Editorial, United Arab Emirates, April 25
"[Yesterday marked] the 90th anniversary of the allied attempt to wrest the Dardanelles Strait from the Ottoman empire. While 8,709 Australians and 2,721 New Zealanders were killed, more than 21,000 British troops and 14,000 French soldiers also died in the nine-month campaign, which ended with an allied withdrawal ... Turkey lost some 86,000 men [but] the site holds a special bond for Australians; it was the first time they fought under their own flag. Gallipoli was literally a baptism of fire."
Press
Editorial, New Zealand, April 25
"National leaders - not least [the New Zealand and Australian prime ministers] Helen Clark and John Howard - grandstand at the commemoration of wartime events ... We need our leaders to express our gratitude for the sacrifices of service men and women in defence of our freedom, but it is tasteless to exploit that expression for political gain. Gain must account for much of the fuss being made over this 90th Anzac Day ...
"Anzac Day does not need this injection of grandiosity. Every year it inspires the spirits of New Zealanders and Australians, and it will continue to do so without false promotion. The events the day commemorates were traumatic and nation-building and therefore not in need of gilding by politicians."
Age
Editorial, Australia, April 25
"As a nation ... we have learned to separate respect for the military from any reservations we may have about the merits of particular operations ... Support for the Australian intervention in East Timor has contributed to this, as has respect for the contribution of the nation's forces ... in Indonesia in the wake of the tsunami.
"But none of this explains the extraordinary rise in interest in the Gallipoli campaign - which Anzac Day specifically commemorates ... The enduring infamy of the Great War was its meaninglessness; tens of thousands of young lives were sacrificed for reasons that now appear questionable at best. This is worth remembering, and is a fitting way to honour the fallen. Anzac Day should not be an excuse for patriotic posturing."
New Zealand Herald
Editorial, April 25
"The reasons for the rejuvenation of this once-threatened commemoration are complex. But the consequences are not. Parades and services [were] swelled by the increased attendance of the great-grandchildren and grandchildren of those who fought ... Most feel an awe at the sacrifice and sense of duty of those who died willingly serving their country ... This sentiment, rather than withering in a more pragmatic age, seems to be becoming stronger, even as the years of peace grow longer ...
"The young today seem to harbour a deeper appreciation, and perhaps knowledge, than many of those educated generations earlier. The myths perpetuated in the classrooms of yesteryear ... have taken a long time to die. The 90th anniversary invites a more realistic assessment."
Michael McKernan
Sydney Morning Herald, April 25
"The value of Gallipoli to Australia, military historians will tell us, is that it kept our force off the western front for an extra year. Australia lost more than 8,000 men at Gallipoli, but they might have lost that number in a day or two on the western front ... Imagine the anger if fully one half of [Australia's 50,000 troops] were casualties by the summer of 1915. France could lose a million men in 1915. Australia couldn't afford to lose anything like that number. Australians were innocents when it came to war ...
"Without Anzac Day, the nation's response to war might have been consumed by anger and hatred. Too much death, too soon ... and people might have turned from war in revulsion."
