Richard Marles and Pat Conroy are currently under intense scrutiny for their perceived mishandling of Australia’s defence affairs, with The Australian’s Foreign Editor, Greg Sheridan, characterizing their stewardship as an “absolute debacle.” Sheridan contends that both Marles, serving as Defence Minister, and Conroy, as Defence Industry Minister, bear responsibility for the current state of affairs.

In a recent discussion with Sky News host Andrew Bolt, Sheridan delved into the contentious issues plaguing the relationship between the defence department and the government. He highlighted the fundamental grievances from both sides, illustrating a deep-seated rift.

According to Sheridan, the defence establishment holds Marles accountable for failing to secure additional funding, leaving them without the resources necessary to fulfill their expanding array of responsibilities. Conversely, Marles believes the defence establishment is out of touch with the evolving strategic landscape, clinging to outdated programs and disregarding the findings of the Defence Strategic Review.

This discord has created a stalemate, with neither party effectively advancing the interests of the Australian Defence Force. Sheridan concludes that the current trajectory falls short of establishing a robust and autonomous military force capable of wielding significant strategic influence or serving as a credible deterrent.

We have received advice of the death on Saturday 10 February 2024 of Adrian Parry.

Adrian was involved in a vehicle accident north of Armidale, NSW. Adrian was appointed an officer upon entry to the Royal Military College in January 2010 and was allocated to the Regiment upon graduation in June 2011. He had postings to 1st Regiment, 53rd Battery, and 4th Regiment before transferring to the Army Reserve and ultimately retiring in 2020. He also had a short corps transfer to the Royal Australian Army Medical Corps in 2015.

Further details will be advised as they come to hand.

RIP Adrian Parry

Peter Bruce, OAM
Obituary Resource Officer
RAAHC
[email protected]

The Federal Court this week exposed a scandal – how government-funded lawyers appeared to help invent Aboriginal “traditions” to fight a massive gas project.

Justice Natalie Charlesworth’s findings are so damning that I believe the Albanese government must now cancel its funding of the Environmental Defenders Office.

The EDO last year got the court to delay the $5.8bn Santos gas project in the seas north of Darwin by helping three Tiwi Islanders who claimed an underwater pipeline from the project to Darwin would anger the rainbow serpent and a Crocodile Man who were in that part of the sea.

They also claimed the pipeline would disturb graves and sacred sites of Aborigines who lived there more than 20,000 years ago, when the seas were 120m lower and the seabed there was land.

It was mad enough to have this project delayed at a cost of $1m a day because of a non-existent rainbow serpent and a man-turned-crocodile.

Wilder was the claim – presented by the EDO lawyers – that Tiwi Islanders today actually knew the sacred sites of land that was drowned thousands of years ago, through oral traditions passed on over more than 600 generations.

As Justice Charlesworth said on Monday, in lifting the ban on the project: “It is implausible that an ancient oral tradition could yield such detailed information”.

It’s even stranger when the supposed gravesite was drawn on a map of the now-drowned area by a single Tiwi Islander, Marie Munkara, and was not known by the 23 Islanders who gave evidence in court.

That wasn’t the only suspicious thing about this amazing map.

Last June, EDO lawyers held – and filmed – a meeting for eight Aborigines against the project, and introduced them to marine geoscientist Mick O’Leary, an associate professor at the University of Western Australia.

O’Leary had with him a computer-generated map of the area as it supposedly was before the seas covered it and told the Aborigines to use their oral traditions and draw where the sacred sites were 20,000 years ago.

He claimed he’d helped stop a Woodside project this way, using ancient memories preserved in song to identify a sacred site.

Well, said one of the Aborigines, impressed: “We gotta do this.”

In fact, O’Leary later confessed in court he hadn’t used any such map against Woodside. The judge gave him a whack: “Dr O’Leary … did lie to the Tiwi Islanders, and I find that he did so because he wanted his ‘cultural mapping’ exercise to be used in a way that would stop the pipeline.”

She also found his map, with “a stunning waterfall in a luscious green landscape”, could not “on any reasonable measure be said to correctly represent the pre-inundation landscape”.

But Aborigines at the meeting had got the idea. Two women described how the rainbow serpent and Crocodile Man would have swum around the Tiwi Islands, or from a local cape, not realising the islands and their cape didn’t exist then, since they were part of the mainland. Neither O’Leary nor the EDO lawyer corrected them.

Yet no one at that meeting identified any grave sites. They were added to the map later by Marie Munkara, in circumstances not filmed or explained. Munkara didn’t give evidence, and no Aboriginal witness said she had cultural authority.

Again, Charlesworth wasn’t impressed: “The court cannot be satisfied about the integrity of any process by which Marie Munkara came to put her own marks there”.

It got worse. Alina Leikin, an EDO lawyer, then stepped up to the map.

“That’s where the sea starts,” Leikin said, and drew a line to a spot on the map to what the EDO later called “the sacred freshwater source”.

The judge was appalled: “That video … depicts what could only be described as the EDO lawyer drawing on the map in a way that could not on any reasonable view truthfully reflect what the Tiwi informant had said”.

She said drawing up this crucial map of sacred sites and graves involved “confection” or “construction” – in other words, fakery. The map was worthless.

Charlesworth also accused the EDO and an anthropologist hired for the case of “a form of subtle coaching” of some witnesses to get them to tell “their stories in a way that propelled their traditions into the sea and into the vicinity of the pipeline”.

Why is the Albanese government funding an activist group of lawyers who used a dodgy map, coached witnesses and far-fetched traditions to stop massive resources projects this country badly needs?

Women have long played a significant role in Australian military service, from serving as nurses in the Boer War, to the formation of the women’s auxiliary forces during the Second World War and their current roles on the front lines.

The HERstory: Remembering Australia’s Military Women exhibition is artist Carla Edwards’ personal thank you to the women who have served in the Australian Defence Force. The exhibition at the Anzac Memorial in Sydney’s Hyde Park features 24 women from New South Wales whose military service spans from 1942 up to the present day.

The women served, in the Air Force, Army and Navy as well as the Australian Army Medical Women’s Service, Australian Women’s Army Service, Women’s Auxiliary Australian Air Force, Women’s Royal Australian Air Force, Women’s Royal Australian Army Corps and the Women’s Royal Australian Naval Service.

Read their personal stories of service through the decades

Carla started this project in 2022 with a request to photograph seven ex-service women on the NSW Central Coast. The overwhelmingly positive response to this initiative prompted Carla to broaden the reach. Fourteen months later, Carla has now driven 20,000 kilometres and interviewed and photographed 93 women across five states and one territory.

The exhibition is located in the Memorial’s Auditorium on Lower Ground level. The Memorial is open every day, 9 am to 5 pm. Please note that access to the exhibition is dependent on the Auditorium’s availability, so you are to call the Memorial in advance on (02) 8262 2900.

The exhibition closes on 1 April; entry is free. Find out more on the Memorial’s website

The US Navy and allied navies employ various techniques and systems to counter enemy helicopters at sea. These measures are crucial for protecting naval assets, including ships and personnel, from aerial threats. Some of the common techniques and systems include:

The members of 47 Commando (Raiding Group) Royal Marines are specialists in small craft operations and amphibious warfare for the UK Commando Force. And they are about to become more lethal and agile thanks to the brand-new Commando Raiding Craft.

Australia’s Defence Honours and Awards Appeal Tribunal released a comprehensive report on Tuesday, recommending the posthumous honouring of Warrant Officer Kevin “Dasher” Wheatley and Warrant Officer Ron “Butch” Swanton for their overlooked acts of gallantry during the Vietnam War. The tribunal advocated for both soldiers to be awarded the Medal for Gallantry.

Swanton’s commendation was based on his courageous attempt to rescue a wounded Vietnamese soldier amidst enemy fire. Despite sustaining mortal wounds himself, Swanton displayed extraordinary bravery.

Initially, a military official dismissed the idea of honouring Swanton, citing that his actions were expected of all service personnel in preserving the life of a comrade. However, the tribunal’s findings supported the recognition of Swanton’s valour.

Wheatley, who was already posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross and the United States Silver Star, would further solidify his place in Australian military history if the recommendation is accepted. His previous accolades include being appointed a Knight of the National Order by the former Republic of Vietnam and receiving the Military Merit Medal and Cross of Gallantry with Palm.

Both Wheatley and Swanton tragically perished together in Vietnam on November 13, 1965, near a paddy field. Wheatley’s refusal to abandon Swanton, despite knowing their impending demise, led to his Victoria Cross recognition.

Chris Hartley, a close friend of the Wheatley family, initiated a campaign to acknowledge Wheatley’s bravery. This effort culminated in the retrieval of Wheatley’s long-delayed US Silver Star and prompted further investigation into other denied commendations.

Among the evidence presented was Wheatley’s act of rescuing a terrified young girl amidst heavy gunfire in May 1965. Despite recommendations for his gallantry going unheeded, Wheatley continued to display remarkable courage throughout his service in Vietnam.

The tribunal’s decision to recommend the Medal for Gallantry was influenced by Wheatley’s exemplary actions and the injustice of previous denials. Wheatley’s son, George, expressed gratitude for the tribunal’s thorough review and highlighted his father’s unwavering dedication to his comrades’ safety.

Despite initial reluctance from defence, military, and political figures to honour Wheatley, Queen Elizabeth II intervened to ensure the Victoria Cross citation accurately reflected his exceptional bravery.

Wheatley’s widow, Edna, faced numerous challenges following his death, including disputes over repatriation and financial struggles. However, public support and media attention eventually led to the return of Wheatley’s remains and the preservation of his medals.

Kerry Stokes, a prominent figure, intervened to prevent the sale of Wheatley’s medals and ensured their placement at the Australian War Memorial.

George Wheatley, now 69, expressed pride in his father’s legacy and appreciation for the government’s support of the tribunal’s findings. The government, represented by Defence Personnel Minister Matt Keogh, pledged to consider the tribunal’s recommendation.

Kevin Arthur “Dasher” Wheatley, VC, and Ronald James “Butch” Swanton are interred at respective locations, with Wheatley at Pinegrove Memorial Park and Swanton at Mount Thompson Memorial Gardens.

The complete findings of the tribunal are available on the Defence Honours Tribunal website.

The performance of bullets in terms of stopping power, lethality, and range has sparked considerable debate. Critics have pointed out perceived shortcomings, advocating for an intermediate-sized cartridge between the 5.56 and 7.62 NATO sizes. Conversely, some argue in favor of the M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round (EPR), citing its purported improvements in barrier penetration and accuracy.

Criticism surrounding range, accuracy, and lethality often ties back to differences in barrel length and twist between the M16 and M4 rifles. Hit probability, crucial for a soldier’s effectiveness in combat, varies notably between these two cartridges due to differences in recoil and noise.

Comparatively, the 7.62 NATO boasts twice the impact energy of the 5.56 NATO, making it preferable for targets shielded by higher-level armor, particularly at medium range. When fired from a 20-inch barrel, a 5.56 NATO round exhibits a flatter trajectory than a 7.62 NATO round of equivalent length. However, a 5.56 NATO round fired from a 14.5-inch barrel matches the trajectory and time of flight of a 7.62 NATO round fired from a 20-inch barrel.

Notably, a 7.62 NATO round rapidly achieves 50 percent of its velocity within a short distance from the barrel upon firing. Consequently, reducing barrel length for close-quarters combat increases muzzle pressure, leading to heightened noise and muzzle flash.