Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2007, pages 28-29, 33

Arab Press Review

The Execution of Saddam Hussain: An Act Of Justice or Revenge?

By Peter C. Valenti

Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussain died like he lived—as the epicenter of controversy, rancor and violence. While his Dec. 30, 2006 execution by hanging marked the end of the Saddam epoch as well as his life, his ability to still influence political events inside Iraq did not die with him. As Tariq al-Hamid astutely noted in his Dec. 31 op-ed in Saudi Arabia’s Asharq al-Awsat, “There are those who talk about legal proceedings, yet all of us know that Saddam’s trial and execution was a political matter, and not merely judicial.”

In what seemed to be a hastily arranged execution—held just five days after he lost his appeal of his death sentence for the 1982 killing of 148 civilians in Dujail—Saddam was helicoptered by U.S. forces to the execution site and handed over to Iraqi guards. Within half an hour, at 6:10 a.m., he was hanged. While U.S. officials—given the fallout over the execution—subsequently have kept mum about their involvement, it is clear from pre-Dec. 30 reports that they were advising the Iraqi government up until the event.

The day chosen for Saddam’s execution was the morning of Eid al-Adha (“holiday of the sacrifice”), the important Muslim holiday which represents the culmination of the pilgrimage (hajj) season to Mecca and re-enacts Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son to God—and God’s relieving him of that duty. Muslims around the world celebrate by slaughtering a sheep, or having one slaughtered, and distributing the meat for charity, family and friends. Because Sunnis celebrated Eid al-Adha on Dec. 30, while Shi’i Muslims celebrated it the following day, the execution seemed to send a sectarian message—intended or not.

Furthermore, and even worse, from either a sectarian or judicial perspective, his guards taunted Saddam in the last minutes of his life. The most grievous example was when at least two of the hooded guards chanted the name of Muqtada al-Sadr, an important Shi’i figure in Iraq and leader of the powerful Mahdi army which is accused of inciting sectarian violence. Saddam was suspected of killing his father, Muhammed Sadiq Sadr, a senior Shi’i cleric.

The considerable debate in the Arab world over all aspects of the execution was exacerbated by the release of the illicit cell phone video made by one of the attendees of the execution. Iraqi National Security Adviser Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, who was in attendance but seemed impotent to affect the proceedings, later admitted that that the video was made by one of the guards, since all the officials in attendance had been searched and had their cell phones taken away.

There was widespread agreement that Saddam deserved his fate.

Regardless of the particular complaints about the execution in the Arab media, there was widespread agreement that Saddam deserved his fate. His execution was celebrated quite openly in Iraq’s Shi’i and Kurdish communities—an attitude reflected in articles written by Shi’i and Kurdish Iraqis. Mahmoud al-Wandi, for example, wrote in the Jan. 3, 2007 Arabic-language Peyamner News Agency, which is connected to the Kurdistan Democratic Party: “The 30th of December 2006 will be an immortal day in the history of the Iraqi people, and as well in the history of all mankind. The beginning of this year 2007 saw a victory of the oppressed people over their oppressor with the execution of the tyrant Saddam Hussain…”

In a Jan. 1 op-ed in Kuwait’s al-Qabas entitled “Saddam: His Deeds Executed Him,” Abd al-Muhsin Yusuf Jamal characterized Saddam’s execution as “An example to every tyrant, and a lesson to every oppressor, and the end of every criminal.”

As can be expected, many Saddam-loyalists were angry. Perhaps the best and most melodramatic example was the Jan. 1 op-ed of Muhammad al-Abdullah (probably a pseudonym) in the pro-Saddam paper al-Moharer. “The calmness and firmness of the president,” he wrote, “underscores for everybody the victory of the ’victim’ over the executioner…The neck which had a rope coiled around it wasn’t alone—Iraq was assassinated…”

For others, the symbol of Saddam as the heroic paladin staving off U.S. and Israeli designs in the region was equally important. “Those who killed Saddam didn’t have as their goal Saddam the Autocrat and Repressor,” argued Tahir Kan’an in his Jan. 4 op-ed in the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi. “Rather they targeted Saddam the Warrior who was attempting to build an Arab power of resistance to Zionism and imperialism…”

Certainly the tumultuous atmosphere of a kangaroo court, along with the added symbolism of the execution taking place on Eid al-Adha, led many Arabs to note that the whole event could not help but lend itself to a sympathetic ending for Saddam.

As many asked, what was the rush? As horrible as it may have been, Saddam was convicted and executed for a relatively minor event in Dujail. Now he will not stand trial for his bloody responsibility in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88), the invasion of Kuwait (1990), the Anfal campaign (1986-89) against Iraqi Kurds, the gassing of Halabja, or the massacres of Shi’i in southern Iraq. In short, he will not answer for what is likely the death of millions of people. 

Time of Sacrifice

The issue of the execution’s “timing” has been repeatedly raised. To have executed Saddam on a holiday, especially this one, within a highly charged sectarian environment seemed incredible to many writers—and most agree that it reflects very badly on the Iraqi government. As Tariq al-Hamid exclaimed in his op-ed, “Saddam Hussain killed his opponents in the name of Arabism, honor and glory, and the Iraqi government executed him yesterday morning, before Muslims sacrifice their sheep on the morning of Eid al-Adha, in the name of democracy.”

Writing in the Jan. 2 edition of Saudi Arabia’s al-Riyadh, Abdullah ibn Ibrahim al-Jarifani lamented that Saddam has become “the sacrificial [animal] offered by the American forces as a sacrifice on the alter of democracy!” No fan of the late Iraqi leader, he observed sadly that the current state of affairs in the region indicates that there are “1,000 Saddams” in the Middle East. “We don’t know how many sacrifices remain that Iraqis must pay until Iraq can attain the ability to boast of security, stability and democracy—will they ever attain this?” al-Jarifani asked bleakly.

The always erudite Abd al-Rahman al-Rashid summed up the bad choices made by the Iraqi government. He supported bringing Saddam to justice, he wrote in the Dec. 31 Asharq al-Awsat, but pointed out that “Even in the West there is the custom that those condemned to death are not sent to their execution on holidays, such as Christmas, because like other [religions’] holidays, they are an occasion for forbearance and mercy, or at least forgetfulness.”

Describing the morning that Muslims woke up on their holiday to the news of Saddam’s execution, he explained that “the day chosen was completely a mistake, and probably it was the day which Saddam himself hoped for because he knew that it would provoke the sentiments and sensitivities of the majority.”

Nor was this just a matter of humaneness or respecting a holiday, al-Rashid argued. “The partisans of Saddam benefit from the likes of these mistakes, just like when the American forces struck Faluja and Najaf in the month of Ramadan,” he wrote. “That timing [of the execution] represents a mistake that will stoke the rage of the public and weaken the position of the government at a point in which it had declared its goal to demonstrate the strength of its new authority.”

Finally, there are those (obviously non-Shi’i) observers who see a darker sectarian message in the selection of that day for Saddam’s execution. In his Jan. 2 op-ed in Asharq al-Awsat, Dia Rishwan cited “narrow sectarian sentiments and a deep desire to take vengeance by Saddam’s opponents among the Iraqis in the government and outside it” as determining “the choice of the timing of the execution on the morning of Eid al-Adha.” The goal, he alleged, was that the religious day “become—in accordance with their declarations—’two holidays and not just one holiday.’ The shared political view between them and their great ally in Washington on behalf of this principle was behind the decision.”

Writing in the same edition of Asharq al-Awsat, a suspicious Husayn Shabakshi asked, “How is it possible for the current Iraqi government to persuade its partisans among the sectarian militias which serve under it that it is a government for all Iraqis while it is bent on specifically provoking the sentiments of Sunnis in a clear and intentional manner?”

Sectarian Strife

Clearly many observers—perhaps even more outside Iraq than within—view Saddam’s execution through a sectarian prism. Mishari al-Dhayidi’s op-ed in the Jan. 2 Asharq al-Awsat laid out the indictment: “The execution of Saddam Hussain in this provocative manner, suspicious in its speed and timing, will contribute to the flaring up of the sectarian war between Sunnis and Shi’i in Iraq.” 

In his Jan. 1 op-ed in Iraq’s al-Badeal al-Dimuqrati, Najah Muhammad Ali’s revealed his belief that Saddam did not get a fair trial, but his most persistent message was one of overt hostility to Shi’i. “The execution of Saddam on Eid al-Adha—or rather, the Day of Arafah—gained for Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki the popularity of Shi’i public opinion inside Iraq and probably outside as well. However it has lost him popular Arab and Islamic opinion, the majority of which was sympathetic to Saddam during his rule and after his fall at the hands of foreign military attack, and up until his execution. This should be made clear to al-Maliki and his advisers,” he proposed ominously, “and they should beware the consequences.”

While Mishari al-Dhayidi clearly viewed Saddam’s fate as just, he argued that, due to the situation in Iraq, greater care should have been taken in how to mete out that justice. “The issue of Saddam has been transformed into a share of stock in the Iraqi conflict market,” he explained, “for the Sunnis, probably with the exception of al-Qaeda, regard Saddam as the only symbol left to them…While the Shi’i and Kurds have ’legitimate’ militias, there is no symbol for the Sunnis to rally to…”

Yet it was Tariq al-Hamid who, in the Dec. 31 op-ed quoted at the beginning of this article, attempted to demolish the sectarian divide over Saddam. Noting the unfortunate and provocative decision to execute Saddam on the day Sunnis celebrate Eid, he argued that many people are forgetting history in order to view Saddam’s execution as the purview of Shi’i. “Saddam Hussain was executed because of the events at Dujail only,” al-Hamid wrote, “but this is only a tiny part [of his legacy] and ignores the facts. Shi’i were not the only victims of Saddam Hussain, as there are the Kurds, and they are Sunnis…and there is the massacre of Ramadi, which befell the Sunnis, and then there is the blood of the Iran War, and Kuwait and the blood of its prisoners. To all of these [belong] the right over Saddam Hussain’s neck, not to the Shi’i only.”

“The Guy Who Tried to Kill My Dad”

Since no one can overlook the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq and their oversight of the country’s political affairs, it is only logical to question the White House role in Saddam’s execution. Again, even those writers who supported Saddam’s execution questioned its timing. As the lead editorial of Qatar’s al-Rayah of Dec. 31 suggested, “The execution of Saddam in this quick manner indicates that Washington is the one who planned and directed matters, that the Iraqi government is merely an executer [pun on executor and executioner] of orders, and that the goal of the Americans in the execution was to end the government of Saddam by way of the symbol of this government who [also] had embodied the resistance.”

Mishari al-Dhayidi questioned political and personal motives alike. Noting that Iraqi National Security Adviser al-Rubaie, who reportedly had been tortured under Saddam’s government, could easily have been motivated by revenge, he turned his attention to the White House: “Was this the latest mistake in a string of mistakes that the Americans muddled up in Iraq,” al-Dhayidi wondered, “or was it that Bush…wanted by the execution of Saddam, ’the new Hitler,’ to send a strong domestic message in America on the heels of the elections in order to say that he is really doing something significant there?”

Writing in Jordan’s Addustour of Dec. 30, Yasir al-Za’atirah issued a forceful condemnation: “If Saddam Hussain deserved execution, and if we truly strive for real justice,” he suggested, “then this is a matter that is applicable to many leaders of the Third World—but luckily for them they enjoy the blessings of Washington. If Saddam deserved execution, then there are those who deserve it more than him, as is the case with George Bush and those around him from the gang of neoconservatives, and with them Blair of course, who have caused the deaths of 655,000 Iraqis up until today…and the one who deserves execution is a person who demonstrates with all insolence that he came to Iraq and remained there on behalf of the protection of oil and protection of Israel, and it was on behalf of those two goals that he was able to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.”

While Iraq’s future is still uncertain at this point, it can at least be said that Saddam’s hanging should not be seen as the beginning of the end of the country’s nightmare. Some observers maintain that  it is difficult to see it as even the end of the beginning. As Ghassan al-Imam noted in his Jan. 2 Asharq al-Awsat op-ed: “When the sheikh of the al-Nazaq clan, Awdah Abu Tayih, died, Lawrence [of Arabia] commented, ’Now has ended the Arab Middle Ages.’ That was not correct,” al-Imam argued. “We are still living in the injustice of the Arab Middle Ages. It did not and will not end with the death of Saddam. It will continue with the presence of rulers in Iraq who will not diminish the injustice and oppression…”

Peter C. Valenti, a free-lance writer and translator, teaches Islam and modern Middle East history at New York’s New School University.

---

< Prev		Next >