZAC hall, opened in 2001 to significant acclaim.

 

1. Finally, it is a bad idea because of the ideologically driven agenda of the board which appears impervious to public opinion and wishes to exult the idea of a museum or theme park, rather than its true purpose, as a place of solemn memorial.

 
It was the highly respected retired Admiral, Chris Barrie, who described the proposal as a tourist theme Park.  If that is its role, it needs to be relocated to the Gold Coast.   At the heart of Australia’s national capital, it sits facing parliament house, together, their joint placing and purpose signify they are Australia’s two most significant buildings. If parliament house is best known through the spectacle of question time and the memorial through its theme park, we hardly deserve to be taken at all seriously as a nation.  We have apparently become a nation that does not wish to take anything seriously, but rather seeks any amusement, however bizarre, as a source of diversion therapy.