I was aware of the Morotai Mutiny which invilved, amongst others, Clive Caldwell and Bobby Gibbes and the general frustration/anger towards MacArthur (well deserved in my book) but was not aware of any other events/factors/"mutinies" etc. Diggers refused to fight in 1945: UK newspaper | NEWS.com.au Diggers 'disobeyed orders to attack' Aussie soldiers 'on the edge of mutiny' Claims are unfair, says outraged RSL AUSTRALIAN Diggers are furious at claims by an English historian that they refused to fight the Japanese in 1945 and were on the brink of mutiny. Sir Max Hastings has reportedly accused Australian soldiers of disobeying orders to attack in his new book Nemesis: The Battle For Japan 1944-45. The former editor of London's Daily Telegraph says many Diggers were embittered and even on the edge of open mutiny. He claims Australian soldiers resented being used for mopping up operations by US Pacific commander General Douglas MacArthur and were bitter about other Australians who did not volunteer for service. While the author would not comment on his accusations, veterans have reacted angrily. RSL Queensland president Doug Formby described the claims as unacceptable and unfair. "I think it's very unfortunate that he makes such sweeping allegations," he said. "Those of our World War II veterans who served in that part of the world would be pretty aghast and very upset. "I think it's most unfair to slander the courageous service that our soldiers gave." Almost 7400 Australians were killed fighting in the Pacific in WWII. RSL national president Major General Bill Crews told Sky News Online that Sir Max had overstated frustrations in the Australian forces. "He has taken one or two examples and blown that up into two years worth of fighting, and I don't think that is a reasonable way to present history," he said. He conceded there were some frustrations among Australian troops towards the end of the war, as they participated in "less necessary" operations after years of service. "Yes, there were some frustrations, but I think you should be very careful making sweeping assertions from that isolated example and then blaming all the service men and women who were fighting valiantly at that time," Maj-Gen Crews said.
There has always been to my knowledge great resentment at the fighting in the last part of the war as a waste of lives however the Aussies did fight and they did die. It was agreed from many circles that it was just a waste of time. Max Hastings has used a lot of innuendo and turned it into something that it was not.
Look forward to the constructive synopsis! I really cannot see Max Hastings making such a blanket statement in the context described and reported.
I heard an interview on BBC Radio 4 on this today while driving to work; Max Hastings and Maj-Gen Crews were interviewed together. As far as I could tell, they kissed and made-up (well not literally!). Crews accepted the basic premise, that there was resentment because MacArthur kept the Australians out of the main area of ops and used them for unnecessary mopping-up operations; Hastings admitted that he had exaggerated the degree of resentment and disobedience in his book, and praised the Australian role in N.Africa and the Med.
Edward Kenna (still-living AFAIK) was awarded his Victoria Cross fighting in New Guinea in 1945, so clearly many Australians fought with great determination
Some of you will have received the relevant part, and I'll be interested to hear your views. As far as I can see Hastings doesn't say that they refused to fight for a cowardly reason but were at the end of their tether at the hopeless, and some perceive as useless, orders that had no military rationale. Couple with the fact that the men were exhausted, there refusal is seen in quite a sympathetic way by hastings. However, what the above paper fails to have done is disentangle the view of the higher command at that time from the historians' writings and interpretations.
I had a speed-read of the chapter (actually, Kyt, I think you missed a page- can't find pages 366-367 - but never mind, got the gist of it). All I can say is, it does paint a negative view of the Australian domestic scene, and it would sound better coming from an Australian than a Brit (but of course the book isn't all about Australia). At risk of copping-out, I think a present-day Australlian is in a better position to comment than I am. But the UK wasn't perfect -there was certainly industrial unrest, communist infiltration and Trade Union pettiness. There was an obituary recently of an officer who needed to load armoured vehicles onto a ship in the London Docks just before D-Day, and the dockers refused to do that because it supposedly wasn't part of their job.
Further to the above, I have been searching for this and finally stumbled across it. The thesis is most interesting however chapter 2 gives a great deal of background to what was occurring at the time. http://www.library.uow.edu.au/adt-NWU/uploads/approved/adt-NWU20060712.150556/public/02Whole.pdf I would be interested in your comments.
I've just skim read the intro and it looks like a great read. Was just about to print it when I noticed it was 400 pages long!! Looks like I'll be doing some long sessions on the computer. Will check out Chapter 2 in a bit. Cheers Spidge
