1 August 2024

Frontier Violence, Peacekeepers' Gallery to enhance new-look Memorial, says Council member

| Ian Bushnell
Join the conversation
15
man standing outside the Australian War Memorial

AWM Council member Glenn Keys: “It’s important for us to make sure we never forget that this isn’t Disneyland.” Photos: Ian Bushnell.

Australian War Memorial Council member Glenn Keys believes the expanded institution will not only be bigger but better and more inclusive.

The Canberra veteran and businessman, whose company Aspen Medical often operates in war zones such as Ukraine, has signed on for a second three-year stint on the Council, which has had to weather the controversy over the half-a-billion dollar expansion program that included the demolition of the award-winning Anzac Hall and criticism that the Memorial had lost its way,

Mr Keys said the Memorial simply did not have the space to do justice to the veterans from more recent conflicts such as Iraq and Afghanistan, or Australia’s many peacekeeping missions or, more contentiously, the need to acknowledge more fully the Frontier Violence of colonial times.

READ ALSO The Waterhouse Natural Science Art Prize at the National Archives blurs the line between art and science

He said the Council took its role very seriously and the place that the Memorial holds in Australian culture and history.

“It’s important for us to make sure we never forget that this isn’t Disneyland,” Mr Keys said.

“We’re not here to make a ride, we’re not here to aggrandise something, we’re here to explain and for people to understand.”

Mr Keys backs Chair Kim Beazley’s commitment to commemorate the Frontier Violence between Indigenous Australians and settlers and police in a deeper way, saying it is a part of Australia’s history that needs to be spoken to.

He said the story of Frontier Violence had been displayed since 1986 in the pre-1914 galleries, but the expansion provided an opportunity to go further.

“It’s actually a great time for us to be able to re-look at that and consider how that’s going to be presented as the Memorial is redone,” he said.

“It will give opportunity for all of those voices, not only to be heard, but for people to come and learn about them as well.”

Mr Keys hoped that other memorials around the country follow Canberra’s lead and start talking about Frontier Violence in those locations as well.

“I think that’s important for us to come to terms with,” he said.

Mr Keys at the Vivian Bullwinkel memorial. “One of the things I’ve not truly understood until I’ve been on Council for a period of time is that the Memorial is many things to people.”

The other innovation will be the introduction of a Peacekeepers Gallery, something that Mr Keys said would be quite powerful.

He said Australia had conducted a peacekeeping mission somewhere in the world constantly since 1948, yet there had never been a permanent display commemorating those who served.

“That’s a powerful message we want to commemorate, that we’ve had peacekeepers helping so many other nations in the world get to peace and stay at peace,” Mr Keys said.

The new-look Memorial is on track to open in 2028. Mr Keys said that as well as providing for better storytelling, the building will be more accessible, particularly for veterans with mobility issues, through the new southern entrance taking shape.

Mr Keys said the construction was inspiring, particularly the new glass oculus.

He said all the displays would be refreshed and updated with the latest thinking about how that should be done, with historians and curators exploring globally how best to present information and provide context.

There would also be opportunities for more hands-on interaction with artifacts.

“They’re going to make them much more relatable, much easier to connect with, but also understanding the context in which these things happened,” Mr Keys said.

The greater display of war machines that the new Memorial will afford has been criticised, but Mr Keys rejects that, saying one of the roles of the memorial is to be also a museum and it needs to display artifacts to do that.

“These things help connect us and help explain a story,” he said.

“They are an important part of storytelling. It would be a disservice to people who’ve served in those environments, a disservice not to explain and show them.

“I don’t see any evidence of aggrandisement of war. What I see is quite a solemn presentation of what war means, the disruption to individuals, the disruption to families and the disruption to society.”

Nor does he see anything wrong with taking donations from arms companies as long as it is done ethically and is fully disclosed, saying he would rather see the money going to something dedicated to preventing war than into shareholders’ pockets.

READ ALSO The Capital Water Cooler: Comings, goings, hearings and consultations

Like former Director Dr Brendan Nelson, Mr Keys views the Memorial as a place where veterans and their families can find healing.

It is something that he has seen for himself.

“I walk past it all the time going from the Council or rooms to somewhere else, and you’ll see veterans standing there, head bowed, and you can see them talking, you can see them recovering,” Mr Keys said.

Or in the Sculpture Garden outside where white stones represent “tears of joy, sadness, blood and sweat”.

“But one of the things I’ve not truly understood until I’ve been on Council for a period of time is that the Memorial is many things to people,” Mr Keys said.

“It can be an education, a way to gather information like an archive, an educational experience, a memorial, a healing space, it can be all of those things, and it might just be one of them to someone, or it might be all of them to the same person.

“It’s an incredible asset.”

Join the conversation

15
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Trotting out the same tired lines about the need for massive development of the AWM. Sadly the proponents of the bigger, shinier development of the Memorial did not understand the commemorative power and beauty of that site. The fact remains nuanced and quality development could have occurred that didn’t destroy its acknowledge National Heritage attributes.

Stanleyhistory12:17 pm 01 Aug 24

Having been the historian on the 1986 Soldiers of Queen gallery, I can confirm that it referred to Frontier war (now more accurately called the Australian Wars) in two ways. First, the section dealing with British regiments in Australia included a small image of the depiction of the 1838 Slaughterhouse Creek massacre from GC Mundy’s 1852 book, Our Antipodes (but without a caption). Second, the text panel referred to British soldiers being used against ‘Aboriginal resistance’. That’s all. Of course it was clear even 40 years ago that widespread conflict had occurred across the continent, a fact that decades of research has substantiated. The Memorial now recognises this as a fact. What it’s planning to do about it is a matter we’re still unclear of.
Prof. Peter Stanley
AWM 1980-2007

David Stephens8:22 am 01 Aug 24

The old Colonial Conflicts gallery had one lithograph on the Frontier Wars. Under current plans the redeveloped Memorial will have 1.1 per cent of its space (or 198 square metres) devoted to the Frontier Wars plus the New Zealand Wars and the contingent to the Sudan.
The relevant decision of the War Memorial Council on the Frontier Wars is dated 19 August 2022 and has a couple important caveats:
“It was agreed that Frontier Violence perpetrated against Aboriginal Australians would, as in the previous Colonial Galleries, continue to be presented in the new Pre-1914 galleries.
It would provide a broader and deeper depiction and presentation of the violence perpetrated against Indigenous Australians.
Wherever possible it would relate to and inform, subsequent Indigenous military service to Australia, providing a context for that service.
The gallery will inform visitors of the significant institutions whose charter it is to tell the full story of Frontier Violence.”
Mr Keys needs to be asked if he intends to help overturn this decision and replace it with a commitment to substantial space, a separate section, and recognition of the dignity of resistance, which are the three parameters set by Mr Beazley when he became Chair of the Council.

I’m pretty sure there was no mention of frontier wars in the pre-1914 gallery (aka the Colonial Gallery). That gallery dealt with the Boxer Rebellion, Boer War and the Sudan. However, the additon of colonial wars in the redevelopment is overdue and welcome.

Capital Retro8:19 am 01 Aug 24

The headline says “frontier violence”. Where did you get the notion there were “wars”?

David Stephens8:48 am 01 Aug 24

Read Henry Reynolds books or the recent Killing for Country by David Marr. Both show clearly that the settlers at the time thought they were fighting wars. See also Rachel Perkins doco, The Australian Wars. Not every war looks like Gallipoli or D-Day.

Oh please…HE mentioned wars. I was simply using his words. Calm down.

Frontier wars is well established and has had historical consensus for some time. Plenty of info about the term and different wars (Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars, Bathurst Wars, etc.) about everywhere (wikipedia is a good start, for deeper info Stephen Gapps’ books on the Sydney Wars and the First Wiradyuri War of Resistance are particularly good).

Capital Retro10:01 am 02 Aug 24

I have considered some of Henry Reynold’s opinions in the past David Stephens, but I couldn’t couldn’t consider any claims the emotionally charged David Marr makes. Rachel Perkins is part of the “industry” so she will always favour the “frontier wars” narrative.

What I rely on are accounts of early Australian life compiled by early settlers. One such publication is “The Bygone Days of Cathcart” by Laurie Platts. This is regionally local too.

Platts makes the qualification that the Aboriginal history of Cathcart are like many interpretations on a single historic event that have been written with such a wide variation of fact that no one has the authority to say which is right or wrong.

Platts records that some of the tribes of Aborigines were more aggressive than others but some were agreeable to live under white man’s conditions but they never had any ambition the better their lot. There were situations where settlers had shot Aboriginals who had attacked them (the settlers) and while this is now regretted, it happened all over the new world from the time of European settlements.

What is also reported were the many fights between the tribes. These were in fact, “frontier” clashes and local Aborigines sought protection in settlers homes while the settlers fired warning shots to drive off the marauders.

“One battle at Cathcart was of a larger magnitude. In the 1830s’ or early 1840’s, Monaro tribes assembled around the Yellow Waterhole area and were raided by a party of coastal blacks coming up through the Coal Hole. The battle raged for some time, with the few pioneers there at the time being scared out of their wits. The coastal blacks came off the victors, with casualties believed heavy on both side, taking all the gins they could appropriate as their spoils of war. The bodies were left where they fell and for many years, their bones bleached white, could be seen around the area. The southern Monaro tribes were severely reduced from this fight”

There were 500 tribes “First Nations” if you like and this these types of confrontations were part of Aboriginal tribal life. There are no records of colonial troops being involved.

Peter Graves5:27 pm 31 Jul 24

Well done on having a Peacekeepers Gallery – finally. Over those tears since 1948, so many of our troops have worn the United Nations’ “blue beret”.

Under “Operation Habitat” in nothern Iraq in 1991, our soldiers cared for the civilians displaced by that war and their ethnicity (they were Kurds).

In 15 March 1993, a former President of the RSL Sir William Keys, highlighted an article in The Australian: “Safe in the Arms of the MIlitary” – arguing the value of Australia’s peacekeeping missions in supporting civilians displaced by war. Especially children.

We once had such high hopes for the “peace dividend” after the end the The Cold War.

Peter Graves9:34 pm 31 Jul 24

A corrigenda: “Over those tears since 1948..” should have been “years”. Though our peacekeeping invovlements in Rwanda and Somalia involved many tears.

With respect, I don’t think the word ‘finally’ was necessary – the AWM has had a Peacekeeping Gallery for over a decade.

Peter Graves10:01 am 02 Aug 24

Thanks for reading. Then what did the AWM mean by this part of the story ?
“The other innovation will be the introduction of a Peacekeepers Gallery,”

In my simple English, “introduction” means “not previously existing”. ???

Peacekeeping exhibition established 2001 – from AWM website.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.