OCAS 3055 - Unthinking Afghanistan: how to reconsider Master Narratives?

>>> Abstract:

The socalled War on Terror in Afghanistan will be analyzed in this course. What can we learn from it? My course will be a source of insights on what has happened in Afghanistan, and we can we learn from the mistakes.

Overall, the mistakes have resulted in an unnecessary long war – I will explain why the military conflict could have been over in 2002, in a country that actually needed assistance in diplomacy and mediation.(Soft politics).

One of the main reasons behind the failure has to do with information, frames, misinformation and ideology (that leads to assumptions by the West based on misinformation)

For that, as my work in the field showed me, it is also extremely important to understand the powerful and historically unprecedented role of media in shaping the story about the Afghan war. Also, the power relations between mainstream media in the US and their government is stronger in times of war (not only the Afghan war), and this needs to be understood by people working in this environment. Understanding this, makes you – as I call it - source-literate, and makes you an independent thinker in relation to these close-knitted networks. I will help you understand these networks.

This course is a hands-on course where we will use also the Afghan case to teach you how to start working responsibly and ethically (without compromises) in conflict areas. You have created a sharp eye for seeing through narratives, by using tools that give you more neutral and independent insights on what is happening in the field. You at the same time are aware of false reporting or denunciation in relation to an international intervention.

But you are here also to shape your values in work? Will you stay in a job where you are behind high walls, and unable to report or have a neutral idea of what is happening outside? What circumstances do you accept? What minimal access to sources do you need to say something useful in a security analysis? What sources are good to use, and what other sources do you need to be aware off? How do you get grip on so much complexity? Have you embraced that it is complex? How modest can you be, or do you need to be? The focus in the course will be on source-literacy: what do we read, what sources are used, and what does it tell the West audience/policy makers (and what does it not tell) about the Afghan war.

>>> Learning outcomes and skills:

For me the most important thing is that by understanding the Afghan conflict you have developed yourself as an personality that allows wonderment, that sees that not all is known, that is honest, and critical in your future job. I see you as a future policy maker/journalist who – like many of my former students – end up working in conflicts. How to survive in that area without giving up your own values of doing good, doing the best you can, without compromising? It's not easy to go against narratives, but it sometimes necessary. How do you do that? I hope you have learned now the tools for independent thinking, a critical mind that is allowed to exist, and is able to grasp the situation on the ground – and very important – is very honest when she/he is not able to do that, and when the situation is too complex. Also, you will be very source-literate, not only on Afghanistan but also on other War on Terror countries. You know exactly how to value information, you are very aware of the politics of information, the nexus of terrorist experts, media and the US government, and you do your best to optimize the information position of yourself or your company or your government. Afghanistan will be (unfortunately) a very good example that can show you how.

Bette DAM

Séminaire

English

Spring 2021-2022

>>> Assignment: Improve Source-Literacy.

Analyze in an article or paper an old or new event in the socalled War on Terror-territory where a terrorist organization is involved: (minimal amount of words: 1000, its not the length that is important to me, it's the substance/level/independence of the sources, context I value)
Groups of 2. Working together. Start this project as early as possible in our course, so I can assist you (we will start half way our course with breakout-groups in the class where I will ask you about your progress).

Imagine you are a policy maker or a NGO-employee or a journalist who needs to give an assessment on the situation in an area in the War on Terror: this can be in a province in Afghanistan (where we have a great amount of sources), but this can be the particular situation on a car bomb attack in Iran or this can be on the latest kidnapping of two Parisians in Burkina Faso (I will share examples with you). But it can also be an event in Moscow.

In all the situations you are probably far away (by not being there). We have learned in our course, it pays off the check. that behind the narrative of terrorism so much more interesting and very important things are happening (false reporting, denunciation, assumption by media). And we often see that our first fall-back option is to report these events as terrorism, which often leads to a response in the West (sending more troops or lately more drones) but to fight what? Who will die?

Can we do a more in-depth job, even though these attacks might be a while ago? Is the attack really Taliban or are we dealing with a local conflict on land and that wont be solved with more American drone -attacks? Oil? Gas? Money? Tribal feuds? Is there false reporting involved? Why is ISIS in this village? What is the name of the village and what do we know about the village? Is there an important business men/tribesmen that influences the local dynamics ?Is there a name of a person connected to this village on Facebook? Is there one who would be interesting to contact and who could tell us more? (we can introduce ourselves as students of Sciences Po who have an assignment to cross check older reporting on events in the War on Terror-territory)

Often these events ended up in our Western reports/media as terrorist, and that's it. But we will look at it again, and deconstruct the information (and we might come to the same conclusions but that's ok). You need to provide me a very honest, realistic and nuanced analysis of what has happened (with the attack or explosion). Your sources are crucial, and I will mainly look at this component of this exercise. This is the main part of this exercise. How do you judge the sources you have? As part of the analysis of available resources, identify, interrogate, and consider the reasons for silences, gaps, contradictions, or evidence of power relationships in the report and how they impact the understanding. What story do they tell (and what do they not tell) What is missing? In that case - and that is the core of this assignment – you go after your primary sources for this.

That can mean you need to call/contact/email people in the Sahel, Kabul or Bagdad, but that's exactly why I came up with this idea: we are too often afraid to talk to people we don't know. We have ideas that they are unreachable in Kabul, but that widens unnecessary gabs between us. Too often – now we as Western reporters/writers/journalist/governments take the liberty to assume something about the far-away other, especially when the use of violence and armies is involved. The Afgan war shows us how dangerous this has been.

Its shocking to learn that most of our reports and media coverage is still voluntarily colonized by western sources, while these days we can easily connect via internet Whatsapp etc with the other side of the world.

So how far do you dare to go to find primary sources? Is one of our alumni (of my class) maybe in that area and can be of help? If we read in an article that a kidnapping of French citizens happened in the Zoo of Burkina Faso, is that Zoo on Facebook, and so we can introduce ourselves and ask them what they think has happened? What do we know about the terrorist groups in the area? What is written about them that is credible?

After gathering you write a very transparent report (stipulate also the things you don't know) that is giving enough context, is free from narratives/agency so the reader can judge. You can end with advise-tips on how your country, your NGO or your editor should understand and communicate on this event, and WHAT should happen from their side (if at all).

Deadlines one week after our last course:

IN CLASS, for everyone. Presentation on an event or a book on Afghanistan, with a critical analysis: In the class we all need to read one piece on the Afghanistan Analyst Network, according to me one of the best sources on the conflict. We can also choose a book, or a well-researched report. I will give you the list with options in a google doc, and you can add your name. Some of the projects are two students. You need to do a presentation on this. What is important is that you see us as your audience that you need to inform (are we your boss?) about the article, summarize it, tell us who the sources are, and then you dive deeper into it: you need to let us/audience/your boss know what you think source-wise, what you miss, you need to put it in context of the mainstream (what is the mainstream narrative about it?): what else has been published on this, where, and what is the quality of these other articles, and why. What is missing here? Can we trust this? So if you present a book on the Taliban-ambassador you can give us your own independent view of who he was – and the book is your main source. But you also have to tell us how he fits in the Western spectrum: have we understood him well, why yes, why not? What else has been written about him, how does the New York Times cover him?
Or we do a paper on Poppy in Afghanistan.
Or a paper on false reporting/denunciation.
I will also add more describing books on the conflict, like a book about America. And you have to read it and reflect that knowledge on what you learned about Afghanistan. How do we need to understand the role of the US in Afghanistan?