Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Most Important Questions to Ask About the Trial of Tariq Aziz

By Patrick Cockburn, Independent UK. Posted May 1, 2008.


And the biggest question: Who is left from Saddam Hussein's regime?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Patrick Cockburn

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Why are we asking this now?

Tariq Aziz, the most articulate spokesman for Saddam Hussein's regime, went on trial in Baghdad yesterday. The 72-year-old is accused of being responsible for the execution in 1992 of 42 merchants, who allegedly raised food prices for no reason at a time when Iraq was under international sanctions. Aziz is on trial with eight others, including Saddam Hussein's half-brother, Watban Ibrahim al-Hassan, and Ali Hassan al-Majid -- also known as "Chemical Ali". Al-Majid is already on death row, having been convicted last year of leading a campaign in which tens of thousands of Iraqi Kurds were massacred in the late 1980s. He is too ill to attend court because he has high blood pressure and diabetes.

Aziz, who was not a key decision-maker in Saddam's regime, is accused of signing the execution orders as a member of Iraq's Revolutionary Command Council -- but he would have had no choice but to do so. It is unlikely he would have been directly responsible for ordering the executions. Indeed, it was one of the few mass killings for which Saddam was mildly apologetic. His victims were later referred to as "martyrs of the moment of rage."

What is the significance of these trials?

They are important because they underline the determination of the Shia-Kurdish government to bring to justice the Baathist leaders who persecuted them for so long. Iraq's new rulers see all of Saddam's ruling Baathist elite as being guilty of hideous crimes. But the trials also emphasize the depth of the divisions between Sunni and Shia Arabs in Iraq.

In Saddam's birthplace, Awaja, schoolgirls threw flowers on his grave and sang songs in praise of him this week. But for all of the Kurds, and most of the Shias, Saddam and his lieutenants were the equivalent of Hitler, Goebbels and Himmler. Many Sunnis see these trials, particularly of those leaders not directly involved in security, as a sign that none of their community has a place in the new Iraq.

What is left of Saddam's regime?

The Baathist regime which held power from 1968 to 2003 was destroyed by the US-led invasion of 2003. In the final war, even its most elite military detachments did not fight and went home. It was very much a family government, whose inner core consisted of Saddam (executed at the end of 2006) and his sons Uday and Qusay, who were trapped in a house in Mosul in 2003 and killed in a gun battle. Other top members of Saddam's government were his three half-brothers and more distant cousins such as Ali Hassan al-Majid. The important survivors of the regime who still matter did not feature in the pack of "most wanted" cards issued to US troops (though the former vice-president, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, is still on the run) but younger men. These are the majors and colonels from Saddam's security services who have been at the heart of the resistance to the occupation.

What was the long-term outcome of Saddam's trial and execution?

The gruesome execution of Saddam and the jeers of his executioners in December 2006 excited sympathy among the Iraqi Sunnis and abroad. Iraqis have become so used to appalling violence that they were probably less shocked by the hanging than many foreigners. They also spend most of their time worrying about the violence that threatens them and their families and not that done to the old dictator.

Many Iraqis say their lives were safer under Saddam but this does not mean they want him back. They know he ruined their country. The Americans orchestrated Saddam's trial, although they wanted it to have an Iraqi face. These days, the US has less enthusiasm for trying and executing former Iraqi leaders because its policy is to conciliate the Sunnis, including former insurgents who have denounced violence and allied themselves with the Americans.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: saddam hussein, tariq aziz, chemial ali, baath party, iraq, death penalty

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Will he get a fair trial?
Posted by: Crazy H on May 1, 2008 10:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No. The really f'd up part is that the true criminals in Saddam's regime could easily be convicted by open, fair trials if we'd only have them.

Is this guy a criminal? Dunno, he was part of the government - but he was carrying out the legal orders of the legal president. It's a question that everyone in the Bush administration should be asking themselves - at last count Bush was responsible for the deaths of four times as many Iraqis as Saddam ever was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

wars justify and cover crime
Posted by: luzmejor on May 2, 2008 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All wars promote this evil, even if they are actually begun strictly in self-defense.

All you need to do is to look at the power and wealth of the corporations running what Ike described as the "Military/Industrial Complex."

All crimes flourish under military occupations.

War is Murder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]