reflection

there is probably no one who doubts that saddam hussein deserved to be hung.
regardless of whether of not he was a pawn of the west, a useful tool that was quickly dropped only to be turned into a global bogeyman, he was still a murderous dictator who thought nothing of killing, torturing and maiming the citizens of iraq for his own benefit. he had little concern for the rights of others and was so obviously guilty of crimes against humanity that it somewhat makes a mockery of tariq ali’s argument that the trial was a mockery and rigged.

in most circumstances i am not in favour of capital punishment but saddam was one of those exceptions where i would be hard pressed to make a case for him not to go to the gallows, as i would have liked to see pinochet swing.

it is true that there are many legitimate reasons why saddam should not have hung at this moment. there were still many crimes for him to answer for which would allow for various iraqis and kurds to have closure.
additionally there are still the issue of complicity of the west in the actions of saddam. many have made the argument that saddam may have been rushed to his death to avoid the embarrassment of the west, which given that we all seem to know about it seems a little odd.

again i have to disagree with the tone of ali’s comment “but what is
conveniently forgotten is thatmost of his crimes were committed
when he was a staunch ally of those who are now occupying the country.” this seems to be saying as long as you can point to someone letting you commit crimes you do not have to pay for the crime if you get caught.

but this is a digression from what i was going to talk about.
when i heard on the radio that saddam had hung the announcer mentioned how calm, almost dignified, if a little bemused saddam appeared as he walked to the gallows.

it transpires that for saddam his dead man walking moment was not one of calm but one where he was subjected to taunting and being secretly filmed. in the end saddam was taunted, baited by the witnesses.

questions have to be asked about how and why this could have happened.
john prescott, the deputy prime minister, has described the actions that occurred as being deplorable. david cameron said it was “quite wrong”.

why do i care if someone who i was happy to see hang was treated as an animal in some bear pit?
for the simple fact that we should be better than that (and yes i am aware of the irony of saying this while endorsing the hanging).

we were shocked by the outrages of lynndie england and co at abu ghraib, not because we were surprised that such abuses of human rights could take place, we know they could and did, but it was always somewhere else. we were outraged because this time it was, if you will forgive the crude phrasing, one of our own that was doing it.

if some of the rhetoric of the war in iraq and against terrorism is to be believed then one of the key elements of it was the establishment of noble ideals. ideals that we cherish in the west and that are absent in the rest of the world. evidently this aspect, like so many others, of the war on terror has failed.
even as the liberal freedoms and safeguards we promised to iraq are not there, at home we are becoming more and more used to the occurrences of “rendition” flights and the curtailing of previously held civil liberties (not to mention the imbalance of power in terms of information and detail that must be provided to the usa, but is not reciprocated).

the scenes at saddam’s hanging made it very clear that the new iraq may not be very different from the old iraq. the reactions from the west demonstrate how difficult the situation now is. the west has created a new democracy in iraq and so cannot be seen to interfere. much of the west has to balance their disapproval of the death penalty with their support of the iraqi.
the occupying forces cannot participate in the hangs, as that would be interfering in the business of a sovereign state. instead we have the distasteful scenes that took place at saddam’s hanging.

yet the west is so obviously the paymasters of the new iraqi state that all the diplomatic phrasings that amount to more than “it is their country, it is their decision” are as mealy mouthed as a clarkson column.
the previously tenuous situation of the iraqi state has become so much worse because of the hanging; it has served not to heal but to inflame.
the west’s desire to withdraw from the situation it has created has more than likely strengthened but its ability to do so has been weakened.

there is no need to shed a tear for saddam, as in the words of margaret beckett, he has been held to account. yet i fear the time for crying has not passed as the situation in iraq and surrounding areas will get worse, while the usa will find itself stuck in the quagmire of its war on terror with no clear idea of the direction it should be going in, while trampling on the rights and freedoms of friend and foe.