The swift execution of Saddam Hussein following a flawed trial was a blunt reminder that the former dictator’s “Republic of Fear gave way, under Anglo-American occupation, to an Iraqi state of revenge. The fate of Saddam, whose atrocious crimes were reminiscent of those of the notorious Umayyad governor Al-Hajjaj bin Yusif, seemed to have been sealed long before the opening of his trial. The Umayyad governor is still remembered in the Middle East for his chilling speech made in a Baghdad mosque nearly 13 centuries ago, in which he claimed that Iraq was “a land of discord and hypocrisy and that Iraqis could be led only by the sword. Discord and hypocrisy thrive on repression and injustice, whether in Iraq or any other part of the world. Saddam’s hanging amid a crowd that included people shouting insults at him, or allegiance to the head of their own militia, was the kind of behavior likely to undermine any move toward genuine national concord and reconciliation. Long before they came to power, the architects of the execution seemed blinded by a thirst for revenge – unable to get over the pain and loss inflicted upon them and their people by the Baath. Though their suffering must be acknowledged, they were among the least qualified to help turn a new page of justice, conciliation and democracy in Iraq.
Their rush to hang Saddam after a mock trial, during which witnesses and lawyers were intimidated or murdered, reflected a misconception of justice. It also sidestepped the more abominable crimes committed under Saddam’s regime. The former leader was executed for ordering the murder of 142 people from Dujail, but this was a tiny percentage of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis whose death he was responsible for. Many Arab democracy advocates who denounced Saddam’s crimes when he was at the height of his influence saw in his trial, and the American decision to hand the dictator over to his enemies, disregard for international standards of justice.
They rightly wondered why Saddam was denied treatment similar to those of non-Arab dictators, including the late Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic who died of a heart attack at a prison in The Hague run by the International Court of Justice. The timing of the hanging was meant to humiliate not only Saddam, his relatives, and followers, but also millions of Muslims everywhere in the world. Many Muslims never had the slightest respect for him before the illegal occupation of Iraq. But the use of lies to justify the invasion and the unprecedented chaos, insecurity and suffering the invasion prompted, and the dignified way in which the former dictator faced his jailers and executioners improved his image, even among his former enemies. The biggest mistake was the timing of the execution. It came at the dawn of the Muslim feast of Adha, which is aimed at raising awareness about the sanctity of human life. The execution was apparently planned as a humiliation to Iraqi Sunnis and as a gift to Shiites on the occasion of the Muslim feast.
Those responsible seemed to have forgotten that the act would only spur more acts of vengeance common in Iraq’s recent history, which might target them one day or another. Given the impossibility that an independent judiciary might emerge under the authority of a foreign occupying power or a vindictive Iraqi government, a fair trial for Saddam and his top aides could have taken place only outside Iraq. This would have helped Iraqis learn from the mistakes that led to so much tyranny, and to discuss ways to avoid this in the future.
The responsibility for dictatorship does not rest on the shoulders of Arab despots alone. These leaders often make it to the top and reinforce their grip over society with the help of their countrymen from different walks of life, including intellectuals and political figures who trumpet their commitment to democracy. The lack of willingness on the part of many Arabs to defend their rights and to care about the victims of injustice and repression often results sooner or later in their being targeted, or their loved ones.
The reluctance of people to respond to dictatorial practices empowers dictators to pursue their repression. The decision to deprive Saddam Hussein of a fair trial and the rush to hang him on the occasion of a religious feast which he and his Arab counterparts have traditionally used as a rare occasion to release some prisoners will make more difficult the struggle for democracy in the Middle East in the years ahead.
The trial of the Iraqi leader was a missed opportunity to promote human rights and the rule of law, and to help Iraq and the region make significant steps toward justice and reconciliation. Ironically, it also provided an opportunity for the former dictator to improve his image at the expense of his jailers and executioners without having to acknowledge any responsibility for the destruction and chaos resulting from his lengthy tyrannical rule.
This should be reflected upon by those yearning for justice and democracy in the Middle East.
Kamel Labidi is a freelance journalist currently living in Arlington, Virginia. He wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR
