| The end of Saddam, known for more than three decades as an Iraqi strongman and leader of one of the most powerful Arab nations, and his execution after standing trial for a year shook the very foundations of most nations in the region. While some countries such as Kuwait (which endured an Iraqi invasion in 1990), Iran (which fought an eight-year war with Iraq), and Israel (which was bombed by Iraqi Scud missiles in 1991) rejoiced at his execution, most Arab peoples were visibly shocked. Perhaps to the point of failing to properly digest the fact he was really dead.
In Iraq, the government of Prime Minister Nour Al-Maliki announced that the country had now closed the book on one of the darkest chapters in its modern history — a chapter written in the fires of revolution and counter-revolution, executions, hangings, warfare and invasion. To drive the point home that Saddam had actually been executed, the Iraqi government released footage showing a sleepless man being led to the gallows by a handful of balaclava-clad men who appeared to be treating the former president with respect. There was no audio track to accompany the footage which ended with the noose being placed around Saddam’s neck. And so, for the first half of the first day of Saddam’s execution, the Arab world was somber, quietly asking itself why this man — or any man — would be executed on the holiest day of the Islamic lunar calendar. There were no protests in the streets of Amman, Gaza, Tikrit, Mosul, Sanaa, Khartoum. Arabs were simply dumbfounded. But then, as fate (or a sinister scheme) would have it, a fuse was lit and dynamite was thrown, and the entire Arab world erupted in anger. A clandestine mobile phone video was smuggled out of the execution chamber and within a few hours had spread so quickly on the i nternet that one day researchers are likely to cite it as evidence of a new information age. By nightfall on the first day of Eid, the picture of a man led to his execution in a respectful manner had been entirely dashed. And reality set in. The new video — with audio — showed an Iraqi and Arab Muslim leader being taunted, cursed in his final few seconds of life. The video also allowed audiences to hear someone unknown call out the name of Muqtada Sadr, a junior-level cleric whose relatives were allegedly killed by Saddam's forces. A man today blamed for much of the death squads and sectarian violence in Iraq. Another man shouts at Saddam saying he will go to hell. The calm that had persisted in the first few hours after the first video was released by the government was now quickly replaced with anger.
Another man voiced exasperation and disbelief that Saddam was executed on the first day of Eid Al-Adha, a day immediately following the last official rites of the Hajj pilgrimage; it also marks the start of a festive period traditionally earmarked for forgiveness and compassion. But the underlying dangers inherent in both the execution of Saddam Hussein and the release of the second, unofficial video go far beyond mere failure to adhere to Islamic customs. Arabs are questioning whether the purposeful humiliation of Saddam was part of an orchestrated effort to discredit and disgrace all Arabs. Arab anger should not be dismissed offhand but should be understood, particularly in regards to the purported trial of Saddam and senior Baathists.
Several lawyers representing Saddam and his entourage were killed; others were tossed out of the court, while judges who appeared to be lenient or not harsh enough were quickly replaced. The Egyptian lawyers syndicate said in a statement that the way the trial was conducted wasted a historical chance to achieve justice due to the political interventions that robbed the court of its independence and neutrality. The statement didn't argue the "right of the Iraqi people to put Saddam on trial and punish him for his crimes." But it stressed that trial procedure didn't give Saddam his right to a fair and a just trial. In a statement released immediately after Saddam's hanging, Human Rights Watch said: "The execution of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein following a deeply flawed trial for crimes against humanity marks a significant step away from respect for human rights and the rule of law in Iraq." Arabs say the verdict had been predetermined and that the duration of the trial was merely to discredit not only Saddam, but all Arab leaders. Furthermore, they question why Saddam was singled out for prosecution for only one incident — the alleged killing of Shiites in Dujail who reportedly tried to assassinate the Iraqi leader — and not other crimes. Why, they ask, was Saddam prosecuted for a crime related to the Iraq-Iran war and involving an assassination plot supposedly hatched by the Iranians? Why did Saddam not stand trial for alleged atrocities committed prior to the Iraq-Iran war or after? Why was the trial of the gassing of Kurds in Halabja aborted? Some Arabs compared Saddam's execution — by a government seen as a proxy to a foreign invading force — to the targeted killings of Palestinian leaders by Israel, a country also considered a foreign invading force on Arab lands.
They also point to the exploding death toll in Iraq — up to 625,000 dead in three-and-a-half years — and wonder why no one has been held to account for those crimes. The Arabs are also questioning why Saddam wasn’t handed over to an international court, as many prominent legal experts — and his family — had called for. Critics of the trial and court system had argued that Saddam would not receive a fair trial in Iraq. They pointed to how those accused in the Rwanda massacres of 800,000 Hutus and Tutsis were brought before an international court. They point to the late Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic who faced an international crimes court in The Hague and the slew of those accused of crimes against humanity in the Bosnian war of 1993. Golden opportunity to create the first just, fair and transparent judicial reckoning of an Arab leader by Arabs has not only been missed, but squandered, say Arab moderates allied with the US. Ironically, while the Arabs are embittered against the Maliki government for allowing the hanging to become a spectacle of sectarianism appearing to pit Shiite versus Sunni, they are reserving most of their anger for the United States. In protests stretching from Morocco to Indonesia, demonstrators carried pictures of Saddam and burned effigies of US President George W. Bush and the American flag. They charged that the United States had allowed Saddam to be humiliated by Sadr's followers and also permitted his hanging on a religious holiday. They claimed that the hanging was part and parcel of a US-Israeli war against Islam, never forgetting that Bush had once called the war on terrorism a new crusade. Critics also said as an occupying force the United States is fully responsible for what transpires in Iraq. Arabs say it was the US which captured Saddam, which broadcast video of him, allowed pictures of him in his underwear to be printed, allowed the court to succumb to sectarian vendettas, and which finally handed him over to the Shiite Iraqis knowing fully well he would be humiliated. Within 24 hours of the second video’s dissemination, US officials were in crisis mode trying to deflect any anger from the Arab world. First, they issued statements saying they were shocked Saddam was executed so swiftly. Arab columnists fired back questioning why US media reports on Thursday, December 28 had predicted Saddam would be executed before Sunday — an obvious contradiction. Then US officials argued that they had pleaded with Iraqi officials to delay the execution order and not rush to hang the man. This, of course, fell on deaf ears in the Arab world because no one believed the US was not in control from start to finish. By Monday, US officials were trying to salvage some credibility by claiming that the execution was entirely an Iraqi affair and that they had nothing to do with it. But Arab critics asked how, for example, this could be true given that three US military officers and several American legal experts were present in the court every day. They also questioned why Saddam's US guards had kept him awake all night before handing him over to the Iraqis. News media reports claim it was a tactic to make the man look disheveled. By Tuesday, three days after the execution, US media was highlighting stories of the jovial and friendly relationship between Saddam and his US captors. By Tuesday evening, US media reports cited several US generals who were releasing statements that they would have carried out the execution differently. One report indicated that Saddam had received full military honors from his US escort. On Tuesday as well, Iraqi officials said they had launched an investigation into who released the mobile phone video and who shouted taunts and insults as Saddam was about to be hanged. On Wednesday, Iraqi officials said they had arrested a guard, while the Associated Press cited one source blaming Iraqi security advisor Mowaffaq Al Robaie for capturing the video. But none of these has softened Arab anger. Ironically, Saddam, who led Iraq with an iron fist and was brutal in suppressing dissent, is now being called the Imam of Arab resistance. Perhaps, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak summed up the current mood on the street when he declared that Saddam's trial, humiliation, steadfastness in sight of the hangman's noose, and ultimate execution have established the former strongman as a martyr in the eyes of most Arabs. | |
Monday, January 8, 2007
Saddam's Hanging: Why Arabs Are Angry
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment