Public on WarPosted: February 2, 2016
If I was to choose a topic for Oral history project it would be about shifts in public perception of governmental strategy in the Middle East in the 2000-es. I would like to explore the range of viewpoints across the society groups -“then” and “now”.
Some of the results of the Labour international policy have had lasting legacy and sparked public’ debates of the UK role and place in the world political affairs, freedom of information and the nature of the relationships between the political establishment and the public. The whole concept of modern war has been reviewed in terms of legitimacy and national interests, identification of the front-line, notion of modern “enemy” and the validity of the “winning” criteria, exposing deep dissatisfaction with the official outline of the UK involvement in military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ongoing mass-digitalisation made possible, for the first time in modern history, to question actions and motives behind governmental decision-making and the state of leadership on a wider scale. For many ordinary people the feelings of being manipulated, alienated from the political process and denied their right for active citizenship prevailed, providing grounds for the alternative discourse which challenges official grand-narrative in the interpretation of events.
For the families of the servicemen, especially those who were wounded and killed in the actions or suffered PSD, those events became life-changing and I believe that their oral accounts hold an important ethical, historical and social value. The society paid high cost and the wounds have not been healed yet partly because of the alleged “cover up” of the inquiry. The oral history project would possibly allow to bring personal opinions to the surface to validate our recent past.