Award-winning journalist Chris Masters has criticized the Australian War Memorial after it overruled its own judges to exclude his book on alleged war criminal Ben Roberts-Smith from its biennial literary prize. The memorial justified its decision by retrospectively altering the rules to disqualify Masters’ book, Flawed Hero.
On Friday, The Guardian reported that Masters’ work, which delves into Roberts-Smith’s actions in Afghanistan and the subsequent efforts by fellow soldiers to hold him accountable, was initially chosen as the winner of the Les Carlyon award for military history. This decision was made by a panel of external judges after the book was shortlisted by memorial staff.
Controversy Surrounding the Decision
The story Masters presents has been central to a long-standing legal battle between the newspapers The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald and Roberts-Smith. Last week, the High Court dismissed Roberts-Smith’s final attempt to appeal his defamation loss. Masters expressed disbelief at the decision, suggesting it was made out of embarrassment over the Roberts-Smith episode.
“I can’t believe the decision wasn’t done out of embarrassment… Clearly they’ve been extremely uncomfortable with the Ben Roberts-Smith episode,” Masters stated.
Masters further explained that the institution appears divided, with historians within the memorial sharing his view that war reveals both the worst and best in humanity. However, he noted that the memorial often avoids confronting the uncomfortable aspects of war, particularly the Roberts-Smith controversy.
Background and Institutional Dynamics
The Les Carlyon Literary Prize, established by the Australian War Memorial’s council, honors the late historian and journalist Les Carlyon. Since its inception in 2020, the prize has been awarded biennially. Initially, it was intended for an author’s first book or major publication, but the eligibility criteria were expanded in 2022 to include established authors, following a request from Carlyon’s widow, Denise, who serves as one of the prize’s external judges.
Despite this change, the memorial’s governing council overturned the judges’ decision to award the prize to Masters, reverting to the original rules that only first-time authors were eligible. This decision effectively excluded Masters, who has authored several books.
“A controversial and sobering story, Masters’ long search for truth behind alleged war crimes by Ben Roberts-Smith is unprecedented in our military history,” Denise Carlyon wrote in an email to the memorial’s director, Matt Anderson.
Implications and Future Considerations
The Australian War Memorial released a statement acknowledging inconsistencies in the advertisements for the 2024 submissions, which led to confusion about the eligibility criteria. The council has committed to a full governance review to ensure integrity and transparency in future competitions. They plan to proceed with the 2026 competition once these issues are resolved.
Masters, while relieved that the decision has come to light, expressed his disappointment over the situation. He emphasized the importance of truth in military history, noting that soldiers need accurate accounts of conflicts to understand the realities they face.
“It’s just so sad that they take this bloody stupid attitude,” Masters commented. “Soldiers are the last people who want lies to be told about what actually happens in conflict.”
This development highlights ongoing tensions within the Australian War Memorial and raises questions about how institutions handle controversial subjects in military history. As the memorial moves forward with its governance review, the literary community and public will be watching closely to see how these changes impact future awards and the broader discourse on military history.
