The Saddam Verdict : Hope, Despair and Division

Saddam Hussein, the once feared despot of Iraq, who ruled the country with barbaric brutality for close to 25 years finally had his day in court and was duly awarded the death sentence. The death sentence comes for the Dujail massacre in 1982, which resulted in the extermination of 148 odd Shia Iraqi under the Sunni Baath party leadership. Iraq was in a bloody war with Iran at the time and Shia-Sunni tensions were high, with both sides looking suspiciously at the other. A failed assassination attempt led to the ultimate bloodbath under direct instructions from Saddam and carried out by his cronies, all of whom have been sentenced. The premise Saddam gave for the killings was lame and pointed out to the influence of Shia Iran actively backing Shia Iraqis to carry out an attempt to kill him. The court however, ruled that the massacre held no legal, moral or military justification and for his actions and crimes against humanity, Saddam must face the gallows. More cases against Saddam, mainly involving the gassing of the Kurds in Halabja, the Anfal campaign targeting Shias and the killing of the Marsh Arabs, still need to reach their logical conclusion, with or without Saddam. While there is no love lost for Saddam from any quarter, leaving aside his minor core group of supporters from Tikrit and the remnants of the Baath party, the execution order and the veracity and legality of the court that tried his case is under the scanner.

Questions have been raised ever since the trial began about whether Saddam would get a fair trial or not, considering the active presence of the US in Iraq, the biased approach of the current Iraqi government and the routine killings of Saddam’s defense lawyers and the kin of sitting judges. Moreover, Saddam himself refused to recognize the court and made the proceedings a propaganda tool to paint himself a martyr for his people. His religious overtures and his antics of carrying a copy of the Koran to the court did not cut much ice with religious Iraqis and Muslims worldwide keeping in mind his ‘secular’ past and colorful ways. That said, media organizations in the Arab world and commentators on the Middle East have raised their concerns about the court and the rule of law applied against Saddam. Some have even gone to the extent of calling the court a kangaroo court with a single point agenda to hang Saddam. That said, it is also true that prior to the invasion in Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam, the same commentators were the source of the gross human rights abuse carried out by Saddam and his sons Uday and Qusay. One would agree that the court and the proceedings may not meet the expectations of every analyst there is no disputing the outcome is one which is well deserved for Saddam and his cronies. It would have been a travesty of justice if Saddam would have been let off and many Iraqis would still fear the overthrown dictator keeping in mind any chances of his return to power.

The victims and the families who suffered under Iraq may welcome this sentencing, surely never would they have realistically believed that such a day would come. But the ruling is sure to upset the already precarious situation that exists in Iraq. The Shias have welcomed the decision with customary gunfire and spontaneous street celebrations. They now feel that they will get the chance to have a government that is representative of the demographics that exist in the country. Also, finally the nightmare quarter of a century of fear is finally over. But with it comes the vent up anger of the Sunnis, who fear that with Saddam gone and him never making a comeback (a popular belief by many Sunnis) there hopes of ever regaining power are bleak. Many even fear having to live as second-class citizens under the dominant Shia majority. This sense of despair and fear of losing governmental representation will fuel the Sunni insurgency in the days to come. The argument that the decision to hang Saddam will in anyway decrease the insurgency holds little merit as the Sunnis will be renege to hit back at the Americans, who they see as the cause of their ‘loss’ of power and the Shias, who they distrust because of the backing they receive from Iran.

Al-Qaeda and the Mujahideen Shura Council that are carrying out the atrocities against ordinary Iraqis will welcome this decision for two reasons. One, they never really backed Saddam, whom they saw as an equal infidel like the Americans with his western ways and secular ideology. Secondly, the decision will help them propagate the notion of the injustices being carried out by the occupying Americans against Iraq and thereby justifying their jihad against the invading infidels. However, this ruling awarding capital punishment to an erstwhile dictator will ruffle many feathers in the broader Middle East, with heads of states becoming more wary of democracy in the Arab world, if all that democracy means is that heads will literally roll. This misplaced fear, however, should not be an impediment for democracy as many citizens of countries ruled by oppressive regimes will realize the true power of democracy where a court of law can punish even the ex head of state and elections can get help get them the universal right of franchise.

Many commentators have argued that the timing of the ruling is meant to coincide with the mid term elections in the US and that it was meant to help Bush and the Republicans. Understandably, the White House has vigorously denied all such claims. One finds the argument of the curious timing as far fetched and moreover, despite the hang order, the war in Iraq and domestic scandal will not help the Republicans to save the Congress and maybe even the Senate. But one must take this moment to cherish democracy and the power it holds, it may not be perfect, and Iraq certainly is not the pinnacle of democracy, but under the true tenants of democracy it does have the power to bring even the most villainous of men in history to justice.