Not only has Australia’s engagement and relationship with its Asian-Pacific neighbours had just only now begun to develop, but it has also now only recently been seen as an important goal to achieve. Multiple stages and events had allowed this change of attitude to take place, these of which allowed both the government as well as its people to at the very least take notice of its neighbouring countries. These important events and stages all aided to give a mindset that differs from the pre World War 2 in regards to Australia’s allegiance with the neighbouring Asian countries; however the most important stage would have to be when Australia had the abolishment of the white Australia policy. However even now despite being located within the …show more content…
This policy was regarded as being the major factor of “Australia being insulated from the geographical region during the 1880’s” (Jupp, 1995, p. 207) and even having lasting effects up to the 1960’s when the Policy was being dismantled. Not only was it detrimental to numerous relations to Asians, but also to any other non European societies as it only limited the scope of immigration to maintaining a white and European society, by alienating newly independent Asian states (Jupp, 1995, p. 209), limiting population growth which in turn grew new fears that Australia would be an easy target to invade, especially by Asian …show more content…
101) these attention would later convert to protests being formed in the colonial Malaya and Singapore and are described by Blackburn(2001) as being “risen to high levels” (p. 101). Demonstrating that the effects of the White Australia policy were affecting Asian countries, not just by the prevention of immigration, but as well as affecting them at an emotional level. These protest were in response to a series of deportations and Blackburn(2001) ”mentions how the divided ethnic communities in Malaya and Singapore had become united in the subject of anti colonialism and the apparent “manifestation of the racism of European colonialism”(p. 104) Once again demonstrating the magnitude of the policy and how it was negatively
...The fact that Australia publically sought America’s help angered Britain, but it was all that Australia could do seen as Britain let Singapore fall to the Japanese and did not given Australia suitable reinforcements to help with the growing pressure from the Japanese. It is shown throughout the war that the fall of Singapore damaged Australia’s relations with Britain, there are even cable grams of John Curtain telling Elsie Curtain how badly the relations with Britain and that he has a fight with Churchill almost every day (National Archives of Australia). Australia had always felt the threat of invasion in WWII but when Singapore fell it was almost certain. Australia moved further away from Britain when they publicly sought Americas help with the growing threat of a Japanese attack. None of this would have happened if Singapore had remained in British control.
John Curtin, Prime Minister of Australia from 1941 – 1945, significantly supported the movement towards an Australian-American relationship. In his speech the Task Ahead, he states “Without any inhibitions of any kind, I make it quite clear that Australia looks to America, free of any pangs as to our traditional links or kinship with the United Kingdom.” This speech was supported by newspapers around the country, possibly showing bias, but it is unlikely that Curtin's statement had a major influence on the US military strategy. A close alliance between the two countries was inevitable, as they both shared the same goal - to defeat the Japanese (John.curtin.edu.au, n.d.; Australian Geographic, 2012) and control the Pacific. However, the effect of this statement on the Australian people can be seen in the newspapers from the time period. H.R Knickerbocker, states “It is the bounden duty of the U.S. to strain every nerve and every effort to ship to Australia today and tomorrow, every available fighter bomber and masses of army marines and navy” (Fall of Singapore: What it Means to Us, 1942, from nla.gov.au). This statement is a clear example of Australia’s new found reliance on the United States, showing how Australia has become dependent on the U.S providing it with resources and
The country I will be using for an example of imperialism is England. England imperialize South Africa, Canada, Australia, and India. The British Empire became the largest empire spanning over 35 million square kilometers in 1913.
Immigration, transport, trade and taxes, and growing national pride were the three main reasons Australia needed to federate. Fear of coming under foreign attack, and concern over being invaded by non-white immigrants were major factors, which encouraged support to Federate. Despite the fact that several colonies already had implemented laws, which restricted immigrants from certain countries, all of the colonies were keen to strengthen their policies. In this time, there were many prejudgments against the Chinese and Pacific Islanders. The Chinese immigrated during the gold rush period, in the 1850s and from 1863; Pacific Islanders were also brought to Australia to work in the hot conditions in the sugarcane fields. People believed that foreign workers took jobs away from them.
After evaluating the above factors, it is clear that the partnership between Australia and Japan is of significant importance to both countries. With reference to the Centre for Study of Australian-Asian Relations (1997:152) the future prosperity of Australia will to an increasing extent, be dependent on that of her neighbours in the Asia-Pacific area. Currently the Australia-Japan relationship could be described as “comfortable and relaxed”. However both Australia and Japan need to be alert to the changing environment and must ensure that the right frameworks and policy settings are in place in order for the two countries to prosper.
Throughout the world, in history and in present day, injustice has affected all of us. Whether it is racial, sexist, discriminatory, being left disadvantaged or worse, injustice surrounds us. Australia is a country that has been plagued by injustice since the day our British ancestors first set foot on Australian soil and claimed the land as theirs. We’ve killed off many of the Indigenous Aboriginal people, and also took Aboriginal children away from their families; this is known as the stolen generation. On the day Australia became a federation in 1901, the first Prime Minister of Australia, Edmund Barton, created the White Australia Policy. This only let people of white skin colour migrate to the country. Even though Australia was the first country to let women vote, women didn’t stand in Parliament until 1943 as many of us didn’t support female candidates, this was 40 years after they passed the law in Australian Parliament for women to stand in elections. After the events of World War Two, we have made an effort to make a stop to these issues here in Australia.
Reynolds, H. (2005). Nowhere People: How international race thinking shaped Australia’s identity. Australia: Penguin Group
This source can be seen as a primary source as it is a poster conveying the perspective from the Australian Government in 1995 towards Chinese immigrants. Chinese immigration has been very controversial over many years, the White Australian policy was adopted into Australia in 1901 to “keep Australia white”. The policy defiantly assisted with the perspective made by the Australian society towards the Chinese. The Australian Government had fears of communist expansion and invasion as communism had evolved in China during that time. The anti-Chinese views where mainly led and fueled by the Australian Government and local newspaper. The creator of the poster choose
Budiono Kusumohamidjojo (2008) stresses the fact that Australia and Indonesia must behave in the same attitude towards each other. He states that ‘do not hurt us because we do not hurt you’ (p. 145). This illustrates that due to the closeness of these countries, Australia must come to terms with the Indonesians. It is critical to note that countries such as India and China exert influence on Indonesian nations. According to the Foreign Minister Mochtar Kusumaatmadja, ‘Australia expects much more from Indonesia’ (p.144) this indicates that Australia’s insincere and turbulent attitude is the destructive force in this connection. For instance, Indonesians assume that the Western countries will allow access to education and work. As Australia seems to be a nation that allows individuals to have a better chance to achieve a better future; however, this is an area of discussion. Kusumaatmadja states ‘Australia should understand us (Indonesia and South-East Asia) better and should be aware that they belong to this part of the world’ (p.145). This demonstrates that if Australia was to show more care and comfort to other countries, it would allow relations to flourish. In addition, Kusumohamidjojo mentions that most Indonesian leaders are resistant to the idea of commitments made with the Western countries. It is clear that ‘in many cases, Indonesia does oppose the Western countries
Since smaller nations have the tendency to form alliances with more powerful nations, as powerful and wealthier countries are able to exert more political influence. Australia could utilize the position as a middle power to work with smaller countries in the region. As a result, Australia could attain a friendly relationship which will prove to be beneficial in the long term. According to Rod Lyon (2014), academic studies of was display that good relations with neighbours is essential for a peaceful regional community. Australia could contribute much to international political life if it could utilize the advantages it has as being a middle power. Some of the advantages correlate to global interest, for instance, being able to have a bigger role as a bridge between pivotal powers, contribute to the relaxation of global tension, and thus further global interest. Having adopted a middle power stand, Australia has asserted itself being a more prominent voice on global scale, hence it should take up more obligations as a relatively powerful country. In other word, “Where there is great power there is great responsibility”(Churchill 1906) In my opinion, a country should consolidate its force on more alarming
Thesis statement: The refugee influx has been a major concern in Australia and the immigration policies have caused a number of debates and controversy since World War II. The change of these policies revealed society 's attitudes toward race, cultural factors, labor needs. During the post World War 2, the White Australia Policy was a significant factor influenced the immigration policies ; the Act prevented the non-Europe and non-White immigrating to Australia. In the 1970s, the Whitlam government abolished the "White Australia Policy and launched the Racial Discrimination Act, which made racial discrimination illegal
The establishment of the White Australia Policy (1901) was based on racist ideologies and was maintained until World War Two (WWII) revealed Australia’s vulnerabilities and forced this discriminatory policy to evolve. Australian federation (1901) initiated The White Australia Policy and the Whitlam government in 1973 terminated the White Australia Policy. The White Australia Policy refers to a set of policies designed to restrict the influx of ethnic immigration. Racist attitudes spread through propaganda contributed to the formation and perpetuation of the White Australia Policy. Contention caused by The White Australia Policy had detrimental effects on foreign relations with a variety of countries. WWII exposed Australia’s vulnerability to
Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Australia-New Zealand & Southeast Asia relations: An agenda for closer cooperation, Singapore: ISEAS, 2004.
The similarities between the foreign policy of the Hawke-Keating and the Rudd-Gillard governments stem primarily from the middle-power tradition that informs them both. However the promotion of Asian regionalism and the maintenance of Australia’s alliance with the US also feature prominently in the foreign policy doctrine of both governments.
The passage of the White Australia Policy in 1901 was the product of fifty years of building tensions. From the early contacts with the Chinese indentured laborers in the pastures, to the violent outbursts witnessed in the goldfields, and to the antipathy industrialized Chinese faced in the cities, there is no question that the economic impact of the Chinese immigrants led to calls for restrictive legislation. However, the racialism that erupted immediately as further justification exhibits the fact that economic concerns may not have been strong enough to cause general public outrage across factions of society. The two fed off of each other, but in the end this paper argues that without the backdrop of racial ideology so inherent in public opinion of this time, the White Australia Policy may not have garnered such unanimous support.