The Elephant Meets Saddam's Kangaroo Court
MECA Media | 04.11.2006 18:19 | Repression | Workers' Movements | World
Felicity Arbuthnot writes, The U.S. administration's stage managed illegal farce: the trial of Iraq's legitimate President and others of his government seems set to conclude(with the U.S., puppet 'Prime Minister' Maliki having already declared a guilty verdict) to coincide with America's mid-term elections.
Saddam done and dusted as President Bush's ratings plummet, is allegedly, a strategy advised by Pentagon P.R. gurus to boost the little man's popularity.
However, if the unthinkable happens, even from the grave, Saddam, who survived successive Presidents and Prime Ministers attempts to cripple his country, will haunt Bush and Blair's tenure for all time. That the trial resumed on the fifth anniversary of the fall of the twin towers was another pathetic stunt, anyway missed by most.
Yet the enormity of the crimes which have been and are being perpetrated in the name of 'we the people', seem less than sufficiently addressed. The execution of residents from the village of Dujail in 1982, after an assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein, if abhorrent, was legal in Iraq law.
Presidential immunity is as valid for Saddam Hussein as for President Bush, who has signed execution warrants for a comparable amount of prisoners in the state of Texas. But the elephant in the courtroom, is the 1988 deaths, during the Iran-Iraq war, of the Kurdish villagers at Hallabja. The US and UK, having repeated the mantra of this bloody episode for a decade, strangely have chosen no trial for Hallabja with suggestions, incredibly, even of a posthumous one.
Dead men cannot talk as to who provided chemical weapons to both Iraq and Iran: primarily the U.S. and U.K. and France. On October 3rd., in Managua, Donald Rumsfeld airily voiced opposition to a lengthy trial.*
Nothing to do,surely, with the fact that days after Hallabja, Rumsfeld in another incarnation, popped in on Saddam to flog more lethal weapons for the U.S. chemical and other arms industries. To try Iraq's leaders for Hallabja would be to have them inevitably list the companies who provided the chemicals, as did the eleven thousand eight hundred page dossier which Iraq provided the UN weapons inpectors in December 2002, which was effectively stolen by US officials at the UN., returned largely illegible, the majority of pages missing - names of all the suppliers removed.
Water would be further muddied by an extensive US War College Report which concluded Iran, not Iraq, attacked Hallabja, just over its border. Either way the same countries supplied the weapons.
Whatever the outcome of the illegal, US stage managed kangaroo court,stemming from an illegal invasion with an appeal seemingly set to be denied, a litany of murdered lawyers, many tons of documents denied to what remains of the defence and twenty thousand pages of documents stolen from the Court office of a surviving defence lawyer, it is US and UK standing and a President and Prime Minister, which have suffered a blow set to ring down history.
Comparsions may be odious, but compare attorneys who know each day may be their last for defending Saddam Hussein and his government, yet committed to as near to a semblance of justice in the circumstances, to Prime Minister Anthony Blair, Q.C., who did not even see fit to turn up to the Parliamentary Debate on Iraq (31st., October) forced by Welsh and Scottish National Parties.
A Prime Minister - avowed to 'stay the course' in Iraq, down to the last blood-drop of the lives of other families' children - unable, apparently, to face even criticism. Neither has he faced bereaved families who have repeatedly requested to talk to him about the reasons for the invasion.
Whatever about Saddam Hussein's human rights record, his courage is unquestionable. Arrested, humiliated, imprisoned, shown being medically examined, photographed in his underpants, his sons and fifteen year old grandson shot like fish in a barrel, the sons bodies displayed near naked to the world - all the above explicitly in contravention of the Geneva Convention - his wife and daughters in exile, his dignity is in stark contrast to leaders closer to home.
If the many reports alleging he and other senior members of his government were offered the chance of going in to exile and refused, Saddam quoted as saying he was an Iraqi and would die in Iraq, the contrast will be even more stark. For all the iron fist of his rule - which in the carnage wrought by the invasion many Iraqis fervently wish was back - proof that he did not hand down penalties he was unable to face himself.
However, should the death sentence be imposed, current carnage will likely pale by comparison. On 31st October, The (pan-Arab) Ba'ath Party issued a statement stating that: 'The life of President Saddam and his comrades is a red line, not to be crossed.'
The illegal execution of a legitimate Arab and Muslim leader and colleagues will inflame not alone the Islamic world, but countless others. No US or UK citizen will be able to assume they are safe anywhere - and the fault will not be of the Crusader President Bush's cited 'Islamic fascists', it will lie squarely at door steps on Capitol Hill and in Whitehall.
However, there may be a chance to avert unthinkable events on all fronts, if a modicum of courage can be found in government in Washington and London.
It has just come to light that on 1st September, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention declared the trial illegal and in contravention of Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - to which both the United States and Iraq are signaturies.
The President of the Arab Lawyers Association, Sabah Al Mukhtar, says a retrial in a truly independent court would be virtually guaranteed to find the defendents not guilty.
Whilst this would open a can of worms for illegal occupiers it would be a lesser evil than the enormity of summary executions of Iraq's legitimate rulers and the subsequent rivers of blood likely to engulf the region and surely trigger attacks across the globe.
No doubt those Pentagon P.R. gurus can knock up some face saving statement. With America's closest ally in the region, Saudia Arabia, declaring the invasion an irrideemable disaster, a thought should also be given to the hundred and fifty thousand hostages on Iraq soil: Bush and Blair's soldiers.
The woeful duo might also do worse than ponder on the words of a man who knew a bit about colonial adventures, Rudyard Kipling. 'For the sin ye do by two and two, ye must pay for one by one.'
MECA Media
e-mail:
arbuthnot4iraq@yahoo.co.uk
Homepage:
http://www.arbuthnot4iraq.blogspot.com
Comments
Hide the following 6 comments
i hope..............
04.11.2006 23:46
The trial is, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal.
And as for dick in mouth, I thought people were going veg and so meat is out of the picture. Blairs Britain, like Blair's Iraq is a growing nightmare, bring back Maggie!
moo moo land
As, were, no doubt ...
05.11.2006 00:41
sceptic
.
05.11.2006 01:04
Wow if you keep saying it - it must be true?!
Who says its illegal and who cares, when the Italians hung Mussolini did you break into a repeated word rant, you must have been really stuck when Ceausescu 'illegal' excecution took place., what word did you get stuck with then.
I have several ones for you apologist, sucker, murderer
.
reply
05.11.2006 14:15
You sure as hell don't speak for me. I care and I say it's illegal. I care because the worst atrocities in Saddam's reign came under US/UK support (who were totally uncritical). Obviously you don't care about the loss of innocent human life. You should not EVER be allowed in Politics - for everyone's safety. The War on Iraq HAS BEEN PROVED illegal, and the vast majority of the people of World are totally AGAINST IT.
nodboss
.
05.11.2006 22:47
"I care because the worst atrocities in Saddam's reign came under US/UK support"
Think you'll find that saddan is reponsible for his own actions, no one else.
"Obviously you don't care about the loss of innocent human life"
Obviously you don't the way your cowtowing to a dictator/murderer.
"The War on Iraq HAS BEEN PROVED illegal"
By who, there is no international court accepted in this country or in the US that is accepted as having jurisdiction over national foreign policy.
"and the vast majority of the people of World are totally AGAINST IT"
Did you ask them all? Does it matter, what right isn't always popular?
.
Felicity is right: Saddam is a creature of the US
06.11.2006 00:40
Roger Morris, a State Department foreign service officer during the Johnson and Nixon Administrations, says that the CIA recruited Saddam and other Ba’athists in Cairo in 1959 to a six-man squad that in 1963 assassinated the Soviet-leaning Iraqi Prime Minister General Abd al-Karim Qasim and installed the Ba’ath Party. It also encouraged the 1968 coup d’état led by Saddam’s mentor Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, who handed power to his protégé in 1979. Successive US Administrations saw Saddam’s regime as a convenient bulwark against Communism and, later, against post-revolutionary Iran.
For more than a decade, Saddam Hussein tested WMD technology for the US. Donald Rumsfeld visited Baghdad in March 1984 to reassure Saddam Hussein that the US privately condoned his use of WMD. He was instructed by Secretary of State George Shultz to tell Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz that the US statement on Iraq’s use of chemical weapons in its war with Iran “was made strictly out of our strong opposition to the use of lethal and incapacitating CW, wherever it occurs” but was not intended to imply a shift in policy, and the US’s desire “to improve bilateral relations, at a pace of Iraq’s choosing” remained “undiminished”.
During the 1980s, the US provided $5 billion of aid with which Iraq purchased British tanks, missile parts and artillery, French howitzers, Exocet missiles and Mirage jet fighters and German technology for producing nerve and mustard gas. The US also exported to the Iraqi dictatorship $1.5 billion worth of weapons, including chemical, biological & nuclear weapons technology and critical components for missile delivery systems.
When Donald Rumsfeld was a member of the President’s General Advisory Committee on Arms Control in the 1980s, biological materials were exported to Iraq under licence from the US Department of Commerce. These included botulinum toxin and anthrax, later identified as major components in the Iraqi biological warfare programme. The US supplied at least seven batches of anthrax to Iraq between 8 February 1985 and 29 September 1988.
During the Iran-Iraq War, the US gave Iraq satellite intelligence and other military support. More than 60 officers of the US Defense Intelligence Agency secretly provided detailed information on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb-damage assessments. This continued even when it became clear that the Iraqi military had integrated chemical weapons throughout their arsenal and were adding them to strike plans that US advisers either prepared or suggested.
US intelligence sources told The Los Angeles Times in 1991 that they believed that helicopters built by the US firm Bell were among those used to drop poison gas on Kurdish civilians in 1988.
Alan Stinchcombe