Table of Contents
If Australia is ever invaded by a hostile power, we may not have many missiles or drones to defend ourselves with, nor a well-armed militia, but at least we’ll be able to frighten them off with a good show of spear-shaking.
A political storm has erupted after images emerged showing Australian Army personnel learning how to make traditional Aboriginal weapons as part of a cultural training exercise.
The controversy has triggered a fierce exchange between One Nation leader Pauline Hanson and the federal government, with both sides offering dramatically different views on what Australia’s military should be focusing on.
Exercise Greenskin, as it was called, brought together personnel from the ACT for four days of cultural workshops, historical tours and hands-on work with indigenous weapons. The Department of Defence presented it as a way to connect troops with Aboriginal history and local traditions. Around 60 soldiers took part.
The Department of Defence shared photographs from the exercise showing soldiers participating in workshops involving traditional Aboriginal tools and weapons.
Including, apparently, the traditional Aboriginal steel axe. I guess Bruce Pascoe was their historical consultant.
Defence Minister Richard Marles leapt to the programme’s defence when Hanson criticised it. He accused her of disrespecting serving members and trying to drag the ADF into a culture war. Major Samuel White, who ran the activity, said the goal was to help soldiers better understand Aboriginal history and the cultural background of their units and communities. He called it rewarding to see indigenous and non-indigenous personnel engaging with traditions together.
That may sound harmless until you remember what an army is actually for. Australia faces real strategic pressure in our region. Modern warfare is decided by drones, precision missiles, cyber attacks, long-range strike and integrated air defence. None of those threats will be deterred by a sharpened stick or a wooden club.
The exercise was never presented as practical bushcraft training in making improvised weapons from whatever is to hand, which could be a justifiable excuse. Instead, it was explicitly ‘cultural’, as part of the ADF’s wider diversity push. That push has included public statements rejecting a ‘warrior culture’ in favour of something presumably more inclusive and sensitive. An army that is embarrassed by the idea of warriors is an army that has lost the plot about its own purpose.
Hanson’s point was straightforward. Resources and training time should go to preparing for actual combat and deterring real adversaries, not to symbolic gestures that make bureaucrats feel virtuous. The images of soldiers sitting around making spears while China builds missiles and expands its navy struck many Australians as a perfect symbol of misplaced priorities.
Supporters claim cultural awareness helps troops operate in diverse environments. That argument collapses when you look at the actual threats. Our most likely adversaries do not care about our cultural sensitivity programs. They care about whether we can fight and win. An army that spends time on spear-making workshops while recruitment is in crisis and readiness is under pressure is not the sort of thing to signal to an enemy that we can fight and win.
The ADF already struggles with retention, capability gaps and the basic business of being ready to fight. Every hour spent on mandatory cultural activities is an hour not spent on marksmanship, fieldcraft, tactics or maintenance. The distinction between a fighting force and a social-work organisation has become dangerously blurred.
Marles and Defence can call it respect for indigenous history all they like. The public sees soldiers being turned into participants in a bureaucratic diversity exercise while the region grows more dangerous by the month. If the ADF wants to teach history, fine. Do it in a classroom on wet days. Do not pretend that learning to chip a spear point is professional military development.
Australia needs a military that takes its core business seriously. That means weapons that work at range, doctrine that wins fights and a culture that values competence and aggression in battle over feelings and inclusion.
Spear-shaking looks impressive in a photo op. It will not stop a single incoming missile, though, if the strategy is to make the invaders die laughing, it might just pay off.
