Natural Theory of Law in Commonwealth Caribbean

Question: Discuss about theAustralia and the World. Answer: Introduction The author of the present article intends to examine the significance of the Anzac concept, in the light of the past as well as present relation between Australia and New Zealand. Anazac, which is the abbreviated form of the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps, has always been a source of great celebration for both the countries, for signifying the unquestionable solidarity and unity among the troops of the two nations. However, the author of this article critically examines the relation existing between the two nations. The author claims that although the Anazac day is celebrated by both the nations, the sense of unity and mutual support inherent among the troops of both the nations is more than dubious. The authors point is substantiated when he shows how there were differences in opinion, lack of faith and reluctance to collaborate, among the troops of both the nations, in the Truce monitoring Group. The New Zealanders found themselves more reserved and controlled unlike the aggressive Australians, and hence they had differences while formulating a joint strategy (Rankin, 2016). Both the nations had a strong sense of identity, and as such both effused to form a true sense of unity, though they allied with each other, for political reasons. The troops of both the nations had different viewpoints regarding the operational style or the formulation and implementation of the strategies (Kelsey, 2015). The author claims that though the Anazac is a celebrated concept for both the nations, yet there are much untold differences and conflict that underlie the relation between the troops of the two countries. The very remarkable quality that characterizes the article is that the author breaks through and challenges the sense of mutual dependence and unconditional support, with which the Australian and New Zealand army has always been associated. However, it should be remembered that though the author substantiates his perspective by referring to various wars, it is still undeniable that the Anzac legend is an important and inextricable part of the national identity of both the countries (James, 2015). The article shows how cultural differences, can give rise to a lack of a sense of co-operation among the people of various countries. The author draws on how the issues of safety and alacrity were more important to the Australians, while careful planning methods were given priority by the Australians. Even the author also highlights how owing to different cultural backgrounds, the troops of both the nations had altogether different operational styles or strategic outlooks. The author continually emphasizes the cultural conflict that underlined the difference in opinion and attitude of the Australian and New Zealand while execution of a plan. It is important to note that the author makes an excellent contribution to knowledge expansion, by questioning the sense of unity and solidarity associated with the concept of Anzac legend. However, the author did not enlighten the readers on the instances that exhibited the joint efforts and co-operation of the troops of both the countries, and devotes only a single paragraph for the discussion on the same (Shanks et al., 2015). Reference List: James, C. (2015).New territory: the transformation of New Zealand, 198492. Bridget Williams Books. Kelsey, J. (2015).The New Zealand experiment: A world model for structural adjustment?. Bridget Williams Books. Rankin, K. (2016). Australia and New Zealand.Only in Australia: The History, Politics, and Economics of Australian Exceptionalism, 14. Shanks, G.D., Milinovich, G.J., Waller, M. and Clements, A.C.A. (2015). Spatio-temporal investigation of the 1918 influenza pandemic in military populations indicates two different viruses.Epidemiology and infection,143(09), pp.1816-1825.