Saddam Hussein All About Him

Saddam Hussein's Hanging - Possible Geopolitical Costs for the U.S.

2007-01-11T20:35:00.000-08:00

Saddam Hussein wasn’t termed the “Butcher of Baghdad” for nothing. He was a ruthless dictator who committed widespread crimes against humanity. He was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. He deserved to be brought to justice for his crimes. Yet, in a sharp detour from the road to justice, Saddam Hussein was hanged in what amounted to little more than yet another act of the kind of raw sectarian revenge that has come to define post-war Iraq. By handing Hussein over to be hanged even as real due process concerns persisted, the U.S. not only foreclosed the opportunity to bring Hussein to justice, but also undertook a course that will likely impose additional adverse geopolitical consequences at a time when it can ill-afford more such burdens.

By delivering Hussein to be hanged, the U.S. took its most visible step to date in embracing Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s pursuit of sectarian domination for the Shia. Such a course is to be expected from Maliki, as his Shia-led government continues to depend, to a large extent, on support from parties associated with the Mahdi Army and Badr Militia, two leading Shia militias that have played major roles in instigating and carrying out sectarian violence. Its policies have politically and economically disenfranchised the Iraq’s Sunnis and put that nation firmly on the path of fragmentation.

By catering to the desires of a sectarian government that has tilted increasingly toward Iran against American interests, the U.S. has damaged its ability to serve as an “honest broker” for national reconciliation in Iraq. It has possibly squandered its ability to effectively reach out to Sunni leaders and thereby made it more difficult to bring stability to Iraq.

The fact that the hanging was carried out at the onset of Eid al-Adha, an important Sunni religious holiday, has further driven wedges between the Sunnis and Iraq’s Shia-led government and between the Sunnis and the United States. Eid al-Adha is a feast of sacrifice. It is an occasion for forgiveness. The timing of the hanging could only have sharpened the Sunnis’ pain and sense of humiliation. Worse, the hanging was carried out to shouts of “Moqtada,” a Shia cleric who has played a leading role in inciting violence against Iraq’s Sunnis and whose militia is responsible for ethnic cleansing in sections of Baghdad. All said, the Maliki government sent an unmistakable message to Iraq’s Sunnis that the Iraq it envisions has no respect for their religious traditions and has no place for them.

That message will likely translate in increased and more intense sectarian violence. With Sunni Arab states increasingly concerned about Iranian aspirations for regional domination, it is possible that such states could passively permit their citizens to assist Iraq’s Sunnis. Should the Sunnis be pushed to the brink of disaster, it is even possible that these states could actively lend military, financial, and technical assistance to them in a bid to safeguard their own critical interests. The interests of moderate Sunni states such as Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia would be endangered by a Shia victory in Iraq that would transform that country into a vehicle from which Iran could project its growing power.

The hanging could also reunify the fractured anti-U.S. Ba’athist movement. With Sunnis feeling that they cannot count on either the pro-Shia government in Baghdad or the U.S. for protection, Iraq’s increasingly disenfranchised Sunni population could turn to the Ba’athists for protection. If so, that movement could regain the vigor it lost when Saddam Hussein’s regime was toppled and its leaders were either captured or sent into hiding. At the same time, if the Sunnis conclude that their community in Iraq is confronted with near-certain destruction, there is some risk that such a situation could provide Al Qaeda in Iraq with the opening it seeks to become “mainstreamed” among Iraq’s Sunnis, not to mention among Sunnis worldwide. Such a development would greatly complicate the overall U.S.-led war on terrorism. Nevertheless, it is a development that cannot be dismissed altogether.

An increase in U.S. soldiers, perhaps along the lines of that recommended by Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), will likely be insufficient to contain the increased sectarian violence that will occur in the aftermath of Saddam Hussein’s hanging. According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), there are currently 23 known militias in Iraq. The Mahdi Army has as many as 60,000 fighters. The Badr militia has 5,000, but is also assisted by Iran. There are up to 40,000 active Sunni insurgents. Al Qaeda has as many as 3,500 foreign fighters. These figures do not include sympathizers who provide non-military support to the various armed elements. Presently, these groups enjoy military advantages from local knowledge and support networks, speed in which they can carry out attacks, and dramatically lower operating costs than the U.S. These advantages have allowed the various armed elements to bring about a military stalemate.

The United States may also have weakened the credibility of its stated intent to see Iraq evolve into a state defined by the rule of law. Leading human rights groups expressed concern about the legal process that led to Saddam Hussein’s conviction and hanging. Human Rights Watch argued that there were “serious procedural flaws” during the trial. According to that group, the actions of Iraq’s government “undermined the independence and perceived impartiality of the court,” there were “numerous shortcomings in the timely disclosure of incriminating evidence,” there were “violations of the defendants’ basic fair trial right to confront witnesses against them,” and there were “lapses of judicial demeanor that undermined the apparent impartiality of the presiding judge.” Amnesty International charged that the legal process “failed to satisfy international fair trial standards. Political interference undermined the independence and impartiality of the court, causing the first presiding judge to resign and blocking the appointment of another, and the court failed to take adequate measures to ensure the protection of witnesses and defense lawyers, three of whom were assassinated during the course of the trial. Saddam Hussein was also denied access to legal counsel for the first year after his arrest, and complaints by his lawyers throughout the trial relating to the proceedings do not appear to have been adequately answered by the tribunal. The appeal process was obviously conducted in haste and failed to rectify any of the flaws of the first trial.” As a consequence, especially among Iraq’s Sunnis and neighboring Arab states, the credibility of the U.S. commitment to due process has been undermined. Such a development is not helpful in advancing the objectives of American public diplomacy in a region in which the U.S. is widely viewed unfavorably.

Reflecting Sunni sentiments, the Al Quds al-Arabi website opined, “The American Government suffered a lethal blow from its allies in Iraq when they acted in an abhorrent sectarian way at a critical historic moment as they insisted on carrying out the death sentence on the blessed day of Eid al-Adha, one of the most sacred days in Islam, and allowed some spiteful people to insult the Iraqi president with political slogans and offensive words without any respect for the sanctity of the dead and the sensitivity of the occasion.” It added, “We do not exaggerate if we say that it deliberately made this insult and this humiliation to more than 1.5 billion Muslims through this barbaric implementation of the death sentence and the humiliating violations during it.” In short, at least among Sunnis who comprise the majority of the world’s Muslims, the U.S. may have suffered a self-inflicted setback that further complicates its ability to build a constructive relationship with the Muslim world.

In the end, while the hanging of Saddam Hussein closed a terrible chapter in Iraq’s history, it likely opened the door to a fresh tragic sequel that could further undermine Iraq’s prospects for stability and unity. It will also likely worsen the U.S. geopolitical position in the region on account of its further reducing the already scarce options available to the U.S. for addressing the challenges it faces in Iraq. Whether or not the U.S. has lost its ability to work with the Sunnis remains to be seen, but robust efforts to repair the damage will be needed and there will be short-term costs that will be incurred on account of the recent hanging of Saddam Hussein

Saddam Dead, US Guilty of First-Degree Murder

2007-01-11T20:33:00.000-08:00

So, the Americans’ monster has been buried for good, and his monstrosity has been brought to a ‘just’ end. Now, the Americans can wrap themselves up in the cozy blanket of Saddam’s execution and ‘live happily ever after’. That’s how they wanted it to be, but, sadly, it’s not going to be that way. The US has persistently refused to learn from the past mistakes, and has never paid heed to what others had to say. It has had the tendency to lean on its own rather questionable wisdom despite an overwhelming load of contrary opinions. Drunk on power and ambitious to build its influence to unprecedented heights, the US pursued its unwise foreign policy to dangerous limits, and paid for it with a September 11.

Saddam’s execution is another feather in the blood-red American cap. This might not make Bush perspire, but would certainly make things uncomfortable for the US. Saddam’s execution has ensured that the future of the world’s most powerful nation is deep crimson. The dictator’s execution was entirely illegal and was in brazen contravention of the international law. The right to punish the dictator, if at all, was the prerogative of the Iraqis, and the Iraqis alone, no other authority should legally punished the fellow. And if he was to be punished by an international court, it was to be done following the procedure established by the international law. In this case, it was a sham procedure followed by an illegitimate court, whose judges were arbitrarily removed to suit the fancy of the occupants, and the verdict was a rush to a prearranged conclusion. This means that the entire process was devoid of legitimacy at all stages.

No matter how grave the dictator’s crimes, he deserved a fair trial. A fair trial is not actually in the interest of the one tried but the one who tried because if the trial is not fair, the legitimacy of the trial itself is eroded, which makes the tried a martyr and the court a monster. Fair trial, therefore, not as much a prisoner’s defence as that of the prosecutor and the court. The court that sentenced Saddam lacked legitimacy on all counts. The US, therefore, is guilty of first-degree murder.

Reaction to Saddam's Hanging Execution

2007-01-11T20:31:00.000-08:00

Very recently, President of the United States of American, George W. Bush, proclaimed that justice is done. However, all the ways of bringing in justice shall be always accompanying by the principle of international law, as well as humanitarian legal instrument.

From the very outset, I do support the hanging execution of Saddam, due to the burden of concrete atrocity evidence. And even some stated that it is not fair to Saddam, compared to Pol Pot (head of Cambodian killing field), Ponochet, Hitler, Czar, it is better than not to execute him. I believe in the theory of “nothing is perfect”, this implies that we have some justices is better than not at all.

I hereby do not stand for or against the capital punishment, since it is the issue of state sovereignty; however, a small clip of Saddam’s hanging execution, broadcasted by CNN and BBC shall not be displayed to the world at all. The word by the Iraq judge that Saddam is now put into hanging execution is enough!!!

Human dignity shall be carried out even during or after death, and in this sense Saddam is still human being.

The USA, as the world’s most prominent player of international law, shall recognize such the human dignity, adopted by the United Nations, and latter on ratified into its own law. To me, the clip of Saddam’s hanging execution is just “the personal revenged between President of the United States of America, George W. Bush, and Saddam Hussein.”

Saddam Hussein, Death of a Dictator

2007-01-11T20:28:00.000-08:00

Saddam Hussein
Iraq’s chief enforcer of pain
The sanctity of human life
By the thousands he did disdain
Dissidents he did abruptly contain
Outmaneuvering and people eliminating
The butcher of Baghdad cold and calculating
The mass murderer unrepentant and self-exalting
Saddam, the one who confronts
As defined in Arabic
Preferring bullets over ballots
Callous cruelty over kindness
Organizing concealed opposition activity
He ascended the national ranks
Through a series of sham trials
Executions, assassinations, and intimidation
Saddam and his Baath party swiftly removed
Any group or person suspected of challenging Ba'ath rule.
Tightly controlling conflict
Between government and the defense
To secure his repressive rule
He went to every expense
And was quickly to dispense
With political opponents
Choosing to cement his own authority
Forcibly, ruthlessly, and firmly
Becoming leader of the Baath Party
Practicing one-party rule repressively
Creating a police state militarily
Employing censorship and violence unapologetically
Unkind and cruel to Iraq’s Shia, Kurdish and Marsh Arabs
Massacring the Kurds
Consolidating power in a nation
Riddled with profound tensions
Iraq had been split
Along social, ethnic, religious, and economic fault lines
Such divisions did define
The dictator's rise at that time
Improving living standards
Via modernization and education
Yet as for his rule and dictatorial organization
He never withheld torture or assassination
Anything to ensure self-promotion and aggrandization
Thousands of portraits, posters, statues and murals
Were erected in his honor all over Iraq.
His presence could nearly give his closest men a heart attack
Uplifting himself to a place of deity
Plastering his face seen on the sides of office buildings
Schools, airports, shops, and currency
Worshipping himself arrogantly
The devilish dictator had many enemies
Knocking off every questionable character
Even those accused falsely
Killing the innocent who didn’t favor him
Using the governmental apparatus to cause destruction
Saddam fought Iran, had blood stained hands
Ivaded Kuwait, espousing himself to be great
He defied the International Community
Despised and likely bribed UN inspectors
Yet justice eventually came
When he was convicted and found guilty
By an Iraqi Special Tribunal
He was hanged like a war criminal
Given no proper funeral
The lesson to be learned
Hurt people hurt people
If you hate yourself
You will respond with hatred
Toward everybody else
Saddam never knew his father
His wounds went deep
Saddam's 13-year-old brother died of cancer
His stepfather treated Saddam harshly
Is it any wonder therefore what he would be?
Saddam’s self-hate turned to tyranny
Sadly afflicting and massacring his citizenry
Killing both his daughter's hubbies
Insidiously inflicting perpetual cruelty
Shall be his life legacy.

Making a Killing: Reflections on Saddam's Exeuction

2007-01-11T20:27:00.000-08:00

What do I know about international relations? I’m no man of the world. I’m not cunning like Richard Perle. I don’t pretend to know anything about the required ingredients for Democratic reform, like so many involved in that budging cottage industry. I have my own, mundane problems to solve.

Still, there’s Saddam Hussein’s execution, weighing on my mind. I suppose it should be since so many of my tax dollars have gone to see it through; since so many of my fellow Americans have died to enact this justice. For what it has cost us all directly or indirectly Saddam's execution calls us all to reflection.

The dictator’s eerie resemblance to my own father aside, I have misgivings about our heavy hand in this sad chapter of world history. We selected and invaded a country. With one hand we put its ruler on trial, and with another we attempted to rebuild what was broken. Such an idea is beyond the fiction any wild-eyed writer could ever hope to dream. Yet this is our reality, and it should be considered carefully.

There’s no arguing that Saddam was not a tyrant. But there are a lot of tyrant dictators holding sway over countries; some, obviously, much more dangerous than Hussein. Why did we chose him and not another leader?

Asking hard questions is one thing, but the answers are far more disconcerting. Saddam was selected because he was a deemed a threat to our country because of his stockpile of WMDs and his ties with terrorism. Thus, the man had to be destroyed and things like liberation and democratic reform would naturally follow.

Unfortunately, it didn't. And our initial reasons for toppling Saddam proved to be entirely inaccurate: he had no weapons of mass destruction, the ones we had sold him he had already used. He was no threat to America. He also had no loyalty to terrorists. He may have been an evil man, hardly exceptional, but he was also quite innocuous. It is not that he did not deserve justice, it is just the manner in which we extracted it and the delusion that we have accomplished something positive.

There can be little satisfaction in breaking into a man’s home and lynching him in the street, even after our wild-ideas have proven false, while the rest of the neighborhood watches horrified. In that story which agent commits the greater evil? In World War Two we fought two empires at the same time. Today we destroy crippled countries, preemptively, and put their insane leaders on trial. And for what? Was Saddam, the puppet, not the product of a dangerous world which we augment with our own recklessness? And was this the embodiment of civilized justice or a blistering repayment?

As the rope was put around his neck Saddam was mocked by his executioners. I see vengeance, not justice. Did Saddam’s thoughts turn to his neighbor, Iran, busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, un-encumbered? Did his thoughts turn to North Korea? Did he lament that he had not forged a so-called civilized state where notions of international democratic reform foster in the minds of lazy intellectuals to be borne on the backs of the common man?

What started as a spectacle in shock and awe ends in the spectacle of execution. When the execution video hit YouTube it was an explosion in sadistic voyeurism. And why not? This whole endeavor, of course, has been to satisfy our blood-lust. The public wanted a crucifixion and it got one. Now that we have extracted repayment for 9/11 will we leave Iraq?

Perhaps Bush will emerge from his war meetings with a plan to bring the troops home. We will see where the priorities lie now, but with Saddam dead I feel our idealism for Iraq much deflated. This thing, for all intents and purposes, is over. Saddam's blood is on my hands, but the mess is left for someone else to clean up.