The
Whole Bloody Thing Was Obscene
By Robert Fisk
07 January 2007
The
Independent
The
lynching of Saddam Hussein - for that is what we are talking about -
will turn out to be one of the determining moments in the whole shameful
crusade upon which the West embarked in March of 2003. Only the president-governor
George Bush and Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara could have devised a militia
administration in Iraq so murderous and so immoral that the most ruthless
mass murderer in the Middle East could end his days on the gallows as
a figure of nobility, scalding his hooded killers for their lack of
manhood and - in his last seconds - reminding the thug who told him
to "go to hell" that the hell was now Iraq.
"Nothing in his life
became him like the leaving it," Malcolm reported of the execution
of the treacherous Thane of Cawdor in Macbeth. Or, as a good friend
of mine in Ballymena said to me on the phone a few hours later, "The
whole bloody thing was obscene." Quite so. On this occasion, I'll
go along with the voice of Protestant Ulster.
Of course, Saddam gave his
victims no trial; his enemies had no opportunity to hear the evidence
against them; they were mown down into mass graves, not handed a black
scarf to prevent the hangman's noose from burning their neck as it broke
their spine. Justice was "done", even if a trifle cruelly.
But this is not the point. Regime change was done in our name and Saddam's
execution was a direct result of our crusade for a "new" Middle
East. To watch a uniformed American general - despite the indiscipline
of more and more US troops in Iraq - wheedling and whining at a press
conference that his men were very courteous to Saddam until the very
moment of handover to Muqtada al-Sadr's killers could only be appreciated
with the blackest of humour.
Note how the best "our"
Iraqi government's officials could do by way of reply was to order an
"enquiry" to find out how mobile phones were taken into the
execution room - not to identify the creatures who bawled abuse at Saddam
Hussein in his last moments. How very Blairite of the al-Maliki government
to search for the snitches rather than the criminals who abused their
power. And somehow, they got away with it; acres of agency copy from
the Green Zone reporters were expended on the Iraqi government's consternation,
as if al- Maliki did not know what had transpired in the execution chamber.
His own officials were present - and did nothing.
That's why the "official"
videotape of the hanging was silent - and discreetly faded out - before
Saddam was abused. It was cut at this point, not for reasons of good
taste but because that democratically elected Iraqi government - whose
election was such "great news for the people of Iraq" in the
words of Lord Blair - knew all too well what the world would make of
the terrible seconds that followed. Like the lies of Bush and Blair
- that everything in Iraq was getting better when in fact it was getting
worse - butchery was supposed to have been presented as a solemn judicial
execution.
Worst of all, perhaps, is
that the hanging of Saddam mimicked, in ghostly, miniature form, the
manner of his own regime's bestial executions. Saddam's own hangman
at Abu Ghraib, a certain Abu Widad, would also taunt his victims before
pulling the trap door lever, a last cruelty before extinction. Is this
where Saddam's hangmen learned their job? And just who exactly were
those leather-jacketed hangmen last week, by the way? No one, it seemed,
bothered to ask this salient question. Who chose them? Al-Maliki's militia
chums? Or the Americans who managed the whole roadshow from the start,
who so organised Saddam's trial that he was never allowed to reveal
details of his friendly relations with three US administrations - and
thus took the secrets of the murderous, decade-long Baghdad-Washington
military alliance to his grave?
I would not ask this question
were it not for the sense of profound shock I experienced when touring
the Abu Ghraib prison after "Iraq's liberation" and meeting
the US-appointed senior Iraqi medical officer at the jail. When his
minders were distracted, he admitted to me he had also been the senior
"medical officer" at Abu Ghraib when Saddam's prisoners were
tortured to death there. No wonder our enemies-become-friends are turning
into our enemies again.
But this is not just about
Iraq. More than 35 years ago, I was being driven home from school by
my Dad when his new-fangled car radio broadcast a report of the dawn
hanging of a man at - I think - Wormwood Scrubs. I remember the unpleasant
look of sanctity that came over my father's face when I asked him if
this was right. "It's the law, Old Boy," he said, as if such
cruelties were immutable to the human race. Yet this was the same father
who, as a young soldier in the First World War, was threatened with
court martial because he refused to command the firing party to execute
an equally young Australian soldier.
Maybe only older men, sensing
their failing powers, enjoy the prerogatives of execution. More than
10 years ago, the now-dead President Hrawi of Lebanon and the since-murdered
prime minister Rafiq Hariri signed the death warrants of two young Muslim
men. One of them had panicked during a domestic robbery north of Beirut
and shot a Christian man and his sister. Hrawi - in the words of one
of his top security officers at the time - "wanted to show he could
hang Muslims in a Christian area". He got his way. The two men
- one of whom had not even been present in the house during the robbery
- were taken to their public execution beside the main Beirut-Jounieh
highway, swooning with fear at the sight of their white-hooded executioners,
while the Christian glitterati, heading home from night-clubs with their
mini-skirted girlfriends, pulled up to watch the fun.
I suggested at the time,
much to Hrawi's disgust, that this should become a permanent feature
of Beirut's nightlife, that regular public hangings on the Mediterranean
Corniche would bring in tens of thousands more tourists, especially
from Saudi Arabia where you could catch the odd beheading only at Friday
prayers.
No, it's not about the wickedness
of the hanged man. Unlike the Thane of Cawdor, Saddam did not "set
forth a deep repentance" on the scaffold. We merely shamed ourselves
in an utterly predictable way. Either you support the death penalty
- whatever the nastiness or innocence of the condemned. Or you don't.
C'est tout.
© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights