James Bowen's responses to Major General Gower's email of 22 December 2005
I have provided below some extracts from my response to Major General Gower's email of 22 December 2005. The director's words are highlighted. My response is also dated 22 December 2005.
Major General Gower:
"..you seemingly contest the right of the Memorial’s Principal Historian to disagree with the Battle for Australia committees’ understanding of Japanese intentions toward Australia in 1942"
James Bowen replies to this charge:
"You are misrepresenting my purpose. I certainly do not contest "the right" of Dr Stanley to disagree with the views of those who founded the Battle for Australia Commemoration. If you take the time to read my detailed response to Dr Stanley's arguments on the Battle for Australia Historical Society web-site (see below), you should appreciate that I am challenging the correctness of Dr Stanley's views on very sensitive historical issues, and the foundation on which he purports to base his views.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/battleforaustralia/battaust/JapdebAustinvade.html
It was Dr Stanley who chose the terms of engagement when he based his claim that the Japanese were not planning to invade Australia in 1942 substantially on the work of Professor Henry Frei called "Japan's Southward Advance and Australia" and a passing reference to Fuchida and Okumiya's "Midway - The Battle that Doomed Japan". I believe that I have shown by extensive references to passages from Professor Frei's book that he contradicts rather then supports Dr Stanley on this issue. As for Fuchida and Okumiya, I have already mentioned that, owing to serious errors in their book, they have little, if any, credibility in Japan today."
Major General Gower:
"His major difference with you appears to be in arguing that there was no Japanese plan to invade Australia in 1942. This is not a novel view by any means and is very well-documented."
James Bowen replies:
"If the absence of any Japanese planning to invade Australia in 1942 is "very well-documented", as you claim, then I am surprised that Dr Stanley did not mention that documentation in either of his two papers on this issue. If you and Dr Stanley still contend that Professor Frei supports your claim that the Japanese were not planning to invade Australia in 1942, or that any other recognised authority on this issue unambiguously supports your claim, please refer me to it and any relevant passage so that I can mention it on the Battle for Australia Historical Society web-site. I am not reluctant to admit mistakes, if I have made them." Emphasis has been added.
Major General Gower:
"I do fortunately live in a society in which scholars are free to propose and defend views which may be unfashionable or challenging."
James Bowen replies:
"So do I, and I would defend Dr Stanley's right to express his controversial and unfashionable views if he were employed on any university campus in Australia. However, he is not employed on a university campus; he is employed as an historian in the nation's war memorial. This should make him appreciative of the need to speak about very sensitive historical issues with great care and moderation. I find it disappointing that neither you nor Dr Stanley appear to appreciate this distinction. However, I sensed that both the Prime Minister and Mr Beazley appreciated this distinction when they made their reported comments about Dr Stanley at the 2005 Battle for Australia Commemoration. I do not believe that either political leader would have mentioned Dr Stanley if he had not been employed at the Australian War Memorial."
Major General Gower:
"Dr Stanley’s views are in fact not so divergent from those of many historians that he should be singled out."
James Bowen replies:
"I am not singling Dr Stanley out. His views tend to grab headlines repeatedly on this controversial issue, and that is why he keeps coming under my notice. Frankly, I deplore the unwelcome attention that these headlines are bringing to our national war memorial, and I am concerned by the fact that these headlines do not appear to trouble you. I would be delighted to know the name of any distinguished historian who supports Dr Stanley's views so that I can read what he/she says about Japanese plans for Australia in1942, and can check their historical references." Emphasis has been added.
Major General Gower:
"Indeed, I suggest that is indeed quite possible that your expressed interpretation is novel and needs to be underpinned by further scholarship."
James Bowen replies:
"If my interpretation is "novel" as you claim, please do me the favour of drawing my attention to other interpretations by distinguished historians that contradict me. I will mention them publicly as qualifying my opinion. Dr Stanley chose to mention Professor Frei specifically in both of his controversial papers as the distinguished historian who allegedly supported his claim that the Japanese were not planning to invade Australia in 1942. If you take the time to read what I have written about this issue, you should be able to see that Professor Frei totally contradicts Dr Stanley. Dr Stanley does not purport to quote any passages from Professor Frei that support his claims, and I imagine that he will have great difficulty finding any such passage. I have taken the trouble to support my arguments with quotations from Professor Frei's work. See especially at:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/battleforaustralia/battaust/AustInvasion/JapNavy_AustInvasion.html
I am even now looking at a paper by the late Professor Frei, and one paragraph that is headed: "Japanese Plans to Take Australia's North". It's not an ambiguous heading is it? Perhaps Dr Stanley just failed to locate this paper by Professor Frei when he was undertaking research for his own papers?" Emphasis has been added.
Major General Gower:
"You mention that you will take your case to the Prime Minister. I am unclear as to what you seek to achieve by this. I have every confidence that he and the Leader of the Opposition (whose name you also mention) would find nothing unusual in a diversity of interpretation."
James Bowen replies:
"Perhaps you did not read what the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Federal Opposition are reported to have said about Dr Stanley's views. You can read the full text of the article at:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/battleforaustralia/battaust/AustInvasion/Leaders_condemn_AWM.html
I believe that I have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that Dr Stanley has either misread or misunderstood what Professor Frei is saying about Japanese planning to invade Australia. I believe that Dr Stanley has also failed to appreciate what Professor Frei is saying about Japanese Prime Minister Tojo's plans to "throttle Australia into submission" to Japan (at page 172), and the planning by the same Tojo's Total War Institute to incorporate Australia into Japan's Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere. In the absence of compelling evidence to support Dr Stanley's very controversial views about 1942 and Prime MInister John Curtin, I will feel compelled to express a view to the Prime Minister and Mr Beazley that controversial, and apparently unsubstantiated views about these sensitive subjects emanating from the Australian War Memorial have a very real potential to damage the standing of the War Memorial in the eyes of Australians."
RETURN TO:
OR