Saddam Hussein is guilty of crimes against humanity. He’s killed thousands of his own people. His trial may have been less fair than we would like, but I hav e no trouble with the guilty verdict. As for the death penalty, I oppose it, but Iraqi law is not my specialty, and if their constitution and Justice system permits that penalty, so be it. They are, as we have been told many times, a sovereign government, so the least we can do is allow them to employ any penalty permitted by their laws.
However, no criminal of Saddam’s stature commits his crimes alone. He has henchmen, sycophants, hangers-on and thugs to carry out his directives. And dictators who oppress and murder their own people in violation of international law often do so with the active assistance of foreign officials who provide these monsters access to the very weaponry and materials used to commit their horrid crimes.
Case in point? Donald Rumsfeld:
Five years before Saddam Hussein’s now infamous 1988 gassing of the Kurds, a key meeting took place in Baghdad that would play a significant role in forging close ties between Saddam Hussein and Washington. It happened at a time when Saddam was first alleged to have used chemical weapons. The meeting in late December 1983 paved the way for an official restoration of relations between Iraq and the US, which had been severed since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. […]
That envoy was Donald Rumsfeld. […]
Throughout the period that Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Middle East envoy, Iraq was frantically purchasing hardware from American firms, empowered by the White House to sell. The buying frenzy began immediately after Iraq was removed from the list of alleged sponsors of terrorism in 1982. According to a February 13, 1991 Los Angeles Times article:
“First on Hussein’s shopping list was helicopters — he bought 60 Hughes helicopters and trainers with little notice. However, a second order of 10 twin-engine Bell “Huey” helicopters, like those used to carry combat troops in Vietnam, prompted congressional opposition in August, 1983… Nonetheless, the sale was approved.”
In 1984, according to The LA Times, the State Department—in the name of “increased American penetration of the extremely competitive civilian aircraft market”—pushed through the sale of 45 Bell 214ST helicopters to Iraq. The helicopters, worth some $200 million, were originally designed for military purposes. The New York Times later reported that Saddam “transferred many, if not all [of these helicopters] to his military.”
In 1988, Saddam’s forces attacked Kurdish civilians with poisonous gas from Iraqi helicopters and planes. U.S. intelligence sources told The LA Times in 1991, they “believe that the American-built helicopters were among those dropping the deadly bombs.”
Now, as I previously stated, I am no expert in Iraqi law, but it seems to me that Mr. Rumsfeld and other former officials of the Reagan administration, with full knowledge of Saddam’s murderous and thuggish tendencies, enabled him to purchase the very chemicals and helicopters that he would later use to massacre the Kurds living in Northern Iraq. Under the principles of American criminal law, they would be guilty, at the very least of negligent homicide when they allowed Saddam to acquire these weapons with full knowledge that he had previously massacred his own citizens.
Indeed, if I was a prosecutor I would be very tempted to charge Rumsfeld with first degree murder because he and his colleagues in the Reagan administration acted with a reckless and depraved indifference to human life when he enabled Saddam Hussein’s regime to acquire the means to make and deploy chemical and other weapons to be used against innocent human beings. After all, Rumsfeld and other US officials had knowledge of Saddam’s past slaughters of his own people, and yet they went ahead and allowed him to obtain advanced weapons of mass destruction. It seems likely to me that Iraqi law has provisions analogous to US law which would make aiding and abetting Saddam’s criminal enterprise actionable.
I will shed no tears when Saddam Hussein dies, whether today, tomorrow and some unknown date in the future. But he should not be the only person who merits punishment for the crimes committed in his name. If the Iraqi government truly is a sovereign and independent regime which represents the will of the Iraqi people I pray that its legal system will file indictments and requests for extradition for Donald Rumsfeld and all other Americans who acted to aid and abet the crimes for which Saddam has been convicted.
Justice, whether in America or Iraq, should be blind to bias and prejudice against defendants charged with criminal acts, but neither it should not remain purposely ignorant of those who through their actions permitted such crimes to be committed in the first place. A man who fires the gun which kills another is a murderer, but so is the man who gives him that gun with full knowledge that his is likely to use it to commit murder. Donald Rumsfeld, and all those who enabled Saddam back in the 1980’s to kill his own people should face the same legal process in Iraq that the now deposed and disgraced dictator was made to face.
And may God have mercy on their souls should they be found guilty for the actions they took which made those horrible massacres possible.
Also available in orange
“His trial may have been less fair than we would like, but I have no trouble with the guilty verdict.”
I do.
‘a less than fair trial’ that finds one guilty and imposes the death penalty? See why our moral influence around the world is scoffed at- US promotes the rule of law but sponsors a trial that’s legally flawed. A ‘less than fair trial’ negates a guilty verdict; no matter the crime.
U.S., aka Rumsfeld, et al aided and abetted, provided Saddam the resources and all this is conveniently covered up.
Saddam could have been given a fair, just trial at the ICC – the Hague – but U.S. would have none of it because we could not direct and orchestrate. Bush gets a ‘victory of vengeance’ that eludes him on the killing field. One more execution on his belt that’ll not enhance his legacy.
before he can talk about all the help he got from Reagan and Rumsfeld.
.
The ICC can only investigate crimes committed after it was established on July 1, 2002. The discussion for Saddam Hussein was an International Tribunal similar to the Lockerbie trial or the present case for Charles Taylor from Liberia in the Sierra Leone Tribunal. Both of these cases are or have taken place in the Netherlands, the Lockerbie case on Scottish territory in Kamp Zeist and the latter in The Hague.
Dutch lawyer for International Law: Geert Jan Knoops was on Saddam’s defence team.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Agreed.
Esp since the US has been the occupying force basically propping up a Vichy govt. recall that the judge was replaced 1/2 way through because he was leaning away from the planned death sentence.
this execution benefits no one. (maybe Bush right now, but this’ll haunt him just as “Mission Accomplished” and “Bring ’em On” has).
Saddam should have been tried for all the crimes first. At least that would have given the illusion of justice to all the aggrieved people. Executing him following the first show trial makes the prosecutors-both US and Iraqi-look cowardly.
ah yes…a respectful hanging…only BushCo™ would make such a statement.
There will no doubt be serious blow-back from this sorry episode.
Sorry dada, but I just burst out laughing at that comment. I posted last night in “What`s your Frickin problem”, about this.
A “respectfull hanging” what a fucking concept.
you’d scream.
Anyone still operating under the illusion that any member of this administration, top to bottom, has any ethics, morals or humanity, is, themselves, seriously deranged.
“What a fucking concept“…indeed
Indicting Rummy would be really cool. It won’t happen but its a nice thing to fantasize about.
The more important issue is; How many Americans will die in retaliation for hanging Saddam? How many will be worth that one judicial assassination?
close to 3,000 U.S. troops have paid the price so Saddam can be hanged!
Those three thousand deaths were a total waste too. Not at all worth one Saddam. Or one Iraq.
How many more Americans and allies will have to die in retaliation attacks before the right-wing American blood-lust from this hanging wanes?
.
Meanwhile, the (Dutch) prosecution says that it can prove that chemicals supplied by Frans van Anraat were indeed used in a number of the aforesaid attacks. Prosecutor Fred Teeven has said that the businessman could have known as early as 1984 that Iraq was using poison gas against the country’s Kurdish population. Moreover, even after the gruesome pictures of the 1988 attack on Halabja were shown around the world, Frans van Anraat continued to supply the Iraqi regime with thiodiglycol.
Baltimore Firm Part of Probe Of Poison Gas
But would the Americans and British dare touch a trial in which we would have not only to describe how Saddam got his filthy gas but why the CIA – in the immediate aftermath of the Iraqi war crimes against Halabja – told US diplomats in the Middle East to claim that the gas used on the Kurds was dropped by the Iranians rather than the Iraqis (Saddam still being at the time our favourite ally rather than our favourite war criminal). Just as we in the West were silent when Saddam massacred 180,000 Kurds during the great ethnic cleansing of 1987 and 1988.
≈ See earlier comments posted in diary by Betsy L Angert —
Justice is Served? Saddam Hussein. Death by Hanging © ≈
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Oui, thanks for this commentary. You also made my point upthread.
History too will not judge us well.
How must all Arab leaders feel about America this evening?
Saddam way their ally. America is the thorn in their side. How must they feel about America tonight?
How will America react when Arab and European leaders denounce the United States for this judicial assassination of an Arab leader? I think America is going to get an ear full of shit from this. And only an ear full of shit IF WE ARE LUCKY.