The damage done: New film examines impact of Lebanon’s civil war

In ‘About a War,’ ex-fighters confront the legacy of the long and bloody conflict. (Supplied)
Updated 11 February 2019

The damage done: New film examines impact of Lebanon’s civil war

  • 'About A War' is a compelling and often unsettling documentary co-directed by husband-and-wife duo Abi Weaver and Daniele Rugo
  • In ‘About a War,’ ex-fighters confront the legacy of the long and bloody conflict

DUBAI: “Everyone dirtied their hands. Everyone got involved. Everyone.” So says Ahed Bhar, a Palestinian born in Lebanon’s Shatila Refugee Camp in 1966 and a former fighter in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. He is talking about Lebanon’s disastrous civil war, which blighted the country from 1975-1990.

Bhar is one of three ex-soldiers from different factions who form the backbone of “About A War,” a compelling and often unsettling documentary co-directed by husband-and-wife duo Abi Weaver and Daniele Rugo, that sets out to examine the still-powerful impact that the war has on the country and its people.

As Rugo pointed out in his conversation with Arab News, no official account of Lebanon’s civil war has ever been laid out.

“When the war finished, they signed an agreement pardoning all crimes against civilians,” he said. “So the history of the war was really brushed under the carpet. As we delved more into trying to understand how people felt about the legacy of the war, we realized that there is quite a lot of unaddressed, unspoken trauma, and a general amnesia about the causes and the consequences. And what happened. There is no official account that is accepted by all parties in Lebanese society. There is no shared narrative. Most people will learn about the war depending on which sectarian group or political group they belong to. Or even their geographical group. They will each have their own version.

“What our film tries to do is to create a multi-perspective account, where we have three different fighters from three different groups, who lived through the war from different points of view, and the audience is asked to negotiate a position between these three,” he continued.

Those accounts, as you might expect, are often conflicting. But what comes across from all three is a sense that they were swept up in events that they didn’t really understand, but which they all believed placed them on the ‘right’ side.

“I thought everything I was doing was proper and may be ‘sanctified’ because I was doing it in the name of Christianity,” says Assad Chaftari, former head of intelligence for the Lebanese Forces in the war. Chaftari felt he had to combat what he saw as a growing Muslim influence — allied to the Palestinian cause — that threatened to create a ‘state within a state’ in Lebanon. He was 16 years old. “Now, of course, I see things very differently,” he says.

Rugo and Weaver’s film, which will screen in Lebanon this week — with shows in Beirut, Tripoli and Saida — marks one of the rare occasions when ex-fighters in the war have spoken publicly about their acts. And their documentary reveals that the scars it left are still raw.

Rugo suggested that one of the main reasons for that is precisely because the events and consequences of the war still aren’t really discussed openly.

“We discovered that there were quite a lot of people who really hadn’t addressed their trauma, and in particular the ex-fighters, because they had never spoken about what they’d done and most of them had never really started to come to terms with, or acknowledge, their roles in the combat,” he said.

Seeing that experience take place on screen — these aging men hearing themselves admit to some of the horrors they were a part of — can be hard to watch. It was, Rugo said, sometimes equally hard to film.

“Some of the interviews were very difficult,” he admitted. “We sat down with them for seven or eight hours on multiple occasions. So at the end of that, you’re drained anyway. And the material you’re recording is difficult. And you’re also going through a process where you empathize with a person and then you see him as someone who’s committed terrible deeds and been involved in a very bloody war. So you learn to (put aside) your own judgments and try and gain a deeper understanding of what motivated these people. That’s what we learned as filmmakers.

“On a more general level, we learned that unless we address the mistakes that have been made in the past, it’s very difficult to create a shared future. In particular in countries such as Lebanon, which are still marred by inequality, by sectarian divides, and whose geo-political situation is a precarious one,” he continued. “So this work on the past is really important to build a sustainable and more stable present and future.”

REVIEW: Second season of Sacred Games mirrors the ills of today's India

Updated 17 August 2019

REVIEW: Second season of Sacred Games mirrors the ills of today's India

CHENNAI: The first season of “Sacred Games” last year was a hit, and the second edition, which began streaming on Netflix on Aug. 15, may be even more so.

The eight episodes explore some of India's most pressing current issues such as a nuclear threat, terrorism and inter-religious animosity dating back to the country's 1947 partition. It. It also addresses how religious men can indulge in the most unholy of acts, including helping corrupt politicians.

Some of the greatest films have had conflict and war as their backdrop: “Gone with the Wind,” “Casablanca,” “Ben-Hur” and “Garam Hawa,” to mention a few. The second season of “Sacred Games” also unfolds in such a scenario, with terrorism and inter-communal disharmony having a rippling effect on the nation.

Directed by Anurag Kashyap (“Gangs of Wasseypur,” “Black Friday”) and Neeraj Ghaywan (“Masaan,” which premiered at Cannes in 2015), the web series, based on Vikram Chandra's 2006 novel, unfolds with Ganesh Gaitonde (played by Nawazuddin Siddiqui) escaping from prison and finding himself in Mombasa. He has been carted there by an agent of India's

Research and Analysis Wing, Kusum Devi Yadav (Amruta Subhash), who forces him to help find Shahid Khan (Ranvir Shorey), the mastermind behind bomb blasts and terror attacks.

In Mumbai, police inspector Sartaj (Saif Ali Khan) has just two weeks to save the city from a nuclear attack, which Gaitonde had warned him about. Both men love Mumbai and do not want it to be destroyed. But religious extremist Khanna Guruji (Pankaj Tripathi) and his chief disciple Batya Ableman (Kalki Koechlin) believe that only such a catastrophic destruction can help cleanse society and bring a cleaner, saner new order.

A narrative of deceit, betrayal, love and longing, the second season has a plodding start, but picks up steam from the fourth episode, with Sartaj and his men racing against time to find a nuclear time bomb that could wipe out Mumbai. Crude dialogue and a constant doomsday atmosphere could have been avoided, but riveting performances by the lead pair – Khan and Siddiqui (though he is getting typecast in this kind of role) – and nail-biting thrills make this Netflix original dramatically captivating.