- Finally, Saddam Hussein is in the box. I have been
waiting
decades for this historical moment, the finale of a melodrama: "The
Thief of Baghdad - Rise and Fall."
-
- As with all the best plays, the end was a big surprise.
Unlike his sons and grandson, the monster, the "Great Leader,"
the veteran of so many wars, upheavals and assassination attempts was so
afraid, weak and vulnerable that he gave himself up without so much as
a fistfight. There were no Republican Guard, no fedayeen, not even any
bodyguards around.
-
- Gone were his palaces, ministers, hand-kissers, and
tribal
and family members. Here is the feared Saddam, now a caveman in a tomb-like
hole, cut off from the rest of the world and from the troops he supposedly
directed.
-
- What do we feel about this? I was asked the same question
by The New York Times, Reuters, Saudi Radio and many American friends.
I wasn't sure why, but I felt happy and upset, relieved and humiliated,
all in the same very tense, dazed, surreal moment. I asked every fellow
Arab and Muslim I communicated with, and they all had the same confused
thoughts and feelings.
-
- Now I know why I felt that way. Yes, Saddam was a
mass-murderer,
but he should have been treated with dignity and humanity as a leader or
at least as a prisoner of war. Showing him on TV like a hunted animal
violates
the Geneva Convention. When Iraqi TV showed imprisoned American soldiers,
even though they were fully uniformed and in a far better shape, America
cried foul. Certainly, Iraq's former president deserved to be treated,
at least, by the same standard.
-
- It was ironic that the Americans were the ones who caught
Saddam and get to decide where and how to try him. Wasn't it America who
brought Saddam to power in a CIA plot, supported and maintained his regime,
defended and covered up for him when he used weapons of mass destruction
against Iran and the Kurds, and failed to warn him when he hinted it to
the US ambassador, against invading Kuwait? Wasn't it Donald Rumsfeld,
now defending the deliberate humiliation of Saddam as fair, who visited
Iraq in 1983 to further his business interests while the dictator was
committing
war crimes? Maybe that is why Rumsfeld is contradicting his own president
today by calling Saddam a prisoner of war, not a war criminal. This way,
Saddam can be spared a public trial that would reveal too many embarrassing
secrets and embarrass too many of the "good guys".
-
- Therefore, to America who made and broke Saddam I say:
Thanks for nothing.
|
