Australia and Turkey: New Perspectives between Old Foes

  • Michális S. Michael


The world is undergoing a period of profound social, economic, and cultural transition. How to handle the risks and opportunities offered by this historical moment is the pre-eminent challenge of our times — one that all states and societies have to address. Turkey and Australia, though geographically far apart, are nevertheless politically and psychologically closer than many would think. Dialogue between these two countries on issues of common concern can make a significant contribution in this regard. In light of the centenary of the Anzac landing on the Gallipoli peninsula in 2015, the different historical trajectories and emerging shared paths of Australia and Turkey are ready for critical examination.


Foreign Policy Foreign Affair Political Identity Globalized World Local Government Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 3.
    Andrew Shearer (2010) Sweet and Sour: Australian Public Attitudes towards China (Sydney: Lowy Institute for International Policy), 11.Google Scholar
  2. 7.
    Jonathan King (2011) Great Battles in Australian History (Sydney: Allen & Unwin), 38–49.Google Scholar
  3. 8.
    Adrian Jones (2004) ‘A Note on Atatürk’s Words about Gallipoli’, History Australia, 2 (1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 9.
    Kevin Fewster, Vecihi Başarin, and Hatice Hürmüz Başarin (2003) Gallipoli: The Turkish Story (Sydney: Allen Sc Unwin), 129.Google Scholar
  5. 11.
    Andrew Mango (2000) Atatürk: The Biography of the Founder of Modern Turkey (Woodstock and New York, NY: Overlook Press).Google Scholar
  6. 12.
    An apt example of the personal bond that developed between Atatürk and the former Australian Prime Minister (1923–28), and then Australian High Commissioner to London (1933–39), Stanley Bruce, occurred during the Montreux Conference. After Mussolini’s invasion of Abyssinia, Atatürk was concerned about Italy’s designs — which occupied the Dodecanese islands at the time — towards Turkey. At the bequest of the Turkish Government, the League of Nations convened a conference at Montreux, allowing Turkey to refortify the Dardanelles and Bosphorus straits. Bruce, who had just completed his term as president of the League of Nations Council, chaired the conference. Atatürk presented Bruce a cigarette case and, as both fought at Gallipoli on opposite sides, it became one of Bruce’s most prized possessions -a bond apparently reiterated by the fact that one of the few photographs Bruce had in his London library was that of his former foe Atatürk. John Connor (2003) Stanley Melbourne Bruce: Guide to Archives of Australia’s Prime Ministers (Canberra: National Archives of Australia), 88–9; andGoogle Scholar
  7. Alfred Stirling (1974) Lord Bruce: The London Years (Melbourne: Hawthorn Press), 468.Google Scholar
  8. 13.
    For an insight into the unique Turkish rendition of hüzün as communal melancholy, see Orhan Pamuk (2005) Istanbul: Memories of a City, trans. Maureen Freely (London: Faber and Faber), 79–84.Google Scholar
  9. 14.
    Nazim Hikmet (1982, reprint 2002) Human Landscapes from My Country, translated by Randy Biasing and Mutlu Konuk (New York: Persea Books), 43. Largely written whilst in Bursa Prison between 1941 and 1945, Hikmet continued revising and reworking his epic poem until 1950 when he was released from prison and during his permanent exile. Human Landscapes was first published in translation (Italian, 1960 and 1965; Russian in 1962) before its Turkish publication in 1966 — three years after Hikmet’s death in Moscow.Google Scholar
  10. 15.
    The increase in Australians visiting Gallipoli and other war sites coincided with a renewed vigour of Australian nationalism in the post-Cold War period of identity politics. In particular, under conservative Australian PM John Howard, Gallipoli was repackaged to appeal to a younger generation of (Anglo) Australians. See Caroline Winter (2011) ‘Battlefield Tourism and Australian National Identity: Gallipoli and the Western Front’, in Elspeth Frew and Leanne White (eds), Tourism and National Identity: An International Perspective (Oxon, UK: Routledge), 176–89.Google Scholar
  11. 16.
    As John Basarin, John Hall, and Kevin Fewster (2010) ‘ANZAC Day at Gallipoli: A Turkish Perspective’, in Anne-Marie Hede and Ruth Rentschler (eds), Reflections on Anzac Day: From One Millennium to the Next (Heidelberg, Vic: Heidelberg Press), 74, note, Gallipoli forms the cornerstone of Australian battlefield tourism, which began as early as 1925, but was enhanced during the 1990s with prime ministerial attendance.Google Scholar
  12. Kenneth F. Hyde and Serhat Harman (2011) ‘Motives for a Secular Pilgrimage to the Gallipoli Battlefields’, Tourism Management 32 (6), 1343–51, stipulate that motivation for such ‘secular pilgrimage’ range from spiritual, nationalistic, family pilgrimage, friendship and travel. Interesting,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Peter Slade (2003) ‘Gallipoli Thanatourism: The Meaning of ANZAC’, Annals of Tourism Research, 30 (4), 779–94, asserts that many Australians visit Gallipoli motivated by ‘thanatotourism’ (death tourism) — meaning curiosity over the deaths themselves.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 17.
    Hürriyet Babacan (2001) ‘Turks’, in James Jupp (ed.), The Australian People: An Encyclopedia of the Nation, Its People and Their Origins (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 709.Google Scholar
  15. 19.
    Mohamad Abdalla (2010) ‘Muslims in Australia: Negative Views and Positive Contributions’, in Halim Rane, Jacqui Ewart, and Mohamad Abdalla (eds), Islam and the Australian News Media (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press Academic Monographs), 39–40.Google Scholar
  16. 20.
    Norman MacKenzie (1937) The Legal Status of Aliens in Pacific Countries: An International Survey of Law and Practice Concerning Immigration, Naturalization and Deportation of Aliens and Their Legal Rights and Disabilities (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 24.Google Scholar
  17. 21.
    Commonwealth of Australia (1957) Census of the Commonwealth of Australia, 30th June, 1954, Volume VIII: Australia, Part I, Cross-Classifications of the Characteristics of the Population (Canberra: Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics), 38–9, 42–3, 180, 182, 184–5,$File/1954%20Census%20-%20Volume%20VIII%20-%20Part%20I%20AUSTRALIA%20Characteristics%20of%20Population.pdf, accessed 12 March 2015. This is reinforced by ‘Table 58 Nationality (i.e. Allegiance)’ which registered only 153 as having allegiance to Turkey.Google Scholar
  18. 23.
    Banu Şenay (2010) ‘State of Origin: Turkish Migration and Multiculturalism in Australia’, in M. Murat Erdoğan (ed.), Yurtdışındaki Türkler: 50. Yılında Göç ve Uyum — Turks Abroad: Migration and Integration in Its 50th Year (Ankara: Orion Kitabevi), 3,, accessed 19 March 2015.Google Scholar
  19. 24.
    Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2011) 2011 Census Community Profiles unityprofile/0?opendocument&navpos=220, accessed 14 March 2015.Google Scholar
  20. 29.
    Department of Immigration and Border Protection (2014b) The People of New South Wales: Statistics from the 2011 Census, 179, 181, 187–8, 231–2.Google Scholar
  21. 30.
    Lenore Manderson and Christine Inglis (1984) ‘Turkish Migration and Workforce Participation in Sydney, Australia’, International Migration Review, 18 (2), 258–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 32.
    Christabel M. Young, Michael Petty, and Arthur Faulkner (1980) Education and Employment of Turkish and Lebanese Youth (Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service).Google Scholar
  23. 33.
    The Gülen Movement is an Islamic inspired transnational activist network that believes in harmonizing the secular sciences with Islam, and feels that education needs to teach both the spirit and the mind. For a detailed account of the Gülen Movement’s development and ideo-theology, see David Tittensor (2012) ‘The Gülen Movement and the Case of a Secret Agenda: Putting the Debate in Perspective’, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 23 (2), 163–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 34.
    Greg Barton (2008) ‘How the Hizmet Works: Islam, Dialogue and the Gülen Movement in Australia’, Paper presented at the ‘Islam in the Age of Global Challenges: Alternative Perspectives on the Gülen Movement’,, accessed 15 March 2015.Google Scholar
  25. 36.
    Christine Inglis (2010) Inequality, Discrimination and Social Cohesion: Socio-Economic Mobility and Incorporation of Australian-Born Lebanese and Turkish Background Youth (Sydney: Department of Immigration and Citizenship).Google Scholar
  26. 39.
    See David M. Jones and Andrea Benvenuti (2006) ‘Tradition, Myth and the Dilemma of Australian Foreign Policy’, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 60 (1), 103–24;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gary Smith and David Lowe (2005) ‘Howard, Downer and the Liberals’ Realist Tradition’, Australian Journal of Politics and History, 51 (3), 459–72;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kemal Kirişci (2009) ‘The Transformation of Turkish Foreign Policy: The Rise of the Trading State’, New Perspectives on Turkey, 40 (1), 29–57.Google Scholar
  29. 40.
    Phillip Robins (2007) ‘Turkish Foreign Policy since 2002: Between a “Post-Islamist” Government and a Kemalist State’, International Affairs, 83 (2), 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 42.
    Michális S. Michael (2008) ‘Navigating through the Bosphorus: Relocating Turkey’s European/Western Fault Line’, Global Change, Peace & Security, 20 (1), 71–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 43.
    Alan Bloomfield and Kim Richard Nossal (2010) ‘End of an Era? Anti Americanism in the Australian Labor Party’, Australian Journal of Politics and History, 56 (4), 610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Michális S. Michael 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michális S. Michael

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations