The crazy politics of the original 'Modern Warfare' trilogy
Terrorism, Russian troops in DC, arms traffickers, and rogue American generals. How the original ‘Modern Warfare’ played on the trends of its time, and a commentary on the crazy events of its narrative from a political lens.
The original ‘Modern Warfare’ trilogy of Call of Duty games were cultural phenomena in their time. When the first game came out in 2007, the Iraqi Civil War was still in full swing, and the armed forces of countries all over the world were directing their efforts toward counter-insurgency actions. The opposing forces which media (films, series, videogames) portrayed during this period were generic, nondescriptive Middle East rebel wearing turbans, while soundtracks heavily featured ouds — a Middle Eastern lute-like instrument — playing while Western special forces went door to door clearing rooms of Kalashnikov-wielding villains.
These games were reflections of their times, and shaped the perception of millions regarding what conflict looked like. But over the four years across which Modern Warfare 1 through 3 came out, the series not only saw an immense evolution in gameplay and graphics,1 but also in the themes through which it told its story. The politics behind the forces which drove the trilogy’s narrative were nothing short of comical, but they reflected the perceptions and fears which dominated society between 2007 and 2011 across all forms of entertainment media. Collectively, the series offers an alternative universe with an iconic story — one with memorable characters and good narrative — hinging on the role of a wide range of political actors in causing global disorder (from those generic Middle Eastern terrorists, to an ultranationalist group which takes over Russia).
Over the coming weeks, marking the near 17th2 anniversary of the series, I want to remember and comment on the narrative elements of this historic series of videogames, starting with the original ‘Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare’.
