I've been preparing for my starring role in Pedro Almodovar's epic on bloggers with a small piece to camera for 3rd year student Kristy Woodhams' TV project. She's been investigating the military's view of how the conflict in Iraq is reported. Many soldiers feel angry and upset at the coverage and feel they have not been given enough 'support'. She asked me what I thought about this.
There are very few 'good news' stories when reporting war. Just ask
Caroline Hawley, until recently the BBC's correspondent in Baghdad. I went to the
Frontline club in London recently to hear her talk. You might remember that she was once accused of being able to 'smell shit in a rose garden' by Paul Bremer, the former chief US administrator in Iraq.
Several ex-soldiers and representatives of NGOs said they were despondent because much of the good work they were doing for civilians was unreported. Caroline said she had reported several positive stories (including one on
Iraq's version of Pop Idol) but that there were more important news priorities: the coalition forces' inability to provide water and electricity for civilians, abuses at
Abu Ghraib, kidnappings, bombings, killings and insurgencies.
Perhaps the lack of public support and ebbing of political will is at the heart of the frustration felt by those in the army. Few of them cannot have asked the question: why did we go to war?
Ben Griffin, an SAS soldier, quit Baghdad after only three months. He told his commanders that he could not take part in an 'illegal war.' Was he court-martialled, reprimanded or called a coward? No, the army discharged him and gave him a glowing reference.
For a US veteran's perspective read Paul Rieckhoff's
blog for the Huffington Post.