Death of Saddam Hussein in New World Order
18 January 2007
The President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, in American custody, was finally put to death on the occasion of Islamic festival of sacrifice. The most shocking part of the hanging was that his legs were chained while ropes were put around his neck. He was used by the occupation forces as a most effective method of Iraqi humiliation, right from the time of his capture to his unlawful killing. He was deprived of many rights under international law. He was not even allowed to meet his lawyers and relatives as per his right under international law. The Iraqi trial court is now completely exposed for its surrender to American agenda. In this context, his death can be questioned under international law.
What is shocking to note is the way the US has been handling the affairs in Iraq; it shows lack of legitimacy of national as well as international laws. It also shows that might is superior to justice. The whole affair has raised some questions? Will it be taken as a New Year Gift to the Western world, or a provocative action to the non-Western world? Will Saddam Hussein emerge as super-hero of Iraq? Kuwait and Iran have taken his death as a gift of humanity, but they can be reasonably indicted for the death of Iraqis since 2003 and destruction of Iraq. Saddam’s death might please some of those who disliked him for certain reasons, especially those who are working as the agents of the Occupation forces. And, these small pleasures would be magnified world over by the “supportive” media to celebrate his demise as “liberation of Iraq,” like it was shown at the time of the fall of Baghdad and the capture of Saddam Hussein.
On the country, a large section of people, both inside Iraq and elsewhere, would see his painful demise as the most tragic incident in the history of Iraq. Despite some cruel actions and orders on his part, he built and rebuilt Iraq, particularly the education of women, construction of roads, communication, higher education, employment, health, electricity, water and other infrastructure towards capacity building of Iraq. Saddam Hussein was, of course, a great rebel against emerging international order. The anger among the majority of the world community, cutting across religious, regional and linguistic lines, has felt the pain and anguish.
Saddam Hussein had built Iraq as a Strong State in middle of the volatile region of West Asia. He stood as a great hope for Iraqis during the UN/US-imposed sanctions. His respect grew more after he refused to leave the country and preferred to die in his homeland, more so after he refused several American offers, inside the jail, to conform to American demands. Finally he would be remembered as super-hero and a patriot who was denied a fair trial, and was not even provided an opportunity to express his views and defend himself. Three of his legal aids were murdered, and the whole judicial process remain shrouded amidst confusion and secrecy.
In most of his deliberations, Saddam had accused American democracy for being violent and criminal to Iraqis. He also denounced al-Qaeda and sectarian violence. He called for mercy not for himself but for Iraqis. He never repented on the death of his sons and dispersal of his family. He always cried over sectarian attacks and killings. However, he cannot be called a failed leader because of his three main achievements. He proved that he was true son of the soil who also became the symbol of national resistance and Iraqi unity. By cooperating with the UN for several years, he exposed major weaknesses of the UN which became instrumental in the destruction of Iraq on several counts. He also succeeded in exposing the United States on the pretext of WMD, Freedom, Democracy and Human Rights. Over the years, we have seen the fall of Iraq into a chaos created by the occupation forces.
The final verdict of the American-sponsored court on upholding the death sentence of the captured President of Iraq and his killing has been more surprising than the ‘paternalistic’ foreign policy of the United States pursued elsewhere in international relations. There are signs, particularly in Iraq, that the Iraqi resistance which is supported by nationalist Iraqis (Shii and Sunni as well as Kurds) speeded up attacks on the occupation forces in different parts of Iraq. On the other hand, massive demonstrations took place in many parts of Iraq in support of Saddam Hussein which are almost unreported realities of Iraq, as all the media agencies have to perform under American guidelines for media persons. It is more than certain that dead Saddam would emerge as hero of the century for Iraqis who have witnessed the blood sacrifice of his sons and grandson in war against occupation. Saddam’s photographs have already become national symbols for many Iraqis and non-Iraqis.
Confusions and secrecy
The whole affairs related to the trial of the Iraqi President were shrouded in secrecy and confusion that can be observed even at the timing of his martyrdom. It is sad to note that even the Iraqi government didn’t know about it, except the American-trusted prime minister Nuri al-Maliki. The Iraqi Justice Ministry which should have discharged this execution was kept away from this news. It was expecting execution on or after 26 January 2007. The whole plan of execution was implemented by the Americans and the Zionists. A day ago, American President George Bush met with some of his trusted officials —Vice President, Secretary of State, Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, Deputy National Security Advisor, and Jt. Chiefs of Staff at his Texas Ranch in which he must have shared this execution news. It is a history that most of the visits of leaders and officials of the occupation forces to Iraq were arranged secretly. It is also true that there have been at least over 1000 Resistance attacks on the occupation forces, resulting in the decline of American public support for Bush war policy at only 28 per cent. Now, after the execution of the Iraqi President, more Americans are likely to be killed. There are also more chances of more sectarian killings. Issues like insecurity, anarchy and violence would again sensitize American public for approving the fund for war expenses in Iraq which would finally subscribe to what the Israeli Lobby wanted to happen in Iraq.
The hanging of Saddam Hussein would, in fact, bring five major changes inside Iraq. One, the resistance will be deadliest against American military targets. Two, division of Iraq on sectarian lines will be an acceptable option. Three, enemies of Iraq would engineer and maximize more episodes of explosions and attacks in civilian areas, thereby concretizing sectarian colour of tensions and attack resulting in full-fledged civil warlike situation in Iraq. Four, political instability and turbulent situations would be phenomenal in West Asia, which would be characterized by more internal conflicts, anti-Establishment syndrome, violence, and border conflicts. And, five, the Palestinians would never get a fair deal from any quarter as Israel would be more assertive and aggressive against non-conformist parties and leaders of this region. As a result, the New Middle East would be disastrous for long-term peace and order in the entire region.
There were very strong signs even among the American hawks (which include representatives from both Democrats and Republicans) about the delay and rejection of the said death sentence as it would have opened all its cards against Iraqis. They wanted to destroy Iraqi resistance in installments, but this speedy jural process mirrors full-fledged involvement of the Zionists Lobby. A recent study by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, relating to the American system of
decision-making shows that the American aggressions on Iraq in March 2003 and its military occupation manifest the choice of the Israeli Lobby. There were emerging signs of growing American public pressures on the Federal government that would have resulted in the withdrawal of forces, and that would have been disastrous for this lobby.
There were also signs that the American Senate would debate on the authorization of money for war expenditures, which this lobby wanted to avoid. The lobby wants fiercer fighting in Iraq resulting in the killings of more American forces which would sensitize American public for supporting tit-for-tat policy of the US against Iraqis. The lobby wants that the US and its allies should continue its war and aggressions on the pretext of terrorism. John Mearsheimer’s study clearly shows that the US is unable to pursue its national interests in Middle East due to Lobby’s grip over the State Department. Besides, there are several recent publications by Western authors who have specified Israel’s interests and design in American occupation of Iraq. Iraqis in general also blame Israel for their sufferings.
It can, however, be said that physically dead Saddam would be more deadly for the American and British forces who have no legitimacy inside Iraq, except in the eyes of few pro-American Shii, Sunni and Kurds. A large number of Iraqi Shii who had earlier opposed Saddam for some reasons or the other, have now changed their opinion due to massive war crimes committed by the occupation forces day and night. Over the three and a half years, they have realized that the so-called liberators are thousand times worse than the Saddam regime. Reasons are quite obvious. They have realized that pro-Shii and pro-Kurd attitude of the occupying forces in Iraq is nothing but a farce. The Shiites know that their
so-called patrons are aggressive, belligerent and biased towards the Shiites in Lebanon, Syria and Iran. Similarly, the Americans have always supported Turkey against its Kurdish population.
Similarly, the Sunnis know well that the Sunni-dominated regime in Saudi Arabia is already a prime target in the classified pages of the 9/11 Report. Iraqis and others have also witnessed how Yassir Arafat was treated despite his secular, sacrificing, moderate and friendly approaches. He was disliked by the Neocons of the US and hated by Israel because of his non-conformity to their design for New Middle East. Only Abdullah’s regime in Jordan is comparatively trusted ally of the United States because it has qualified the “conformity tests” on several occasions. It is a fact that the US has always forgotten its friends for the sake of its “expansionist” interests. Russia sided with the US against Hitler only to be designated later as an “evil empire” by the US. Similarly, the US promoted Talibaans against the Red Army but later it bombed them.
It is now clear to most of Iraqis and others that its was neither crime, nor WMD, nor Saddam as Iraqi leader as the factor for American aggression, but his non-conformity and the Baathist philosophy of economic sovereignty which was posing resistance to the grand plan for the conformist New Middle East. It is due to this reason that Iraq is now the prime target for American belligerence. Most of Iraqis cannot forget how their economic, educational, and social capacities were crippled by the deadliest sanctions resulting in the death of two million. Therefore, Iraqis, except the benefited Kurds, can reasonably indict the US and its major ally UK for their massive losses, sufferings and humiliations both during the sanctions and occupation.
One can also review all the developments in Iraq where the US priority has been only building over 14 military bases, completing its largest embassy, engineering ethnic conflicts, car bombs in markets, and assassinations of leading Iraqis, forcing over 100,000 Iraqis to become refugees every month, psychological operations through media manipulation and other problems of Hobbesian state of nature. The US and its sponsored administration has failed in restoring security, law and order, supply of electricity, water and other humanitarian relief, including the working of hospitals. On the contrary, their engagements in creating political institutions and constitution in Iraq has only benefited their agenda, rather than benefiting Iraqis in general. They are not only violating human rights in various capacities but also obstructing even minimum efforts for humanitarian relief in the country. Iraqis have also lost on economic front, mainly due to “total capture” by the occupation forces on their oil wells. As a result, majority of Iraqis do not even have a kind of “police state” nor are there opportunities for any improvement due to occupation which have resulted in lawlessness and plundering of Iraq. It is in this context that the elimination of Saddam is aimed at — compounding painful situation in Iraq.
Arshi Khan, Reader, Department of Political Science, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh. And can be reached by email at email@example.com
The Milli Gazette, 16-31 January 2007, p. 24