Paper short abstract:

This paper reflects on the possibilities and the political, ethical, and moral issues arising in the context of ethnography during war and insurgent situations. Emerging from fieldwork in Iraqi Kurdistan, it also contemplates the moral issues on the handling of data and accounts of extreme violence.

Paper long abstract:

Based on reflections during fieldwork in Iraqi Kurdistan interrupted by a bombing campaign, this work aims to contemplate the possibilities and challenges of anthropology in war contexts, especially in situations where war is not an exceptional circumstance but a perpetual condition shaping local subjectivities and ontologies (Richards 2005; Lubkemann 2008;). Other reflections originating from this context include how to approach stories of extreme violence (Das 2011), and what it means to be the ethnographer chosen by the interlocutor to share a particular narrative.

It also reflects on the ethical-political dilemmas in handling ethnographic data that may be of interest to powerful actors – both state and non-state – in the context of ethnic conflict, addressing issues related to the role of ethnographic knowledge produced and the inevitable affective implications arising from the process. The anthropologist, then, becomes a witness, and the relationship developed with the interlocutors becomes one of growing complicity.

This entire process can be described as a process of growing affection (Favret-Saada 2012), where the access and knowledge produced by the anthropologist are directly associated with deepening effective relationships with a specific population or interlocutor. Furthermore, from the context of war and extreme violence, additional ethical dilemmas emerge, such as what to do when that interlocutor who was so valuable to the research is no longer alive. What is the possible treatment of ethnographic data, and how is it possible to honour their existence with all its complexity?