I'm uneasy that subsequently many have accepted the idea that a pilgrimage to Turkey draped in an
Australian flag is some kind rite of passage as a young Australian. It seems misguided that for someone who has been lucky enough to have never been touched by war there is a need to travel to a battlefield to feel completely Australian.
![Picture](/uploads/8/4/1/7/8417532/7331339.jpg?325)
Watching 4 Corners last Monday I was affected by the testimony of the men who participated in the D-Day landings and I was saddened that they'd had so few opportunities to tell their stories in the 70 years since those events. It was sobering to see how the trauma of very old events was still so fresh in their minds and it concerned me that it had left a shadow across their entire lives.
I'm not alone in questioning ANZAC. Jonathan Green makes a number of interesting points in his piece, why must war define us?
And on ABC1 on Sunday night, Geraldine Doogue explored a number of ANZAC relate issues with a guest panel on the Moral Compass. It was especially interesting listening to James Brown, a former Army Captain and his unease at the way Anzac Day is the one day people 'bathe' in the tragedy of war and then spend the rest of the year not giving it a thought.
There are a range of attitudes on ANZAC out there and they are all worth listening to.
I'm not against marking the day, in fact I fully support it. I just question whether or not there is a better way to do so. I believe it would be an opportunity to more clearly recognise the tragedy of war, than to suggest that Australian character was formed by war, rather than surviving in spite of war. Or that the day is about the sacrifice of others to guarantee our freedoms.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan offered no threat to Australian freedoms.
The shore landing at Galipoli wasn't the birth of our nation, it was the first great tragedy we felt as a very young country.
If I was organising ANZAC Day, I'd leave the Dawn Service exactly as it is. It is a beautiful, touching, and very appropriate ceremony. But I would change the march. Rather than returned servicemen with medals on their chest marching I'd throw participation open to everyone who has been touched by war.
This would include the relatives of those killed or damaged by war, returned servicemen affected by their experience, and migrants who have fled wars and seen the horrors they hold. Participants would wear black armbands (rather than medals) and those who line the streets wouldn't cheer, they'd bow their heads and reflect silently on the cost of armed conflict. I'd also encourage those who have had relatives killed by war (including the suicides that result from PTSD) to display photos of their loved ones. That would give us all a better appreciation of what war actually costs.
![Picture](/uploads/8/4/1/7/8417532/5732849.jpg?263)
I'd demand that they pay the full cost of war - from reparations, to rehabilitation programs, to refugee support, to fully supporting returned servicemen with all their social and medical requirements (as a result of their service) for as long as they require them.
The cost would be huge. And the desire of politicians to send people into an armed conflict that will change them forever would be greatly diminished.
Wars cost servicemen and women far more than they cost the governments or the politicians who send them.
Australia isn't a warring nation, but we have found ourselves caught up in numerous conflicts. We have made mistakes and sustained unnecessary casualties, possibly as often as we have achieved great victories. We have lost a lot of good people, and we have damaged a great many more.
Perhaps the best way to acknowledge this is not through a coffee spiked with rum or several beers at the RSL, all over a game of Two-up on April 25th. Perhaps it is more important for us to open Anzac Day up to all those who have been affected by war, and let them put voice to stories that all through history have been something you just don't talk about.