Reader Emad Hassan drew my attention to Imad Hajjaj’s latest cartoon, which I found personally annoying. In the cartoon he refers to Saddam’s trial as an act of "humiliation to Arabs." As an Arab, I was not humiliated; quite the contrary I am glad justice is being served.
The only thing that bothers me about the trial is how arrogant Saddam appeared to be, showing absolutely no signs of repentance for the crimes against humanity that he committed during the days of his oppressive regime.
Kais from Beirut Beltway refers to an editorial in the Daily Star in which the author discusses how both Lebanon and Iraq are on the path toward justice.
In both Iraq and Lebanon, the many citizens whose lives and families were affected by murderous regimes are hoping that the regimes’ leaders will be dealt heavy punishments by the courts.
If carried out properly, the trials of Saddam and former Lebanese and Syrian regime figures will mark a turning point in the history of the Arab world. Holding rulers accountable to the rule of law is unheard of in the region, where dictators, royal families and despots have habitually acted with impunity.
Indeed, it is a turning point in the history of the Arab world. It is not an act of humiliation as Hajjaj suggests. But then again Hajjaj might be playing on the emotions of the Jordanian street, where support for the popular Saddam is fierce. So Mr Hajjaj, although I really admire your work, this time you got it wrong.
UPDATE: Amir Taheri has a compelling piece about Saddam’s trial in the Times of London. Here is one excerpt:
Saddam is enjoying what he denied his victims: a public trial with defense lawyers of his choice and the rule of evidence taking into account the principle of reasonable doubt. Here a new Iraq, based on the rule of law, will be trying the old Iraq of cruelty and corruption. The Arabs will watch and decide which they would rather live under. The rest of the world should also watch to decide which side to support in the struggle for Iraq’s future.
My point Nas, is Hague or no Hague, Saddam’s removal needed external intervention.
Do you think his trial in the Hague -after being toppled by US forces- will not prompt some people to say that the trial was a charade? I doubt it. Resistance to change is a deep-rooted trait in our region nowadays.
Although it ailed me to see a military battle waging in Iraq, I find that at least supporting the current democratic process is the only solution to adopt, at least for the sake of the Iraqi people who have been suffering for decades.
And since I foresee the objection to Saddam’s trial whether it was held in Iraq with the presence of US troops or whether it was held at the Hague, i would favour the Iraqi option.
Let his own people try him. This will be justice served. I spent a big chunk of the day reading comments from Iraqi bloggers and the majority of them are ecstatic that the dictator is finally getting what he deserves.
It would have been utopian if the trial happened without external intervention, but then again, the lesser of two evils is what we are left with in this case.
Natasha, on the contrary, i think it is 100% possible. as basboos has just said (in the form of a question) why wasnt he put on trial at the Hague for warcrimes like every other tyrannt of his kind? what was the agenda behind (for i believe is the first time) putting a dictator that was just removed to be put on trial by his own people during a time when (a) the external forces that removed him are still occupying the country (b) those external forces are seeing a wave of lacking support for their war on both the homefront and on the streets of baghdad.
it’s a charade natasha, this isn’t a huge conspiracy, its political manuevering 101. think about the message it sends when an arab leader is put on trial in his own country. who is this message tailored to? if this trial took place in the hague how would that message change?
Well guys…Ofcourse the Iraqis have all the right to put Saddam on trial…but i think to avoid all this debate the wiser decision was to send him over to be tried in The Hague….
nas,
I think it was rather impossible for the Iraqis to put their own dictator on trial without any external intervention.
Sometimes you have to choose the lesser of two evils.
Emad Hassan has it right
So does Shaden
Saddam should be tried by his own people. Not by a court in the middle of an occupation. Hajjaj is saying there are two objectives to the trial. For the majority of arabs all over the world one of them stands out more than the other.
I do agree with Basbooos that we did humiliate us more than anyone did, but still I mean wouldn’t be more justified if we ourselves try Saddams and the rest of the mob?? And besides it’s not like it was offered to us in the first to deny it. The Americans are trying Saddam in the name of the Iraki ppl, but whom would be better than taking justice other the Irakis themselves??
I did not understand the Emad’s point when I first saw the cartoon and did not make much of it. Looking at it again, I find it reads, “HUMILIATION OF ARABS and justive for the Iraqi people”.
I think Emad means that the American forces want to send a dual message with Saddam’s tiral. First, to humiliate other Arab RULERS (maybe), and second, to serve justice. Most Arabs identify with their rulers, however, even if the are not perfect.
Lastly, our rulers came to power at a time when the Arabs world had nothing better to offer. Times have changed and the old system has to adapt and allow more input from the smarter people we now have.
–nar
R we humiliated?? Yes we are, but not because this trial is being orchestrated by the Americans as you say. We have been humiliated for years and years but no one ever dared to speak up or even notice…Our humiliation came from within. It came from the fact that we have allowed ourselves to be ruled by dictators…We have allowed these thugs to humiliate us in front of the whole world and never said a word, now because its the Americans we all suddenly have grown tongues and started talking and critisizing…Why wouldnt we expect the Americans to further humiliate a nation that has been already humiliated by its own rulers???
Furthermore, the judge’s podium reads: “and the Iraqi’s justice”.
Hajjaj believes that this trial will give the Iraqi justice.
On the other hand, its humiliating to Arabs that its being organized by the unjust American occupation.
As simple as that.
I think it does portray the situation very artistically.
Hajjaj’s cartoon pictures an elusive American soldier holding the banner that reads: “humiliation to Arabs”.
The humiliation does not come from the fact that Saddam is being tried against the mass murders he might be responsible for, but it comes from the fact that the trial is being completely organized, symbollicaly, by a sly American soldier who seems to be in control of the proceeding but without direct intervention.