Australian Journal of Politics and History最新文献

The article examines Australian–Hungarian foreign relations during the period of the Cold War, specifically between 1956 and 1988, often called the “Kádár era” after Hungary's leader of the time, János Kádár. Following the suppression of the 1956 Hungarian revolution, Hungary struggled to establish diplomatic ties with Western nations, including Australia. However, signs of thawing division emerged in the late 1960s, culminating in the reinstatement of diplomatic relations between Hungary and Australia in 1972. Hungary's primary objective was to cultivate economic relationships beyond the confines of the Eastern Bloc. Establishing diplomatic channels was just one facet of this effort. Hungary also aimed to gain insights into Australia's foreign policy stances. Additionally, the Hungarian diaspora in Australia emerged as a significant area of interest. As Ellen Gray has observed, Australia's Cold War foreign policy with the Soviet Union remained insufficiently studied for an extended period, a situation that also applies to smaller Socialist nations such as Hungary. Despite Hungary's limited international influence, its diplomatic and foreign policy decisions were significantly shaped by the Soviet Union; however, a closer analysis reveals both the interconnectedness and distinctiveness of each Eastern Bloc country's foreign policies. By drawing on archival materials from the Hungarian Foreign Ministry and State Security Authorities, this study uses new evidence to reconstruct the complex and multifaceted relationship between Hungary, Australia, and the Hungarian-Australian diaspora. Exploring foreign relations through the lens of trade and diaspora relations provides valuable insights into the foreign policies, nation building, and state security of both countries during the Cold War period.

For the first half of the twentieth century, Australia maintained a firm policy of non-repatriation. Military personnel who died overseas were buried in vast military cemeteries administered by the Imperial (later Commonwealth) War Graves Commission. In 1966, however, the Australian government decreed that Australia's war dead could be repatriated, at public expense, for hometown burial or cremation. Focussing on the 18 soldiers who died in (and shortly after) the August 1966 Battle of Long Tan, this article examines the logistical, affective, and commemorative effects of Australia's Vietnam-era change to repatriation policy. In doing so, it reveals the new policy's practical and cultural legacies.

In the research note I will analyse the changes of historical narrative of the Second World War and transformation of memory policy in contemporary Ukraine. The aim is to highlights the deconstruction of Soviet mythology of the Great Patriotic War, and the gradual formation of Ukrainian dimension of war instead. The impact of key actors in Ukraine's memory policy will be described, including: scholars who introduced new approaches for deconstruction the Soviet concept of the Great Patriotic War and have been creating a new historical narrative; authors of history textbooks who have been updating the content and improving the teaching methodology; Presidents of Ukraine and politicians who, by decrees and laws, propose changes of official discourse and memorial practices. Decolonisation a historical narrative, as well as the decommunisation of state memory policy in Ukraine regarding the Second World War were perceived by contemporary Russia as a threat. So, the accusations of Ukraine's distortion of the “truth” about the war and the alleged spread of “fascism” and “neo-Nazism” in Ukraine play a significant role in the Russian hybrid war against Ukraine which started in 2014—and in 2022 evolved into justification for full-scale aggression.