In 1914, most of Germany’s Pacific colonies were administered by German New Guinea – the northern half of the country now called Papua New Guinea. The southern half - Papua - was an Australian colony.

During the Versailles Treaty negotiations in 1919, Japan expected to take over German New Guinea. However, Australia’s Prime Minister Billy Hughes worked with United States President Woodrow Wilson to deny Japan gaining all German colonies in the Pacific.

Japan was successful in gaining former German Pacific colonies north of the equator (including in China) but German New Guinea became a League of Nations mandate to Australia. German Samoa was given to New Zealand.

While there were significant financial and other obligations on Australia from taking on special responsibilities for German New Guinea, Billy Hughes argued these were justified by broader security interests - a prescient vision which should not be forgotten.

The implications of a Japanese New Guinea from 1919 are now impossible to ascertain but Australian history would almost certainly read differently.

The islands Japan gained in the Pacific after World War I were important for its advance throughout Asia in World War II. For example, Kwajalein Atoll supported the attack on Pearl Harbour, Palau the invasion of the Philippines, Saipan the Battle of Guam, Truk assisted Japan take Rabaul and the Gilbert Islands – now Kiribati and Jaluit Atoll - were helpful in seizing Nauru.

If Japan had gained German New Guinea it would have, over the next 20 years, established supply lines and fortifications right up to the Australian New Guinea (Papuan) border.

The outcomes along the Kokoda track, despite the extraordinary courage shown by Australian soldiers, would have been much more uncertain and a loss more likely.

A land-based invasion of Port Moresby – possibly much earlier in the war - could have quickly established a base for extensive bombing and other attacks across northern Queensland.

A naval base in Rabaul, fortified by Japan during the 1920s and 1930s, could also have changed the outcome of important engagements like the Battle of the Coral Sea.

And with an ally of Germany and Italy having a colony so close to Australia, probably fewer of our troops would have been sent to Europe and the Middle East in 1939.

Australia’s current approach to Papua New Guinea, perhaps we can call it “benign neglect” but possibly something worse, is of strategic concern as China extends its influence in the region.

Since PNG gained independence from Australia in 1975, we have cut back our assistance to only one-quarter of previous levels in per capita terms (based on 2016 prices). These cutbacks are a primary cause of the reduction in health and educational services that see PNG’s human development ranking continue to fall.

For most Papua New Guineans, there has been little development over the last 41 years. An estimated three million people live in absolute poverty.

An election is underway in PNG with writs issued on 20 April, but the forthcoming ballot is affected by the steady erosion of democratic rights by the increasingly autocratic government of Peter O’Neill.

While there is international concern about new Chinese bases in the South China Sea, an even greater concern would be for another foreign power to gain effective control of a major base in PNG. The consequences of not securing our region could be catastrophic.

The Fuzzy Wuzzy Angels assisting our wounded troops remains a symbol of Australia’s indebtedness to the people of Papua New Guinea. There are many lessons from the courage displayed along the Kokoda Track in 1942.

But possibly the key lesson is the importance of having another Australian prime minister, like Billy Hughes, who is willing to take the risk and commit the resources to help secure our strategic interests in the region.

Australia’s current approach towards our very near neighbour PNG, circumscribed by the shame of the Manus Island detention centre, does not display such a wise vision.

Paul Flanagan is Director of Indo-Pacific Public Policy and Economics