Paul Ham is an acclaimed Australian historian, author, and journalist known for his in-depth works on modern history, particularly focusing on war, politics, and human rights. He has written about major historical events such as World War I, World War II, and the Vietnam War, delivering detailed insights into the political and social dynamics of these conflicts. Ham’s books, including Hiroshima Nagasaki, Vietnam: The Australian War, and 1914: The Year the World Ended, have received widespread recognition for their rigorous research and engaging narrative style. His works are known for examining the human cost of war and conflict, providing a voice to those affected by history’s most consequential events. His approach often delves into the moral questions surrounding war, particularly the ethical implications of decisions such as the use of nuclear weapons or the treatment of prisoners.
Ham has also been involved in documentary filmmaking and public speaking, using these platforms to further discuss the themes of war, and human rights. His ability to weave together personal stories with large-scale historical analysis makes his work both compelling and educational, contributing to a deeper understanding of how history continues to shape the modern world.
Riya interviewed Ham after attending Democracy is Not Worth Dying For which was presented at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas 2024
In this interview, Riya explores topics related to Ham’s interactions with survivors of war, and how war and conflict is presented in the media, and his opinion on the progression of democracy, helping us make sense of conflicts and political issues happening around the world currently.
Throughout your interactions with armies, soldiers, families etc – which interaction was the most meaningful to you, and why?
I have had various different encounters with soldiers over the years, and it is difficult to locate one specific interaction, but I would say that my interactions with the Vietnamese veterans were the most intriguing because they came back to a nation that had forgotten them and wanted to forget the war that was labelled as unjust. Back in the time, the veterans were sent by the democratic government, but the nation changed when they returned, disregarding the war as a crime against humanity. I interviewed many Vietnam veterans and their families about how they coped with the trauma of coming back from fighting a war that was perceived as a ‘waste of time’ by their own country.
One thing we see a lot in the media is women being represented as victims or seen as a backlash in war. How does that differ from the role that women play in war?
There is a huge difference between the perceived and the actual role of women in wars. The perceived role is that women would sit at home and cater to the needs of the veterans and do what they are asked to do. However, in World War 1, women had jobs for the very first time. They were making uniforms, weapons, and many middle-class women found themselves working as nurses and working in social service. These liberating changes drove the women’s movement in Britain, Australia, and many other countries, proving that women are economically productive.
When it comes to the Vietnam war, women were involved in many ways. They were entertainers hired by the government for the soldiers, which was particularly a traumatising experience for them. Talking about the brutal side of war on women, women have always been treated as weapons in wars, and they have been subjected to various forms of targeting through rape and abuse.
Coming to the third point, women have also been soldiers at wars. Specifically, during the Vietnam war, we witnessed women being enlisted as soldiers and fighters on the North Vietnamese side. We can see how war has impacted women, and while it has made way for liberation of women, it has also been used as a way of suppression by the enforcement of large-scale abuse against women.
How different is the reality of war than what is presented by the media, specifically talking about how the conflict in Gaza is being covered by Western media?
The coverage of the conflict in Gaza is deeply twisted by prejudices and biases influenced by politics. Even the causality figures are inaccurate and have not been verified by independent sources. It is difficult to fully grasp the situation in Gaza due to how heavily influenced media platforms are, and from my personal experience, I would say that obtaining reliable documents on the conflict in Gaza would not be possible until after a few years.
Talking about media platforms, most teenagers now get their information on social media. How do you think social media platforms influence us in the way they deliver news about important global conflicts?
We had great hopes for social media’s ability to spread awareness globally. However, it is a tragedy to see how social media platforms now report what people want to see instead of the truth. It is being used to spread around myths, lies and conspiracy theories that essentially interest people and confirm their biases instead of educating them with factual information. It is difficult to find independent sources of information, but one source I always recommend is Wikipedia since it is always evolving and consists of a whole range of people putting their views in. It might not always be accurate, and it most certainly has flaws, but it is the only source that aims to achieve accuracy and it is an evolving consensus that is objective and more comprehensive when compared to other sources.
Talking about your panel at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas on democracy, do you think what we politically claim as democracy is the ideal democracy?
I would say that we are far from the ideal democracy since the political system is deeply corrupted, and it is difficult to define what an ideal democracy would look like. Back in the 1900s, we did not have any democracies and by the end of the 21st century, we had around 120 democracies and this figure has dropped to 75 as of today. I have faith in democracy and I believe it can be restored only if people fight for it. The existence and persistence of democracy depends on people’s willingness to fight for this system. One thing that is important to realise is the strength of democracy. People lose faith in this system after seeing the level of corruption that runs in political parties. However, they fail to understand that with the power of democracy, they can unelect a government, and elect a government that brings about energy, enthusiasm, positive change, and hope. This hope drives the strength we need to have to continue to fight for democracy, and if we can do that, democracy will continue to rejuvenate.
In this interview, Ham offers a thought-provoking perspective on the realities of war, the role of women in conflict, and the complex interplay between media, politics, and public perception. Ham’s insights about the influence of social media platforms highlight misinformation and biases present in media platforms that shape young minds. His thoughts on democracy reflect both a critique of the current political system and an inspiring message about the potential for people to fight for democracy. Paul Ham not only sheds light on the complex issues of war, media, and politics but also emphasises the importance of vigilance, education, and collective action in shaping a better, more just future.
The Festival of Dangerous Ideas was presented by The Ethics Centre in August 2024, supported by Principal Partner UNSW Sydney. Catch up on talks from over 12 years‘ of FODI with the Festival of Dangerous Ideas podcast: festivalofdangerousideas.com.