Reflections
on War
Chris Hedges' Speech to AFSC's Annual Public Gathering
Nov. 6,
2004
Paul Lacey introduces Mary Ellen McNish and audience
Mary Ellen
introduces Chris Hedges, the speaker.
We have a very distinguished journalist with us this afternoon,
Chris Hedges. He's going to bring us provocative messages about
war and how people respond to it. Your program has a list of some
of his accomplishments as a journalist and as a writer, but I want
to tell you about some of the things that are not listed there.
His father was a Presbyterian minister who fought in World War
II; after that he became a pacifist. Both parents were social activists
involved in the anti-war and civil rights and gay rights movement.
Chris has said in interviews that when he was a boy he saw the cost
to his father of taking a moral stand on issues in a small town
where they lived in upstate New York. Taking a stand is often unpopular
and can make your life very difficult.
Chris received a Masters of Divinity from Harvard Divinity School
where he was propelled to become a war correspondent out of a sense
of justice. He worked as a war correspondent for 15 years for the
New York Times, the Dallas Morning News, Christian Science Monitor,
and National Public Radio. He first covered the war in El Salvador
staying there for five years and then moved to Nicaragua.
After leaving Central America he went to the Middle East and took
a sabbatical to study Arabic. Chris also covered the civil wars
in the Sudan, Algeria, and Yemen. During the Persian Gulf War Chris
spent time with Kurdish fighters in the north of Iraq and later
was captured by the Iraqi Republican Guard in the south when he
was with the Shiite rebels.
In 1995, Chris was in Sarajevo and Kosovo during the hostilities
in the Balkans. He does not describe himself as a pacifist. He admits
he's drawn to war and calls it an addiction, an intoxication. His
two books are clear about the dangers of war to the human personality.
War is a disease that in war time infects and destroys individuals
and societies. I'll stop here and let Chris tell us what I think
is going to be some very important messages.
Chris Hedges
Thank you very much for inviting me. I think that communities
such as yours, communities that have a concern about issues of faith,
issues of social justice, issues of peace and war are going to be
vitally important in the next four years. Before I begin my talk
I want to say a little bit about that, especially after the election
that we have suffered through.
I got up on the morning of November 3rd, depressed and distraught
because I believe that much of what I and perhaps many of you in
this room care about have seemed to have taken a severe body blow.
And I think that it's important that we not let that body blow diminish
the efforts to organize and resist what is clearly going to be an
escalation of the war in Iraq, and I think perhaps as frighteningly,
a renewed intolerance towards difference as manifested by the ideology
of the Christian Right.
I am writing an article for Harpers and my way to respond to this
election on the third was to lock myself in my room to finish it.
It is entitled "The Christian Right and the Rise of American
Fascism." And I think we have to begin to name these forces
for what they are and stand up against them just as I think that
we have to make a renewed effort to counter the myth, the romance,
the lies that are being told and disseminate it throughout this
country, especially to our young about war.
So it is a great privilege to be here. I think all of us have
important work ahead. I encourage you to find sustenance in your
community and your faith but not let go of the extremely important
work. Because I do believe, especially if we suffer again acts of
domestic terrorism, that what is at stake is far more than the rule
by a radical party at this point that is embraced in an intolerant
ideology, but perhaps the very subversion of the open society that
we care so deeply about.
I have, as you heard, spent most of my adult life in war. I began
two decades ago covering wars in Central America, I spent five years
in the Middle East, I spent seven in the Balkans, where as Mary
Ellen mentioned, I covered the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo. My life
has been marred, let me say deformed, by the organized industrial
violence that year after year was an intimate part of my existence.
I have watched young men bleed to death on lonely Central American
dirt roads and cobble stone squares in Sarajevo. I have looked into
the eyes of mothers keening over the lifeless and mutilated bodies
of their children and I have stood in warehouses with rows of corpses,
including children and breathed death into my lungs. I carry within
me the ghosts of those I worked with my comrades now gone.
War has found me, found us out again. We have blundered into nations
we know little about, caught between bitter rivalry as between competing
ethnic and religious groups and we have embarked on an occupation
in Iraq that is as damaging to our souls as it is to our prestige
and power and security. We have become tyrants to others weaker
than ourselves and we believe falsely that because we have the capacity to
wage war we have the right to wage war. Once you master a
people by force you depend on force for control. Isolation always
impairs judgment and we are very isolated now.
In Antigone, the king imposes his will without listening to those
he rules and dooms himself. Thucydides wrote of Athens' expanding
empire and how this empire led it to become a tyrant abroad and
then a tyrant at home. The tyranny Athens imposed on others, it
finally imposed on itself. The lust for war, the desire for profits
led the Athenians to lose sight of democratic ideals, ideals that
are their legacy to us and should be our legacy to others. We are
fed images and slogans that perpetuate fantasies about our own invulnerability,
our own might, our own goodness, and these illusions blind us. We
cannot see ourselves as others see us. We have fed the heart on
fantasies. William Butler Yeates wrote, "The heart's grown
brutal from the fare."
It is 1967 in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and we have become
Israel. Our empire has expanded and in this we have become piranhas.
We are propelled forward, not by logic or compassion or understanding,
but by fear. We have created and live in a world where violence
is the primary form of communication and we have built an alliance
against terror with Ariel Sharon and Vladimir Putin, two men who
do not shrink from gratuitous and senseless killing in the Israeli
occupied territories and Chechnya. And those who are not with us,
and few are with us now, we ridicule and belittle and condemn. We
have become the company we keep. Much of the world, certainly the
Muslim world, one-fifth of the world's population, most of whom
I remind you are not Arab, see us through the prism of Iraq,
Palestine, and Chechnya. And this prism is one that is igniting
the dispossessed and deteriorating by the hour our security and
safety.
The attacks on the World Trade Center illustrate that those who
oppose us, rather than coming from another moral universe have been
schooled well in modern warfare. The dramatic explosions, the fireballs,
the victims plummeting to their deaths, the collapse of the Towers
in Manhattan, were straight out of Hollywood. Where else, but from
the industrialized world, did the suicide bombers learn that huge
explosions and death above a city skyline are a peculiar and effective
form of communication? They have mastered the language we taught
them. They understand that the use of indiscriminate violence against
innocence is a way to make a statement.
We leave the same calling cards. We delivered such incendiary
messages in Vietnam, Serbia, Afghanistan, and now Iraq. It was Secretary
of Defense Robert McNamara, who in the summer of 1965 defined the
bombing raids that would kill hundreds of thousands of civilians
north of Saigon as a means of communication to the Communist regime
in Hanoi.
The seduction of war is insidious. It appears to be a way to eradicate
our enemies, to banish from the world of the living those who would
do us harm. At a time when we are afraid it gives us a false sense
of power and security. Of course, we do not see the war in Iraq.
The press always masks the essence of war and death from public
view. The coverage is presented as a game, as entertainment. Commentators
on the cable news channels rival in the power and might of our weaponry
and by extension, our own power. We watch neatly packaged video
clips fed to the press by the war makers and we are spared the pools
of blood, the agony of the dying on the other end. It is clean,
and neat, and tidy, and wildly out of context.
There is the technological capacity to show us war. We could have
watched live footage of a young Iraqi soldier with his legs blown
off with an anti-tank mine dying in the sand, something I saw in
the Persian-Gulf War. But such coverage would hardly boost ratings,
hardly make us to want to wage war and so we are fed the myth. The
myth the press almost always feeds us in war time and (the reality
we are) kept from seeing.
There is no more candor in Iraq or Afghanistan than there was
in Vietnam, but in the age of live satellite feeds the military
has perfected the appearance of candor. For the myth of war, the
myth of glory and honor, sells newspapers and boosts ratings real
war reporting does not. Look at CNN, FOX, and MSNBC. Nearly every
embedded correspondent sees his or her mission as sustaining civilian
and army morale. The identification of reporters with the units
they cover is insipid, and dangerous, but also usual, for in war
the press is always part of the problem.
In war time, as Senator Hiram Johnson reminded us in 1917, "truth
is the first casualty." We have lost touch with the essence
of war. After our defeat in Vietnam, we became a better nation.
We were humbled, even humiliated. We asked questions about ourselves
we had not asked before. We were forced to see ourselves as others
saw us and the sight was not an attractive one. We were forced to
confront our own capacity for atrocity, for evil, and in this we
understood not only war, but ourselves.
But this humility is gone. The good name of war has been resurrected.
It began under President Reagan in Grenada and Panama, and culminated
in the Persian Gulf War. We have been led to believe, in the same
way the doomed empires of the late 19th century believed, that our
technology makes us invulnerable. A lie sadly unmasked, as I speak
today, in the streets of Fallujah.
War is the pornography of violence. It has a dark beauty, filled
with the monstrous and the grotesque. The Bible calls it "the
lust of the eye" and warns believers against it. War gives
us a distorted sense of self. It gives us meaning. It creates
a feeling of comradeship that obliterates our alienation and makes
us feel, for perhaps the first time in our lives, that we belong.
War allows us to rise above our small stations in life, to find
nobility in the cause, feelings of selflessness, even bliss.
Once in a conflict, the shallowness of much of our lives becomes
apparent; the fruitless search to find fulfillment in the acquisition
of things and wealth and power is laid bare. The trivia that dominates
our airwaves is exposed as empty chatter. War allows us to engage
in lusts and passions we keep hidden in the deepest, most private
interiors of our fantasy life. It allows us to destroy not only
things but human beings, and in that moment of wholesale destruction,
we wield the power of the divine, the power to revoke another person's
charter to live on this earth.
The frenzy of this destruction-and when unit discipline breaks
down or there was no unit discipline to begin with, frenzy is the
right word-sees armed bands crazed by the poisonous elixir our power
to bring about the obliteration of others delivers. All things,
including human beings, become objects, objects to either gratify
or destroy or both. Almost no one is immune. The contagion of the
crowd sees to that.
"Force," Simone Weil writes, "is as pitiless to
the man who possesses it, or thinks he does, as it is to its victims;
the second it crushes, the first it intoxicates." And those
who have the least meaning in their lives-the impoverished Palestinian
refugees in Gaza, the disenfranchised North African immigrants in
France, even the legions of youth in the splendid indolence and
safety of the industrialized world-are all susceptible to war's
appeal.
I do not miss war, but I miss what it brought. I could never say
I was happy in the fighting in El Salvador or Bosnia or Kosova,
but I had a sense of purpose. This is a quality war shares with
love, for we are also able to choose fealty and self-sacrifice over
security for those we love. This is why war, at its inception, always
looks and feels like love, the chief emotion war destroys. We are
tempted, maybe even encouraged, to reduce life to a simple search
for happiness. Happiness, however, withers if there is no meaning.
The other temptation is to disavow the search for happiness in
order to be faithful to that which provides meaning. But to live
only for meaning, indifferent to all happiness, makes us fanatic,
self-righteous, and cold. It leaves us cut off from our own humanity
and the humanity of others.
The ancient Greeks understood the perverse attraction between
love and death in war time. When Achilles killed Penthesilea, the
queen of the Amazons, in the Trojan War, he fell in love with her
as she expired on the battlefield. He murdered love, and once he
murdered love, he himself was doomed. He courted death. Aphrodite,
the goddess of love, had an illicit affair with Aries, the god of
war, who was hated by all the other gods with the exception of the
god of the underworld, to whom he steadily brought new souls.
We feel, in war time, comradeship. We confuse this with friendship,
with love. There are those who will insist that the comradeship
of war is love, the ecstatic glow that makes us, in war, feel as
one people, one entity, is real. But this is part of war's intoxication.
Think back on the days after the attacks of 9/11. Suddenly, we no
longer felt alone. We connected with strangers, even with people
we did not like. We felt we belonged, that we were somehow wrapped
in the embrace of the nation, the community. In short, we no longer
felt alienated. As this feeling dissipated in the weeks after the
attack, there was a nostalgia for its warm glow. War time always
brings with it this comradeship, which is the opposite of friendship.
Friends, as J. Glenn Gray points out in his book "The
Warriors: Reflections on Men in Battle," are predetermined.
Friendship takes place between men and women who possess an intellectual
and emotional affinity for each other. And many of us will admit
that we never really had a friend, and even the most fortunate
of us have very few.
But comradeship, that ecstatic bliss that comes with belonging
to the crowd in war time, is within our reach. We can all have comrades.
The danger, the external threat that comes when we have an enemy,
does not create friendship, it creates comradeship. And those in
war time are deceived about what they are undergoing. This is why
once the war ends these comrades again become strangers to us. This
is why, after war, we fall into despair.
In friendship, there is a deepening of our sense of self. We become,
through the friend, more aware of who we are and what we are about.
We find ourselves in the eyes of the friend. Friends probe and question
and challenge each other to make each more complete. They draw the
secrets out of us and know our inner core of being. For we reach
and change others, and we ourselves are changed when we plunge to
the depths of our inner life, the depths that expose our insecurities,
our incompleteness, those depths that often lie beyond articulation.
In comradeship, the kind that comes to us in patriotic fervor,
there is a suppression of self-awareness, self-knowledge, self-possession.
Comrades lose their identities in war time for the collective rush
of a common cause, a common purpose. In comradeship, life is ecstatic
and corporate, as opposed to friendship, where life is singular
and individual.
In comradeship, Gray reminds us, there are no demands on the self.
This is part of its appeal and one of the reasons we miss it and
seek to recreate it. This is why once the war is over, once the
danger that linked us together is past, these feelings are instantly
extinguished.
Sebastian Haffner, who was a lawyer in Nazi Germany, wrote of
this comradeship in his book "Defying Hitler." He noted
that comradeship destroys the sense of responsibility for oneself,
be it civilian or, worse still, the religious sense. Comradeship
always sets the cultural tone at the lowest possible level accessible
to everyone, he wrote. It cannot tolerate discussion. In the chemical
solution of comradeship, discussion immediately takes on the color
of whining and grumbling. It becomes a mortal sin. Comradeship admits
no thoughts, just mass feelings of the most primitive sort. These,
on the other hand, are inescapable. To try and evade them is to
put oneself beyond the pale. In war time, when we feel threatened,
we no longer face death alone, but as a group. And this makes death
easier to bear. We ennoble and self sacrifice for the other, for
the comrade. In short, we begin to worship death, and this is what
the god of war demands from us.
Think, finally, of what it means to die for a friend. It is deliberate
and painful. There is no ecstasy. For friends, dying is hard and
bitter. The dialogue they have and cherish will perhaps never be
recreated. Friends do not, the way comrades do, love death and sacrifice.
To friends, the prospect of death is frightening and this is why
friendship-or let me say, love-is the most potent enemy of war.
We do not see war in the images of war presented to us in films
and novels, nor in the mythic narratives the government and the
press spins out for us. We do not see war in the televised images
from Iraq. The war is carefully packaged, the way tobacco or liquor
companies package their own poisons. The titillation is there, but
always in doses we can digest. The reports give us war that has
a coherency and logic it never has in battle. We taste a bit of
war's exhilaration, but are safe.
War from Iraq is seen through the prism of the U.S. military,
and it comes complete with manufactured heroes, feel-good stories
about our own, and an enemy that is always painted as barbaric and
uncivilized. We can thrill in the perversity of war even as we watch
films or read books that are meant to denounce war. It is almost
impossible to produce antiwar films or documentaries that also present
images of battle. It is like trying to condemn pornography while
showing erotic love scenes. The prurient fascination with violent
death always overpowers the message. War has become part of the
modern industrial landscape. Indeed, its tools are often the cutting
edge of technology.
By World War I, we had created ways in which thousands of people,
who never saw their attackers, could die in an instant. And weapons
that carry out this impersonal mass slaughter are beautiful. They
are crafted, sleek, and harbor within them awesome power. The machines
of war-the planes, the tanks, the heavy machine guns, the huge,
hulking howitzers and the helicopters-are pieces of art. I have
seen them at work. They are angels of death, streaking through the
sky. I was with a unit of guerrillas in El Salvador when some Huey
helicopters raced in over a lake to hunt us down. We hid in the
ruins of an abandoned village, darting from wall to wall, standing
with our backs to the shattered bricks, so our hunters could not
see us as they passed low overhead. As I looked up at these machines
that were trying to kill me, I found them seductive.
Once in a conflict, once we live in the midst of fighting, we
are moved from the abstract to the real, from the mythic to the
sensory. No soldier, after a few seconds of combat, believes in
the myth of war anymore. And this is why wounded marines jeered
John Wayne when he visited them in a hospital in World War II. When
this move takes place, we have nothing to do with a world not at
war. The world, when we return to it, is viewed from the end of
a very long tunnel. There, they still believe. There, they do not
understand. We feel different, wiser, greater. This experience
is so overpowering that, if we can control our fear, we go back
to seek it out again. War is addictive. Indeed, it is the most
potent narcotic invented by humankind.
The first time I was in an ambush was in the Salvadoran town of
Suchitoto. It was a dreary peasant outpost made up of stucco and
mud and wattle huts off the main road. The town was surrounded by
the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front rebels, who, when
I arrived in El Salvador, were winning the war. The government forces
kept a small garrison in the town, although its relief columns were
frequently ambushed as they ambled down the small strip of asphalt,
surrounded by high grass. It was one of the most dangerous spots
in the country.
The rebels launched an attack to take the town. A convoy of reporters
in cars marked with "TV" in masking tape on the windshields
high-tailed it to the small bridge that led to the lonely stretch
of road into Suchitoto. Then we moved slowly down the road, the
odd round fired ahead or behind us. We made it to the edge of town,
where we ran into rebel units, now accustomed to the follies of
the press. On foot we moved through the deserted streets. The firing
from the garrison became louder as we weaved our way with rebel
units to the siege that had been set up. Then, as I rounded a corner,
several full bursts of automatic fire rent the air. Bullets hit
the mud wall behind me. We dove onto the dirt. Rebels began to fire
noisy rounds from their M-16 assault rifles. The scent of cordite
filled the air. Rebels around me were wounded and crying out in
pain. One died yelling, in a sad cadence for his mother. His desperate
and final plea cutting through the absurd posturing of soldiering.
At first, his cries haunted me. Soon, I just wished he would be
quiet.
The firefight seemed to go on for an eternity. I cannot say how
long I lay there. It could have been a few minutes. It could have
been an hour. Here was war, real war, sensory war, not the war of
the movies and novels I had consumed in my youth. It was horrifying,
confusing, numbing, and nothing like the myth I had been peddled.
I realized at once that it controlled me. I would never control
it. In a lull, I made a dash across an empty square to find shelter
behind a house. My heart was racing. Adrenaline coursed through
my bloodstream. I was safe.
I made it back to the capital. And, like most war correspondents,
soon considered the experience a great cosmic joke. I drank away
the fear in a seedy bar in downtown San Salvador that night. Most
people, after such an experience, would learn to stay away. I was
hooked. Drawn into the world of war, it becomes hard to escape.
It perverts and destroys you. It pushes you closer and closer to
your own annihilation-spiritual, emotional and, finally, physical.
I covered the war in El Salvador from 1983 to 1988. By the end,
I had a nervous twitch in my face. I was evacuated three times by
the U.S. embassy because of tips that the death squads planned to
kill me. Yet, each time, I came back. I accepted with a grim fatalism
that I would be killed in El Salvador. I could not articulate why
I accepted my own destruction and cannot now. There came to be a
part of me, maybe it is a part of all of us, which decided I would
rather die like this than go back to the dull routine.
During the war in El Salvador, I worked with a photographer who
covered the war, had a slew of close calls, and then called it quits.
He moved to Miami and took pictures for one of the newsweeklies.
But life in Florida was flat, dull, uninteresting. He could not
adjust and soon came back. From the moment he stepped off the plane
it was clear: He had returned to die. Just as there are some soldiers
or war correspondents that seem to us immortal and whose loss comes
as a sobering reminder that death has no favorites, there are also
those in war who are locked in a grim embrace with death from which
they cannot escape. He was frightening to behold, a walking corpse.
He was shot through the back in a firefight and died in less than
a minute.
Sigmund Freud divided the forces in human nature between the Eros
instinct, the impulse within us that propels us to become close
to others, to preserve and conserve, and the Thanatos, or death
instinct, the impulse that works toward the annihilation of all
living things, including ourselves. For Freud, these forces were
in eternal conflict. He was, therefore, pessimistic about eradicating
war. All human history, he argued, and civilization and its discontents,
is a tug-of-war between these two instincts.
Taste enough of war and you come to believe the stoics were right.
We will, in the end, all consume ourselves in a vast conflagration.
There is a constant search in war to find new perversities, new
forms of death when the initial flush fades a rear guard and finally
a futile effort to ward off the boredom of routine death. This is
way we would drive into towns in Bosnia and find bodies crucified
on the sides of barns, or decapitated and mutilated. This is way
those slain in combat are treated as trophies belonging to the killers
turned into grotesque pieces of performance art. I know soldiers
that to this day carry in their wallets the identity cards of men
they know they killed. They take them everywhere. They show them
to you with the imploring look of a lost child. They will never
understand. The job of killing allows our senses to command our
bodies. The killing with spiders into greater orgies of destruction,
hedonism, and perversion spirals out of control. The comradeship
of war, actively works to stomp out all feelings, of love, of tenderness,
for love alone shields us. The most important part of the individual
life which cannot be subsumed in communal life is love, Haffner
wrote. So comradeship has its special weapon against love, smut.
Every evening in bed, after the last patrol round, there was the
ritual reciting of lurid song and jokes. This is hard and fast rule
of neocomradship and nothing is more mistaken than the widely held
opinion that this is a safety valve for frustrated erotic or sexually
feelings. These songs and jokes do not have an erotic arousing effect.
On the contrary, they make the act of love appear as unappetizing
as possible. They treat it like digestion and defecation and make
it an object of ridicule. The men who recite three lurid songs and
use coarse words for female body parts were in effect denying that
they ever had tender feelings or had been in love. That they had
ever made themselves attractive, behaved gently, and used sweet
words for these same parts. They were rough, tough, and above such
civilized tenderness.
In war we deform ourselves, our essence. We give up individual
conscious, maybe even consciousness for the contagion of the crowd,
the rush of patriotism, the belief that we must stand together as
a nation in moments of extremity. The normal order is turned upside
down. Better to give yourself up to the lust of war, to make a moral
choice, to defy war's enticement; to defend love can be self-destructive.
In the rise to power we always become smaller.
Power absorbs us and once power is obtained we are its pawn. As
in Shakespeare's Richard III the all powerful prince who molded
the world, we fall prey to the forces we thought we had harnessed.
Love may not always triumph but it keeps us human. It offers the
only chance to escape from the contagion of war. Perhaps it is the
only antidote and there are times when remaining human is the only
victory possible. When the mask of war slips away and the rot and
corruption is uncovered, when it turns sour and rank, when the myth
is exposed as a fraud, we feel soiled and spent, it is then that
we sink into despair.
In the Arab/Israeli 1973 War, almost a third of all Israeli casualties
were due to psychiatric causes and the war lasted only a few days.
A World War II study determined that after sixty days of continuous
combat, 98% of all surviving soldiers will have become psychiatric
casualties. The study found that a common trait among the 2 percent
who were able to endure a sustained combat was a predisposition
towards "aggressive psychopathic personalities." During
the war in El Salvador soldiers could serve in the army for three
or four years or longer, virtually until they psychologically or
physically collapsed. In garrison towns commanders banned the sale
of sedatives because of the abuse by troops.
In this war, the emotionally maimed were common. I once interviewed
a nineteen year old Salvadoran army sergeant who had spent five
years fighting and suddenly lost his vision after his unit walked
into a rebel ambush. The rebels killed 11 soldiers in the fire fight
including his closest friend. A couple dozen soldiers were wounded.
He was unable to see again until he was placed in the army hospital. "I
have these horrible headaches," he told me, sitting on the
edge of his bed. "There is shrapnel in my head. I keep telling
the doctors to take it out."
But the doctors told me he had no head wounds. I saw other soldiers
in other conflicts go deaf or stop speaking or simply shake without
being able to stop.
War is necrophilia. This necrophilia is central to soldiering
just as it is central to the makeup of suicide bombers and terrorists.
The necrophilia is hidden under platitudes about duty or comradeship.
It waits, especially in moments when we seem to have little to live
for and no hope, or in moments when the intoxication of war is at
its pitch, to be unleashed. When we spend long enough in war it
comes to us as a kind of release, a fatal and seductive embrace
that can consummate the long flirtation with our own destruction.
In Milovan Djilas's memoir of the partisan war in Yugoslavia,
he wrote of the enticement death held for the combatants. He stood
over the body of his comrade, the Commander Sava Kovaèeviæ,
and found
"Dying did not seem terrible or unjust. This was the most
extraordinary, the most exultant moment of my life: Death did not
seem strange or undesirable. That I restrained myself from charging
blindly into the fray and death, was perhaps due to my sense of
obligation to the troops, or to some comrade's reminder concerning
the tasks at hand. In my memory I return to those moments many times,
with the same feeling of intimacy with death and desire for it,
while I was in prison, especially during my first incarceration."
War ascendant wipes out Eros. It wipes out delicacy and tenderness.
And this is why those in war swing from rank sentimentality to perversion,
with little in between.
A year after the war in Sarajevo, I sat with Bosnian friends who
had suffered horribly. A young woman, Ljiljana, had lost her father,
a Serb, who refused to join the besieging Serb forces around the
city. She had been forced a few days earlier to identify his corpse.
The body was lifted, the water running out of the sides of a rotting
coffin, from a small park for reburial in the central cemetery.
She was emigrating to Australia soon-where she told me, "I
will marry a man who has never heard of this war and raise children
that will be told nothing about it, nothing about the country I
am from."
Ljiljana was young, but the war had exacted a toll. Her cheeks
were hollow, her hair dry and brittle. Her teeth were decayed; some
had broken into jagged bits. She had no money for a dentist. She
hoped to fix them in Australia. Yet, all she and her friends did
that afternoon was lament the days when they lived in fear and hunger,
emaciated, targeted by Serb gunners on the heights above. They did
not wish back the suffering and yet, they admitted, these may have
been the fullest days of their lives. They looked at me in despair.
I knew them when they were being pounded by hundreds of shells
a day, when they had no water to bathe in or wash their clothes,
when they huddled in unheated apartments, as sniper bullets hit
the walls outside. But what they expressed was real. It was the
disillusionment with a sterile, futile, and empty present. Peace
had again peeled back the void that the rush of war of battle had
filled. Once again they were, as perhaps we all are, alone, no longer
bound by that common sense of struggle, no longer given the opportunity
to be noble, heroic, no longer sure of what life was about or what
it meant.
The old comradeship, however false, that allowed them to love
men and women they hardly knew, had vanished with the last shot.
Moreover, they had seen that all the sacrifice had been for naught.
They had been, as we all are in war, betrayed. The corrupt old Communist
Party bosses, who became nationalists overnight and got them into
the mess in the first place, had grown rich off their suffering,
and were still in power. There was a 70% unemployment rate. They
depended on handouts from the international community. They understood
that their cause, once as fashionable in certain intellectual circles
as they were themselves, lay forgotten. No longer did actors, politicians,
and artists scramble to visit during the cease fires, acts that
were almost always ones of gross self-promotion. They knew the lie
of war, the mockery of their idealism and struggled with their shattered
illusions. And yet, they wished it all back, and I did too.
A year later I received a Christmas card. It was signed "Ljiljana
from Australia." It had no return address. I never heard from
her again.
But many of those I worked with as war correspondents during the
past two decades did not escape. They could not break free from
the dance with death. They wandered from conflict to conflict, seeking
always one more hit. By then I was back in Gaza and found myself
pinned down in another ambush. A young Palestinian 15 feet away
was shot through the chest and killed. I had been lured back but
now felt none of the old rush, just fear. It was time to break free,
to let go, to accept that none of this would or could or should
return. I knew then that it was over. I was lucky to get out alive.
Kurt Schork, brilliant, courageous and driven, could not let go.
He died in an ambush in Sierra Leone, along with another friend,
Miguel Gil Morano. His entrapment, his embrace of Thanatos of the
death instinct was never mentioned in the sterile and antiseptic
memorial service staged for him in Washington. Everyone tiptoed
around it, but for those of us who knew him we understood that he
had been consumed. I had worked with Kurt for ten years, starting
in northern Iraq. Literate, funny-it seems the brave are often funny-he
and I passed books back and forth in our struggle to make sense
of the madness around us. His loss is a hole that will never be
filled. His ashes were placed in Lion's Cemetery in Sarajevo for
the victims of the war.
I flew to Sarajevo and met the British documentary filmmaker Dan
Reed. It was an overcast November day. We stood over the grave and
downed a pint of whiskey. Dan lit a candle. I recited a poem the
Roman lyric poet Catullus had written to honor his dead brother.
By strangers' coasts and waters, many days at sea,
I come here for the rites of your unworlding,
Bringing for you, the dead, these last gifts of the living
And my words-vain sounds for the man of dust.
Alas, my brother,
You have been taken from me. You have been taken from me,
By cold chance turned a shadow, and my pain.
Here are the foods of the old ceremony, appointed
Long ago for the starvelings under the earth:
Take them: your brother's tears have made them wet; and take
Into eternity my hail and my farewell.
It was there, among a few thousand war dead, that Kurt belonged.
He died because he could not free himself from war. He was trying
to replicate what he had found in Sarajevo. But he could not. War
could never be new again. Kurt had been in East Timor and Chechnya.
Sierra Leone, I was sure, meant nothing to him. Kurt and Miguel
could not let go. They would be the first to admit it. Spend long
enough at war and you cannot fit in anywhere else. It finally kills
you. It is not a new story. It starts out like love, but it is death.
War is the beautiful young nymph in the fairy tale that when kissed
exhales the vapors of the underworld. The ancient Greeks had a word
for such a fate-ekpyrosis. It means, "to be consumed
by a ball of fire." And they used it to describe heroes.
Thank you.
^ Top of page |
 |
Search site
|