Australian defence policy : a study of empire and nation (1897-1910)
Creators: name: Atkinson, L.D.
Publisher: name: The Australian National University
Year: 1964

description: The Continuing debate about the role of Australians in their own country and the position of their nation in the Empire provides the dominant theme of this work. It suggested that the study of defence policy might appropriately be divided into four parts each coinciding with a particular era and all in chronological order: colonial, federal, national, and Imperial. Colonialist defence policy was the result of an effort to make the self-governing portions of the empire self-reliant in military affairs. In Australia this was achieved through dependence on British advice and cooperation with Whitehall to produce a special squadron which would ensure local security. Yet self-defence in the era 1860-1897 meant, in essence, the defence of' the capitals. Little interest was taken in mutual support and less in national schemes. Since the prime danger lay in fugitive attack from the Queen’s enemies which the royal navy promised to limit, this view seemed to many justified. If colonial policy was stabilized, however, colonial attitudes were not. to the questions "What should Australians do when the Queen was at war? How could they maintain their dignity and their security?” came a variety of answers: Separate from the Empire; declare the colonies neutral; unify the Empire; and federate Australia. By the end of the century the federationists’ solution was accepted and the first federal parliament set out to ensure that the old colonial forces could support each other and that Australia, while not neutral, might assume an attitude of passive bell until it examined the justice of any Imperial conflict in which it was involved. Federalist defence policy between 1901 and 1905 involved the amalgamation of colonial schemes and remained federalist in substance so long as it colonial policy and practice. It was successfully implemented by applying the principle of self-reliance, as it had been understood in Australia, to the whole Commonwealth. Nationalist defence policy had far less respect for colonial - or state - susceptibilities. It strove to assert the authority and the identity of the central government over all Australians. It rejected federalist solution either because national aspirations were not fulfilled or because too much corporation with Great Britain had involved an unmanly dependence. The emergence of Japan and the dwindling of British sea power between 1905 and 1909 seemed to many nationalists adequate justification to ignore Imperial commitments and to defend Australia until it became an impregnable fortress in coloured seas. Debate proceeded apace on the form a national navy and a national army should take. National sentiment justified the discussion imperial sentiment provoked men to object to the creation of' a "little Australia". Imperialist defence policy was sketched in 1909. It satisfied national aspirations by creating a sea-going navy and a mass citizen army. It satisfied Imperial sentiment because that navy would materially assist the British in time of war and because, from the reservoir of trained manpower produced by universal military training , expeditionary forces could be organised. With some of the trapping of a nation-state, the Commonwealth entered into an unwritten alliance with Great Britain to defend the Empire. From this brief summary it is clear that the study involves changing attitudes and policies. The work has therefore been structured so that the assumptions and the development of each era are presented in the opening pages of each of the four major parts. Since it is the texture of those assumptions with which we are concerned further precis here would not serve any useful purpose. It is for instance, impossible to state briefly what passions moved imperialists in Australia without doing violence to contemporary views. Insofar as there is one proposition basic to the investigation, it is this: defence policy was influenced as much by sentiment as by the demands of cost and security Aware from the early nineties that they were creating a nation, Australian statesmen demanded that defence systems satisfy their Aspirations as well as allow an appropriate relationship with Great Britain. Insofar as there is one continuous argument it is this: until a distinctively Australian policy was forged integration into any scheme of Imperial defence was impossible. Aware that they were endowed with a large measure of security from the amalgamation of colonial policies between 1901 and 1905, Australian statesmen demanded naval and military proposals more worthy of the nation they represented. The year 1909 saw the culmination of protected discussion and the blurring of many difference between Australian and Imperial sentiment. Largely at the advice and the suggestion of the British, a defence policy was forged with seemed to satisfy the demands of nation and Empire.