Saddam Court on Trial

When Saddam Hussein was charged with war crimes two years ago, hopes ran high that his trial would bolster a new Iraq.

"The trial also marks an important step in Iraqi efforts to regain international legitimacy and achieve some sort of national reconciliation," said the Daily Star of Lebanon.

Today those hopes remain in the future. As Hussein's trial in Baghdad resumes this week, much of the international online commentary about the proceedings has been critical, thanks to Hussein's courtroom outbursts. "End This Farce," said the Khaleej Times in February. The trial is in "shambles," said the Arab News in April.
After the U.S. invasion, the abuses at Abu Ghraib, and the deaths of thousands of Iraqi civilians, "Saddam's crimes against humanity hardly compare," said British activist Felicity Arbuthnot in Islam Online.

Defenders of the trial admit shortcomings but contend that time will vindicate the proceedings.

Saddams' antics are to be expected, writes trial observer Nehal Bhuta in the Daily Star of Lebanon (which, unfortunately, has become a subscription site).

"The impression that Saddam has successfully undermined the judicial process is misleading," he wrote last week.

The Spanish newspaper ABC says the trial is "a reflection of the improvised planning with which everything [in Iraq] has been conducted." But the editors of the Madrid daily say justice for Saddam is one of several reasons to be optimistic about Iraq's future. The trial, they say, is "exemplary in that it represents a renunciation of mere revenge."

"This is about justice after 25 years of Saddam's government -- not justice for the winners, but justice for the victims," writes Zbynek Petracek published by Czech newspaper Mlada in March. "The trial resembles a farce for cameras in combination with the lives of judges being threatened," he acknowledges, but says that is no reason not to proceed. "You can't please everyone."

Writing for the news debate site bitterlemons.org, international Egyptian reformist Bassma Kodmani finds it remarkable just how scarce the commentary - negative or positive - is on Saddam's trial.

"Most newspapers, with slight variations in tone, limit their coverage to neutral informative articles," she says.

For her this is a sign that the political culture that produced Saddam is changing.

"For most Arabs," she says, "the trial is only one aspect of America's grand design to change Iraq and reshape the Middle East. But there is no sense that the trial will have much impact on the future of the region. This may not be an accurate assessment and is probably more a reflection of changing priorities and the feeling that the worst has already happened."

By contrast, says Kodmani, "human rights activists and liberal intellectuals and opinion leaders, applaud the trial as representing the first time an Arab leader is held accountable in a court of law for his crimes. In Lebanon in particular, they see in it a hopeful precedent for the trial of key figures implicated in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

For Kodmani, the long-term impact will be beneficial.

"Arabs need to learn that stability can and must be built on voluntary civic coexistence rather than on the iron-fist control of a dictator. They need to develop the notion of equal responsible citizenship as the basis of national cohesion. The annihilation of Saddam through his indictment and execution will provide the ruins on which to build this new political culture," she writes.

By Jefferson Morley |  May 22, 2006; 10:24 AM ET  | Category:  Mideast
Previous: In Da Vinci's Code, A World of Distrust | Next: Saddam's Greatest Hits

Posted by: P. J. Casey | May 22, 2006 12:41 PM

Posted by: Andy Pesko | May 22, 2006 04:16 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.