10 days to war
Next week on Newsnight we're making our foray into drama with a series of films entitled . This may prove controversial, but we hope it will also open up the debate about the war in Iraq in new and revealing ways. The issue our viewers most often ask us to revisit is - by some distance - the decision to go to war in Iraq.
Over the next two weeks, to mark the fifth anniversary of the invasion, we will look back and examine again the circumstances of the run-up to war: the WMD claims, the question of legality, the diplomatic wrangles and so on.
The reason we've chosen drama is that now we can recreate the scenes the cameras couldn't capture at the time - inside the Foreign Office on the day the legal officer Elizabeth Wilmshurst resolved to resign, inside the UN as Britain and America cajoled for a second resolution, inside the House of Commons on the day of the vote to go to war, with the troops on the Iraqi border as Colonel Tim Collins delivered his rousing eve-of-battle speech.
The eight episodes, each of which focuses on the events and issues from the same day exactly five years ago, have been painstakingly researched by our team of journalists and woven into mini-dramas by the dramatist Ronan Bennett. They'll be played by an all-star cast including Kenneth Branagh, Juliet Stevenson and Tom Conti. (Watch the trailer here).
But is it Newsnight? Not quite. The 12-minute films will run each night in the 10.30pm slot just before Newsnight, and then on Newsnight proper we'll pick up the issues raised with some of the real players portrayed in the drama and other key figures involved at the time. I hope you'll enjoy the drama on , join the debate and let us know what you think.
Comments
It is surely wrong that the 大象传媒, an organisation riddled with liberal bias and with a great deal of its own baggage being carried into this subject, should be trusted to produce a drama about the events leading up to this conflict.
BLAIR'S WAR
If you are featuring the run up to war, please run some clips of the Aaronovitch interview that show Blair at his most overtly enthused in fighting the "Final Battle for the Lord" with apocalyptic rhetoric.
If you could have a psychiatrist on hand - so much the better.
Peter,
Do you mean they will be shown at 10.30, or before 10.30 then?
I think this sounds like a good idea- I am sure, as you say, the films have been researched well, and, at the end of the day, if it doesn't work that well, it will have led to a debate, and all credit to newsnight for innovation. It is a space within the news dept of the bbc to have this slightly different approach, and I think perhaps people forget this sometimes- if newsnight isn't innovative, it will end up virtually identical to the 10 o clock news.
The problem with coverage of the Iraq War (and many other areas) is something I like to call the "Golden Liars" effect.
This refers to the sourcing of news stories from parties (usually governments) who are awarded a great deal of trust despite a long and well-documented history of issuing false stories, outright lies and distortions.
Despite the huge historical record of lies, particularly around wartime, why is the British government treated as such a reliable source of information? Why was there such a lack of analysis, second-guessing of true motivations and making use of independent experts?
The real tragedy of all this is that the 大象传媒 has not learned from the mistake. We are seeing exactly the same kind of reporting when it comes to Iran.
There is all kinds of talk in 大象传媒 articles about how Iran might be trying to make a bomb etc. Why do we not hear about possible motivations of the US? Plenty of experts believe that the US is trying to find any excuse to attack Iran or provoke a conflict, so why do we never hear that point of view? Perhaps you feel that it would not be "balanced", but if that is that case, how can it be "balanced" to print so many flimsy allegations against Iran?
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised by any of this. The "Propaganda Model" of the media proposed 20 years ago by Herman and Chomsky seems to have stood the test of time very well.
No doubt you'll be re-discussing all the areas of contention that have been gone over time and time again, but I hope you'll also find time to discuss the idea that the UK's realpolitik was such that no political leader, nor anyone else with their brain in the right place, would have concluded that it was in our best interests to refuse to go into Iraq with the USA.
What we have to consider is whether the damage to our special relationship with the USA, which was the opportunity cost of refusing to support them, was worth more or less than the benefit gained from asserting our independence, and deciding to do what we considered to be morally right.
My belief is that this, above everything else, was the crunch decision to be made in 2002/03, and that, to be honest, all other considerations portrayed as being critical are really red herrings.
No doubt, having given the affair many hours of consideration, you too will have concluded that this point of view requires an airing.
I am very concerned that Newsnight is to become a vehicle for drama. It should be what it says in its title - NEWS-night, a nightly programme about news, giving background information and informed comment about subjects in the news.
What concerns me is the decision to illustrate the events using dramatic footage. No matter how accurately the programme makers try to reproduce those historical events, the depiction can be no more than a third- or fourth-hand interpretation of events, not a factual report.
It will inevitably have lost accuracy at each stage in the process of its creation; in the memory of the people whose recollections are relied on, in the slant those people give to those memories (for whatever personal interests or ends), in the reassembly of events and spoken words by the scriptwriter, and his/her creation of dialogue to reflect unreported words, which will inevitably be necessary to complete the dramatisation. Then the director and editor have input which can radically affect the message.
Seeing supposed 'events' happening before our eyes, even if identified as a dramatisation, is beguiling. It can lead to the belief that one has experienced something in fact, when all that has been seen is someone else's interpretation. This is justified in a different arena, but not in a programme which is supposedly a serious news programme.
The difference between fact and dramatisation are already blurred in the modern world. Why is Newsnight taking this dangerous step?
This looks Excellent, unfortunately I rely on the Internet for News so will be unable (at first) to enjoy the series. Will it be available in any other format than Live TV?
I remember quite distinctly the last few days before the bombing - a sense of holding ones breath - and the US Ultimatum that Saddam Hussein should surrender himself - they claimed that if he had done so the bombing would not have gone ahead, speculation I grant you but I and most probably several thousand other Amnesty International members were, during those last few days e-mailing the Iraqi Government with the message from the US in the hope that the fair and humane treatment that they had promised would prevent the atrocities of War (probably wrong on both counts - but again speculation) What really did stick in the throat though was UK involvement and I am vey pleased the the 大象传媒 have had the foresight to realise the depth of opinion in the UK over the decision to go to War in Iraq and broadcast this serial
The problem with docu-dramas is that they can only ever portray one view of what happened. But you only have to look at any historical event to see that there are always different viewpoints as to what really happened, and why. Even if a particular person was 'there' it does not follow that their view is uncontested, or necessarily 100% accurate, and they are unlikely to have perfect knowledge anyway. So it doesn't really matter how well researched your mini-programmes will be, they are necessarily going to be partial and probably (given Newsnight's record) highly tendentious.
In itself this might not matter, were it not for the fact that many of your viewers will see them not as imperfect accounts, but as 'factual'. For myself, it's a long time since I saw Newsnight as being very interested in any version of 'the truth'; like the rest of the media the primary objective is sensation, not accuracy or balance.
Well there goes the neighbourhood.
A striking loss of integrity in the desire to be sensational. Leave drama to fiction, it is impossible to use actors without some sort of bias coming through.
You should be ashamed of yourselves. Report the news, don't try to make it.
WAR OF BUSH鈥橲 REVENGE
There can be little doubt that 鈥淏lair鈥檚 War鈥 was actually granted to him 鈥 and imposed on us 鈥 by the manifest weakness of character of Iain Duncan Smith.
When Duncan Smith was asked about his decision to back the war (with his dutiful followers) his eyes glowed with military light and he declared himself impressed by Blair鈥檚 resolve. What a circus. Bluebottle simpers at the Feet of Neddy Seagoon, and Britain gets embroiled in the 鈥淲ar of Bush鈥檚 Revenge鈥. Might IDS be properly confronted with his terrible mistake?
Are there plans to broadcast this online? I live in the USA and would love to be able to watch these.
I won't be watching it because the 大象传媒 has no credibility for providing an impartial commentary on the build up to the War in Iraq.
War is entertainment, even in hindsight.
Docudrama fails on two obvious levels.
The desire to be compelling can cloud the sometimes inevitable truth that many of the decisions are made in dull and uninteresting ways which do not lend themselves to good theatre.
On the other hand, the desire to be accurate can obscure the objective of providing credible and entertaining re-enactment.
My view is that there is no reason for not running the footage but there should be a credible separation between what may have happened (drama) and what actually happened (news and current affairs). To bring docudrama (however good)into the remit of Newsnight simply serves to further blur the lines between the known and the assumed.
I'll be interested in watching the drama, not so much the debate as I think this has been done to death (unless you uncover issues in the drama).
However it shouldn't go out at 10.30 in the Newsnight slot, and the debate shouldn't follow immediately after in Newsnight, with today's news pushed out to later in the programme.
Better to run the drama at 10pm, then have the debate, with Newsnight proper starting at the normal time.
Iraq does not affect me in the slightest, domestic news please.
Whatever your own political views on the merits or folly of Britain's involvement in the Iraq War, it cannot be right that Newsnight resorts to 'dramatisation' in a factual news programme.
No, no, no. I want facts, impartiality, fairness. Not agenda driven polemic.
Please reconsider and go back to what you do best.
Maybe the 大象传媒 can admit to cowardice in the face of the British Govt. But i don't think you will. I probably wont even watch this lot. Its too little too late 大象传媒. Your credibility as far as i am concerned has gone.
WHAT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?
That should have been the pursuit of all the media especially the 大象传媒 and it wasn't.
The recent nicing off of the public with a "news blackout" which used to be called censorship and is still called censorship was the icing on the cake.
You blew it a long time back.
This is a divisive issue and people with different points of view are never going to agree. It is very sad that you media types have nothing better to do than to keep picking the scabs just so that you have something to write about. Let it go!
Also stop using the unprovable "our viewers most often ask us to" excuse.
This is a vanity project.
If you are interested in the war in Iraq give us a current view of its impact. How about tracing the widows/children of deceased members of the forces. What has happened to them? What support have they received from the MOD. How about a day in the life of an injured serviceman/woman?
What has happened to Tony Blair? Alastair Campbell etc- have they done anything to promote the interests of the troops/their families or even the poor civilians in Iraq? They have earned a great deal -any gone to these causes?
Finally can we hear less from the likes of Tim Collins/Mike Jackson who now earn a very respectable living promoting themselves with your assistance. So what Collins made a speech - he served his country- I thank him but I am more interested in hearing rom those whose voice is so often ignored by your programme.
Oh good Iraq, how interesting zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Your credibility is fast disappearing.
Go ahead. Make a drama out of it to hide the horrendous fact that Tony Blair, an Oxford graduate in Law, tore up the UN Charter and joined George Bush in the entirely illegal invasion of a sovereign member state of the UN, without any threat being posed by Iraq to either state. In doing so they effectively destroyed the UN - an institution that was designed to build a legally acceptable foundation for world peace.
The big problem facing UK Conservatives, with regard to the next General Election, is the legal dilemma posed by the Iraq war. They backed the war because they backed the Atlantic Alliance - yet a fundamental principle of Conservatism is the "rule of law", and the invasion of Iraq was entirely illegal. Ironically, only Charles Kennedy had the courage, when faced with this question of legality, to ask: "Who decides?"
You can see why they dug into his private problems and got rid of him.
I'm not sure Newsnight should be devoting time to a drama.
Surely it is Newsnight's job to provide impartial news.
It is one of the last decent, frank and honest shows on television, tainting it like this is simply wrong.
A drama is not fact, even if factually based, and therefore outside of the show's remit.
Yet another attempt at dumbing-down by the 大象传媒 when they should really be trying to raise the bar.
You have no idea how lucky you are to have this kind of programming... just visit the USA and watch the news and see... The 大象传媒 may not be perfect, & I wish it was a bit tougher back in 2003, but having lived in the US for a bit... oh my god... the 大象传媒 is the last stand on real journalism - the only corporation that still works on behalf of the people... & that I think ids because of the license fee... we all have a stake!
This is public service broadcadsting.
Commendable.
Will the series be shown in USA? Or in other countries?