(HEROC) declared the actions of the Australian government to be immoral, and in some circumstances, illegal (appendix D). For many people in Australia today, this case epitomises the mistreatment of the Aboriginal community, as their attempts at legal action rarely see success against the legal might of the Australian government, as well as the British, as, despite Australia gaining its independence in 1901, “the power of the British Crown to disallow Australian legislation remains in our Constitution although it would seem politically impossible to invoke it” . The case is not black and white, as a government study (appendix E) found higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse and smoking with consequent disproportionate representation of Aboriginal people in the criminal justice system. There is therefore some legitimate reason for children being removed from their parents, as supported by Keith Windschuttle in his book The Fabrication of Aboriginal History Volume 3: The Stolen Generations 1881–2008 – “My conclusion is that not only is the charge of genocide unwarranted, but so is the term ‘Stolen Generations’. Aboriginal children were never removed from their families in order to put an end to Aboriginality or, indeed, to serve any improper government policy or program. The small numbers of Aboriginal child removals in the twentieth century were almost all based on traditional grounds of child welfare” (8).

On some occasions, European tensions extended to the South Pacific. During the first and second Samoan civil wars, British, American and German naval contingents were sent to the area to protect colonial interests, and attempt to take control of Samoa by actively supported differing factions. On several occasions, warships shelled settlements, causing a huge deal of damage, and raids occurred upon both European and indigenous assets. (9) Eventually, the Samoan islands were divided between America and Germany, in exchange for Germany terminating their rights in Tonga and all of the Solomon Islands south of Bougainville. From a modern perspective, it can only be considered inappropriate for European navies to engage in war against the significantly less well-armed villagers, who still carried spears, resulting in significant loss of life for political advantage