Case study: Oral histories -- semi-structured interviews

PERCEPTION OF THE WAR AS SEEN BY BOSNIANS WORKING IN AFGHANISTAN

When we embark on any historical research, regardless of how far the focus issue is , there are various different methods one could pursue while collecting the evidence on which the analysis is to be conducted. Sometimes these methods are rather time-consuming, involving many hours of hard work spent in the archives or on the field. At first what you are studying historically may seem quite foreign, but gradually, as a result of these painstaking activities, you develop an understanding of what particular forms of past experience may have involved, and to what extent its impact is still felt, if it is felt, nowadays - the second one is our focus. There are many different ways in which oral histories analysis could be conducted, one of which is interviewing.

Justification of the Interview Structure

Semi-structured interview is oral history technique in which the interviewer has his hands free to shape the sequence of questions and direction of the interview in any way they find it beneficial for the purpose of the research. Although it is sometimes charged with the reproach of being too time-consuming and requiring the interviewer's training that would prevent them from suggesting the desired answers, it is rather useful type of collecting certain data. For instance, some of its advantages lie in the fact that they offer a valuable insight into a certain issue of experience, or even in the fact that the sole existence of the previously established questions seem to provide a kind of invariability and objectivity that are a rather important characteristics the researcher should have, if they want their research to be fully valid. Bottom line, the reason for choosing precisely this kind of interview - instead of structured, for instance - is that it is more flexible than other types as it allows tackling some issues the interviewer finds interesting during the interview, which is usually something that was not anticipated as possible reasoning of a certain issue. Naturally, this does not mean that interviewer does not have a set of prepared questions to ask, but it gives the interview an opportunity to explore particular themes or responses further, if there are indications that the interviewee is keen to do so. As we have seen through the interview conducted, the experience with all its affects can be only transmitted in a dialogue which allows parties, the interviewer and the one being interviewed,

to speak their thoughts. Semi-structured interviews allow that freedom where the personal influences the objectivity with which one begins the dialogue. It is particularly in this specific field where the interests and issues are raised and very the facts become revealed. It is also a space which can be compromised and self-censored, depending on questions and the interviewer. In addition, the importance of oral history becomes visible, which so often gets disregarded or not allowed to be voiced at all. We have seen with this interview how a different party, rarely taken into consideration, a worker from Bosnia, speaks his experiences of Afghanistan, the working conditions, prerequisites and environment, and importantly how that influenced and still is influencing his life. This notion is important as many Americans still, are not aware of what constitutes their army, their civilizing troops. Such experiences if voiced become integral part of the history, enabling an important insight in life under war conditions. It importantly, allows us to interpret the war, and to see that a different story may present itself, quite different from the one/s offered by means of popular culture and media. Regardless of subjectivity embedded in the interview it opens new horizons of re-writing the history, to which we are very often, only from the 'outsider' perspective, exposed.

Oral Histories: Findings

Before we start, it may be of some relevance to point as the impact media has on the perception of the war in Afghanistan. The following is, therefore, to elaborate on the way the war is being produced in the modern media. The American soldiers are being killed daily and the American public is unaware of the fact and my interviewee mentions soldiers dying by the hundreds but the U.S. TV stations, wouldnt tell. The media didnt broadcast that as the interviewee claims. He also talks about Islamic terrorism and how the production of the war in Iraq goes so far as to claim that it is a war that is being fought for the entire world and this is something that not only the soldiers enlisted there firmly believe but this is also something that the American public believes and takes pride in. They are taking part in relieving the world of terror. However, it is very interesting how politics and war are interfaced here and how politics is everything here in this depiction of war. It is the name that determined the war and those who have the power to name determine the frame the political frame in which to operate. Therefore it is not surprising that one interviewee mentions how any other account of the war in Iraq besides War on Terror is regarded as unpatriotic. Now, first important finding is that the interviews indicate that the main reason for going to the fighting zone is the economic one. More precisely, the unemployment in their own

country seems to be the major problem and the most common reason why people apply to work in a war zone. A student such as one of our interviewees, who cannot find the means for a decent life in Bosnia, due to the circumstances in his country is obliged to go in a war, the war in Afghanistan, so that his life does not end symbolically and on the margins. The elaboration of his motives state not only what his conditions are, but how the situation in total in his country is. His remark, probably unconscious, (Apparently you have to go to war to earn money) witnesses the work conditions in which not only in Derrida's words justice is always violent, but life is violent and we are all equally responsible for such outcome. What is even more terrifying, it seems that the need for the financial safety is even stronger than the need for safety of one's own life, and these workers do not even think about it unless asked to elaborate on it. In other words, they seem not to think about it and yet, when they do, they feel a need to explain, to excuse themselves for going there only for this purpose. For instance, the following is quite an interesting explanation:
"Well, since I worked here for six years in Eagle Base Dubrave as a military interpreter or a linguist assistant, as they called it, it was my decision after that to go to Iraq in order to fulfill my financial goals, which means to have a longer financial stability and of course, as many of us, to buy a house or an apartment so that that kind of issue is resolved... Well there was a choice to stay here and apply for a job but, as we all know, the economy in Bosnia and Herzegovina is extremely bad as it is in most of the world but here we have a 60% unemployment rate which means that it would be incredibly hard for me to find a job here first. Second of all I already had a six years long experience working with US troops here so it was quite easy for me to get a wealthy job and to go overseas and fulfill my long-term goals." (female, 35)

Moreover, there is an interesting fact when it comes to the attitudes the interviewees had towards the people they encounter there. On the one hand, it seems that both interviewees have a negative attitude not only towards the country as such but towards everything in there, and the only thing they seem to be liking about the whole situation is the fact that it brings them the money they need so badly. Not only that they do not agree with the alleged cause of the war, the one Americans - whom they work for - seem to purport but also they are critical of the locals and everything about them, almost repulsed by everything they seem to represent, which is probably what makes it even more difficult for them to live in such surroundings. For instance, this is one perception:
Uhm, well... I always thought these are poor people who got attacked suddenly and, you know, like we were... But when I get to hang around some of them... I feel totally Nazi-like, you know... They are smelly and their jokes are something no one can understand. They work for their enemies, what do you call it, a sell-out? I mean... I am speaking non sense, nothing is connected, but that is really what I get from them... I can't seem to make a coherent picture, it's impossible. All I know is that I am, in a way, Afghani intolerant (laugh). (female, 30)

On the other hand, not only that these workers are keen on repudiating the Afghani, but both of them also seem to resent the United States of America seeing them as those who started something that had neither justified purpose not any positive outcome, at least not so far. Based on the conducted interviews, there seems to be the tendency to mention the negative characteristics of the

USA even in the questions that had nothing to do with the US involvement in the war, which indicates that there are some strong, let's call it so, emotions towards the United States not exclusively as the nation but rather as a political enemy to masses. In addition to this, there were prejudice not only among different races and nations, but also between gender 'categories' where women seemed to have a rather rough end.
"I think all over the world men get promoted more easily than women. Women always have to work harder to prove themselves, that they are as smart as men. But if were only talking about Bosnians then I would have to say that being a woman or a man does not really play a big role. What did, in my personal opinion, play a role is No.1 how well you speak English, because, of course, English is the official language in an US base and if youre proficient then you can get promoted way more easily than someone who is not. And your own personal attitude and of course education means a lot regardless to what people might think they do appreciate if somebody comes from Bosnia with any kind of degree and with a combination of proficient English then I think you can get promoted more easily, I will not say easy because it is never easy to get promoted, but you can get promoted easier. But men and women, I would say there was a whole lot of difference with Bosnians. For the rest, there was probably some." (female, 35)

Furthermore, the interviewees seem to have quite some problems in talking about the war. They do talk about the factual information, such as bomb attacks, bad working conditions, the attitude both locals and Americans have towards them, but they are not keen on talking about the psychological side of it; in a way, they tend not to think about it, and even when they are asked to talk about it, they talk carefully, in search for the interviewer's approval of the statements they are about to make. What's even more surprising is that they do not seem to be aware either of the influence being in the war zone has had on their personality or the way the impact has changed their lives. By these types of answers we as interviewers could see that under such conditions one must become completely alienated in order to survive, but also what we see is that the influence of such experience is far greater than these people seem to claim. In addition to this, we have talked to some family members of the interviewees who happened to see the change the person has gone through, which is not something they themselves are capable of noticing; the changes are usually related to the more 'military-like' behavior, more serious way of thinking about life, but also some serious traumas resulting in, e.g. , sensitivity to any kind of noise, for it brings some memories back. Finally, the interviewees seem to mentally connect the war in Afghanistan, with the war that happened in Bosnia and Herzegovina 1992-1995, though not to the same extent. What is more interesting, they seem to connect the role the United States had in the war in Bosnia - though not directly - with their role in the war in Afghanistan, which is what accounts for their aversion to the American. In other words, they see the United States as the embodiment of all the negative things the West is said to have done to disturb the world peace. In a way, they do have a leg to stand on however, there is an element of the lack of adequate knowledge, when it comes to some things (e.g.

who mediated the war in Bosnia, at first place and what kind of a mission it was). For instance, one of the interviewees felt there is a strong link between the war in Bosnia and the war in Iraq because he had experienced them both and the war in Bosnia was still fresh in his mind when he left. (The very reason for his leaving Bosnia - the reason of not having a job - is a consequence of the war in Bosnia). He did note that the representation of the wars in Bosnia and Iraq were different - in Bosnia no one knew that a war was raging, while in Iraq the US media houses (he mentioned CNN) are constructing their own accounts of what is going on there. probably to quote the interviewees:
"Im not quite sure that I can actually say that there is a parallel between the wars. In my personal opinion, of course, the war here was a pure aggression and ethnic cleansing. In Iraq the war is more complex and it is really difficult to explain it. So, from one side you can say, ok, Sunnis and Shias are fighting so you can call it a civil war. Then, on the other hand, if you put US forces in the equation then Americans would say we are fighting the terrorism and we are bringing democracy and peace to one country. But, when you look at it from the perspective of Iraqis then they are occupying their country and enforcing their way of living on them, so it would be...I couldnt even draw a parallel or a name to the war in Iraq because it is just so complex." (female, 35)

However, interviewees had

somewhat different perception of the war, and the best way to get the message communicated is

"Well.. We knew what we fight for and against whom... They don't... And our war... it was a genocide, we fought just to fight back, to survive... Also.. the arms... We had tank, I didn't see not even one in here, they fight from the air, they throw bombs, it's... unexpected, cruel, but not as bloody as it was in our war. They fight gracefully (laugh)..." (male, 42)

Besides this, there is an interesting question we posed to all the interviewees: Did the war in our country have a name? Genocide? Bosnian civil war? The war taking place in Iraq has name - in the interview we have heard the mantra that is being uttered everywhere - War on terror. This is how the justification of the war that takes place there is brought on to the millions of American families that are sitting before their tubes every day - the American soldiers are heroes and they will bring democracy to Saddams country of oil. This is how interviewees replied to the question:
"Uhm... The war against the non-American. They fight it only because of that, I think, Talibans are something they want to get rid of. They're not fighting the entire nation, just one part of it, the one that seems less American-like, you know?" (male, 42) "Civil-capitalistic-profit war would be my combination of war in Iraq." (female,35 )

But when it comes to the war that took place 1992-1995, there is no official name - perhaps a genocide only - but all we get from the interviewees was shrugging. In conclusion, it seems that through the war in Iraq and Afghanistan we can read and interpret our own reality here in Bosnia - because it affects us - indirectly, but it does affect us. There are many people just like these interviewee who are barely finding ways to make ends meet.

The movement of labor - in Marxian terms - is necessary to find ways of knowing just how much the rest of the world is affected -perhaps other countries like Bosnia. It is therefore important that we devise tools through the narratives of the people who are involved in the war in Iraq or Afghanistan and to see how culture shapes our perception of the war that is raging there.

Almedina Toki Alen Avdi Pavlina Vujovi Naida Husanovi

_________________________________________________________
UNIVERZITET U TUZLI FILOZOFSKI ODSJEK, ENGLESKI JEZIK I KNJIZEVNOST

June,_2012

web: www.untz.ba | Dr. Tihomila Markovia br.1 75000 Tuzla Bosna i Hercegovina | rektorat@untz.ba