Saddam
Sans Mustache
By Greg Guma
08 August
, 2004
United Press International
In
case you've been living in a duct-taped bomb shelter, we're in the midst
of a national dialogue about strength. It's central to President George
W. Bush's public persona and a main argument for his effectiveness.
Not to be outdone his Democratic opponent, Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass.,
has done everything from riding a motorcycle to making "stronger
at home" a campaign mantra to sell a muscular image.
Strength is also
central to the image of the new Iraqi prime minister, Iyad Allawi, whom
Newsweek described as "Iraq's New SOB," and has been lauded
as a ruthless strongman in The New York Times and Washington Post. Locally,
he's known as "Saddam without the mustache."
Of course, he's
not the first bully boy to be embraced by over-confident US leaders
or an obsequious press corps. Nicaragua's Somoza, Zaire's Mobutu, Iran's
Shah, the Philippines' Marcos, and many more have received similar kid
glove treatment over the years.
But it is possible
to be too strong? That's the prospect raised by unproven allegations
that Allawi personally executed six prisoners in June, just a week before
the handover of power by Coalition Provisional Authority head Paul Bremer.
The story, first
published by the Sydney Morning Herald on July 17, was written by Paul
McGeough, who got the details from two separately interviewed Iraqi
witnesses.
Both insisted that
Allawi shot the handcuffed and blindfolded men in cold blood, in front
of U.S. military and Iraq police witnesses, while visiting the Al-Amariyah
security center in Baghdad.
He was sending a
message, Allawi allegedly explained, and showing Iraq police how to
"deal with" the opposition. When British Prime Minister Tony
Blair was asked about it, he dismissed the allegation as "odd"
and called Iraq's new prime minister a "deeply humane person."
Despite the seriousness
of the allegation, U.S. newspapers and networks avoided covering the
story for almost a week. Some still haven't. Eventually, Los Angeles
Times reporter Alissa Rubin did develop a follow up; but her July 22
report, "Iraq rumors reflect debate over need for a strongman,"
classified McGeough's story as one of several "urban myths"
circulating about Iraq's new leader.
Rubin opted to interview
random citizens about their attitudes. One opined, "We really need
such tough measures to be taken." Iraq's deputy prime minister
told her such "rumors" are evidence of a political culture
that equates strength with force.
Her story ended
with the bleak notion that many Iraqi's are relieved and comforted by
the impression the rumors about their prime minister have created.
If that's really
true, here are a few more examples that ought to rouse cheers in Iraq's
apparently bloodthirsty street. According to a July 11 New York Times
feature by Dexter Filkins, Allawi cut off one prisoner's hand to make
him confess about "terrorist" activities. Talk about protecting
the homeland! In Filkins' view, this show for force demonstrated why
Allawi is "the perfect man" to bring this "fractious
country" together.
Citing CIA sources,
the Times also has published reports that Allawi's organization, the
Iraqi National Accord, conducted bombings that killed civilians during
the 1990s. He was opposing Saddam at the time, after running Baath Party
organizations in Europe during the 1970s. Made up mostly of defectors
from the military and intelligence services, his anti-Saddam group received
financial support from Britain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and, eventually,
the CIA.
Before his June
elevation, while chairing of the Interim Governing Council's security
committee, Allawi is also alleged to have recruited former torturers
to serve in a new secret police apparatus while, of late, he has threatened
martial law, shut down sections of the media, suggested the government
might delay elections, and moved to bring back the death penalty. Sounds
more despotic than strong.
Rubin's story trivializes
the murder rumor and downplays Allawi's brutal style, her survey of
Iraqi opinion does raise an interesting point. Deeply divided societies,
especially those frayed by violence, often question "whether democracy
or dictatorship will best deliver the life people desire," she
suggests.
Before the Iraq
invasion, we heard that the United States needed to oust a tyrant and
establish a democracy. Now the argument is that the unruly country needs
a tough guy ready to impose martial law, ban protest, and use secret
police to "annihilate" opponents. In other words, a tyrant.
In the United States,
both major party candidates want to be seen as the real Iron Man. After
9/11, Bush morphed from compassionate conservative into "war president."
In wartimes, stubbornness is sometimes confused with true strength,
and trumps values like individual liberty and human rights. For most
Democrats, it nevertheless followed that choosing a war hero -- their
own strongman -- was the best ticket back to the White House, even though
many of them opposed the war and still yearn to end the occupation their
champion ambiguously supports.
Like Iraq, does
U.S. culture now equate strength with force? How many millions in this
fragile democracy are comforted by the idea that their commander in
chief is ready to "do whatever it takes?" Are policies like
preemptive war and the abuse of suspected enemies merely knee-jerk reactions,
or the fateful power plays of an arrogant superpower?
At the Democratic
coronation, former President Bill Clinton argued that "strength
and wisdom are not opposing values." Good line. But in politics,
looking tough usually works better than sounding smart, and, in journalism,
playing it safe too often wins over boldly seeking the whole story.
At this point, maybe
the best we can hope for is a little more wisdom from our leaders and
a bit more courage from the press.
Greg Guma is the
editor of Toward Freedom, a Vermont-based world affairs magazine, and
author of "Uneasy Empire: Repression, Globalization, and What We
Can Do." He can be contacted at towardfreedom.com.
Copyright ©
2001-2004 United Press International