Who needs Saddam?
Humanist | 15.11.2002 17:35
In Florence over 500 000 people recently, in a very active way, demonstrated their passive tolerance of Saddam Husseins ruthless regime. Being the leading city of classical humanism - with the possible exception of Athens -Florence has a long tradition of resisting tyrants like the Sforzas, Mussolini and Hitler. This tradition of republican and democratic devotion will never become a thing of the past. Instead, something important is to be learnt from it.
A great renaissance humanist namned Bruni (not to be confused with Bruno) is said to have held a speach in Florence on the issue of the difference between a tyrant and the people subjugated by such a ruler. This was at a time when the free republic of Florence was involved in a bitter struggle with Sforza, the despotic ruler of Milan.
The thoughtful point made by Bruni was that if the people of Florence were in conflict with the PEOPLE of Milan there would have been possible ways to settle such a disagreement, as the TRUE interests of different nations is maintaining peaceful and contributing relations on a mutual level whereas a TYRANT, on the other hand, cares only about his OWN personal interests. Therefore the powerful Florentine republic had no other option but smashing this tyrant, Although - as a tragical but unavoidable consequence - innocent lifes were squandered.
This dilemma is essential in the Iraq - UN conflict. People will suffer severely whatever choice we make. People like those who expressed their passive acceptance of Saddams brutality also have blood on their hands whether they like it or not.
One thing is for sure: There WILL be more innocent victims in Iraq. However, we ought to realise that the TRUE interests of the nation of Iraq should NOT be mixed up with the interests of Saddam Hussein. We should respect other sovereign nations, as they have the right of developing in accordance with their own interests. But what should we do when a nation is subjugated by a selfish dictator who cares only for his own limited interests like in the case of Sforza, Hitler and Saddam? Do we have a to respect Saddam when he obviously;
* Do NOT respect the human rights of the Iraq population?
* Exposes his own population to gas attacks?
* Invades his neighbour countries?
* Time after time verbally deliver threats of attacking western countries which he has signed peace agreements with?
* Disrespects the rights of the world community to inspect presumable facilities for development, production and storage of ABC-weapons - weapons that he flagrantly has displayed that he is prepared to use?
ONE thing that is clearly obvious is that CIA and other parts of the western establishment have supported Saddam and helped him in sticking to power. Furthermore, the present Iraq itself is a "construction" of the west - that piece of land was in fact once a british "protectorate". The order in Iraq of today is not a result of the iraqis own choices to the extent that the public in general believe. The Iraqis have NOT choosed this oppression out of free will.
Don´t we have an inevitable responsability of providing opportunities for the iraqis to determine the development of their own nation? Saddams regime is NOT their choice.
A lot of people would say that we, the west, do not have the rights whatsoever to invade any other country just because we consider its leaders immoral.
A response to that opinion is that in this case it´s very clear that: A) The west IS responsable for the atrocities of Saddam and for getting rid of that dictator that we helped to power, B) It is a true obligation as a humanist and citizen of the world to resist all forms of disrespect for human rights. No one is unworthy of being adjudged such rights. The whole question of Saddam is not just "up to the Iraqis themselves".
As long as the evil tyranny of Saddam Hussein prevails in Iraq, human rights will not. Should we really just protest with WORDS against these perpetual assaults? That´s not true humanism and belief in human brotherhood in my eyes. If everyone had the attitude shared by the "peacelovers" who "protested" in Florence some days ago, neither Florence nor any other part of the western civilisation would have advanced from the dark ages to the modern times!
The arab civilisation in fact once provided Europe with intellectual assistance in developing the tradition of humanism. Today we owe THEM assistance in establishing a government that respects the idea of human dignity. Unfortunatly, some might say, such a rule - which involves the right of expressing views like the activists did recently in Florence - DOES have a price.
The thoughtful point made by Bruni was that if the people of Florence were in conflict with the PEOPLE of Milan there would have been possible ways to settle such a disagreement, as the TRUE interests of different nations is maintaining peaceful and contributing relations on a mutual level whereas a TYRANT, on the other hand, cares only about his OWN personal interests. Therefore the powerful Florentine republic had no other option but smashing this tyrant, Although - as a tragical but unavoidable consequence - innocent lifes were squandered.
This dilemma is essential in the Iraq - UN conflict. People will suffer severely whatever choice we make. People like those who expressed their passive acceptance of Saddams brutality also have blood on their hands whether they like it or not.
One thing is for sure: There WILL be more innocent victims in Iraq. However, we ought to realise that the TRUE interests of the nation of Iraq should NOT be mixed up with the interests of Saddam Hussein. We should respect other sovereign nations, as they have the right of developing in accordance with their own interests. But what should we do when a nation is subjugated by a selfish dictator who cares only for his own limited interests like in the case of Sforza, Hitler and Saddam? Do we have a to respect Saddam when he obviously;
* Do NOT respect the human rights of the Iraq population?
* Exposes his own population to gas attacks?
* Invades his neighbour countries?
* Time after time verbally deliver threats of attacking western countries which he has signed peace agreements with?
* Disrespects the rights of the world community to inspect presumable facilities for development, production and storage of ABC-weapons - weapons that he flagrantly has displayed that he is prepared to use?
ONE thing that is clearly obvious is that CIA and other parts of the western establishment have supported Saddam and helped him in sticking to power. Furthermore, the present Iraq itself is a "construction" of the west - that piece of land was in fact once a british "protectorate". The order in Iraq of today is not a result of the iraqis own choices to the extent that the public in general believe. The Iraqis have NOT choosed this oppression out of free will.
Don´t we have an inevitable responsability of providing opportunities for the iraqis to determine the development of their own nation? Saddams regime is NOT their choice.
A lot of people would say that we, the west, do not have the rights whatsoever to invade any other country just because we consider its leaders immoral.
A response to that opinion is that in this case it´s very clear that: A) The west IS responsable for the atrocities of Saddam and for getting rid of that dictator that we helped to power, B) It is a true obligation as a humanist and citizen of the world to resist all forms of disrespect for human rights. No one is unworthy of being adjudged such rights. The whole question of Saddam is not just "up to the Iraqis themselves".
As long as the evil tyranny of Saddam Hussein prevails in Iraq, human rights will not. Should we really just protest with WORDS against these perpetual assaults? That´s not true humanism and belief in human brotherhood in my eyes. If everyone had the attitude shared by the "peacelovers" who "protested" in Florence some days ago, neither Florence nor any other part of the western civilisation would have advanced from the dark ages to the modern times!
The arab civilisation in fact once provided Europe with intellectual assistance in developing the tradition of humanism. Today we owe THEM assistance in establishing a government that respects the idea of human dignity. Unfortunatly, some might say, such a rule - which involves the right of expressing views like the activists did recently in Florence - DOES have a price.
Humanist
Comments
Display the following 2 comments