The Australian War Memorial’s role as a national shrine dedicated to honoring the service and sacrifice of Australia’s armed forces has come under renewed debate amid calls to include the so-called "frontier wars" between settlers and Indigenous Australians in its narrative.
Originally conceived by official war correspondent Charles Bean to commemorate the efforts of Australian soldiers during World War I, the Memorial has traditionally focused on military campaigns fought by the nation’s armed forces. It serves as a place of unity and pride, intended to recognize the shared commitment of Australians in defense of the country and its values.
Recent demands have emerged to expand the Memorial’s scope to encompass the violent conflicts of the 19th century often described as “frontier wars,” which involved clashes between British settlers and Indigenous peoples. Proponents argue that acknowledging these conflicts is necessary to confront Australia’s full historical record of colonialism and Indigenous dispossession.
However, critics caution against this expansion, contending that the nature of these confrontations differs significantly from recognized military campaigns. Since the frontier conflicts did not involve organized Australian military forces or government-sanctioned armies, they argue such events may be more appropriately commemorated at institutions like the Australian National Museum or the National Centre for Indigenous Studies at the Australian National University, rather than the War Memorial.
Estimates of Aboriginal fatalities during these frontier conflicts vary widely and remain the subject of scholarly debate. Some recent claims suggest that up to 100,000 Indigenous Australians may have died as a result of these clashes, largely based on extrapolations related to the actions of Queensland's native mounted police. However, other sources, including the Newcastle University Massacre Map, place the death toll closer to 11,000 across approximately 400 recorded massacres, acknowledging limitations due to reliance on historical accounts and oral histories.
The 1820s “Black Wars” in Tasmania represent one of the most intense periods of frontier violence, including the declaration of martial law and coordinated efforts by settlers and soldiers to suppress Indigenous resistance. Historian Henry Reynolds has described this cessation as the closest instance of a “war” between settlers and Indigenous peoples due to the scale of casualties and formal military involvement. Nevertheless, historical records also show instances of cooperation and mutual respect between Indigenous leaders and colonial authorities during this period.
The military contributions of Aboriginal Australians in later conflicts remain a notable element of national recognition. At least a thousand Indigenous men served in the First Australian Imperial Force during World War I despite official recruitment barriers, with many displaying valor and sacrifice. Their participation has been commemorated at the War Memorial, reflecting a longstanding acknowledgment of Indigenous service in the national defense.
While there is broad agreement that Australian history’s complex and often painful chapters warrant acknowledgment, debate persists over how and where such histories should be memorialized. Some argue that incorporating the frontier conflicts into the War Memorial risks diluting its purpose as a monument to those who fought under the Australian flag, while others call for a broader reckoning with the nation’s colonial past within dedicated cultural and historical spaces.
The discussion highlights ongoing efforts to balance respect for military heritage with an inclusive understanding of Australia’s diverse and contested history.