In the Hangman's Noose

Governments and organizations around the world condemned the recent execution of Saddam Hussein as incompatible with democratic values. Yet his hanging was actually the result of failed policies on Iraq, argues Tomas Avenarius in his commentary

Hangman's noose (photo: AP)
Was it politically wise to execute Saddam Hussein, Tomas Avenarius asks

​​Along with the images broadcast by Iraqi television, a children's choir sang: "This is the day when the tyrant is punished, this is a new day for Iraq."

Saddam Hussein's final moments could be seen around the globe, the minutes spent by the gallows, then, with the noose around his neck, the seconds immediately preceding his execution. The world has only been spared the actual images of a dying Saddam.

Even if our compassion has its limits, there remains a feeling of unease. Was it legitimate to hang the despot who was responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands? And beyond all moral questions: Was it politically wise?

Saddam's death on the gallows ends the final chapter of his dictatorial reign. We can no more mourn this regime than we can grieve the man who was responsible for it. Nevertheless, governments around the world, human rights organizations, and the Vatican have protested against the execution of the Iraqi dictator. Most people who believe that we can live in a democratic and humane international community under the rule of law have good reasons for rejecting the death penalty.

Aside from these moral, legal, and philosophical arguments, however, the historical situation keeps on steamrolling ahead under its own driving force. Saddam's dictatorship lasted over two decades before it ended with the invasion of US troops; the system was forcibly changed. Such historical turning points often take place outside the realm of formal law. They develop their own momentum.

Regime change "made in the USA"

This is all the more tragic since the regime change "made in the USA" – from a brutal dictatorship to Baghdad-style democracy – could be qualified as a virtual failure at the time of the execution. The chance of creating a new Iraq seems to have been lost – if indeed there ever was such a possibility.

Given this situation, we can now call into question the political wisdom of the execution. This hanging will by no means help bring peace to Iraq, quite the contrary. The violence could increase; revenge could provide a pretext for renewed terror.

If the execution was not politically wise, did it at least serve some other political purpose? Or was it nothing more than the consequence of an earlier and far greater political blunder?

Fundamental strategic error

The war against Iraq was a fundamental strategic error. Military intervention was the wrong instrument for dealing with this dictator. The only one who still disputes this fact is the man politically responsible for the war: US President George W. Bush. Iraq continues to slide into a mire of terror, the Middle East has been further destabilized, and the US has lost authority as a world power.

Without a doubt, it is basically pointless today to think about what alternative Bush might have had. Nevertheless, the question remains: Would Saddam's regime have collapsed anyway under the sustained pressure of UN sanctions? Would high-ranking officers in his military eventually have staged a coup? Would the international community have been better off with a dictator tied up by sanctions than with an Iraq without Saddam?

Interesting questions, but they remain nothing more than academic musings of no political consequence.

Failure to export democracy

The lesson to be learned from the Iraq disaster is that although dictatorships can be toppled by force of arms, better political systems cannot be simply exported. Before the rule of law and democracy can take hold, basic social conditions have to be achieved and people have to accept specific value systems.

The Islamic world in particular cannot be democratized from the outside. Over one and a half millennia of cultural traditions have deeper roots than certain models for political systems. This is particularly true when a religion makes fundamental political demands on shaping people's daily lives, such as Islam does.

Built on a shaky foundation

Furthermore, the Iraq that the Bush administration wants to democratize is a state built on an extremely shaky political and historical foundation. European colonialism and imperialism have created a nation without a strong national identity, where modern forms of government like democracy and federalism do not work well.

This is another reason why Islam immediately reclaimed the public arena after the fall of Saddam Hussein. It explains why Iraqis are turning to religious groups, ethnic factions, and clans instead of toward a unified state.

Developing political systems

The modernization of the Arab world and its autocratically ruled states requires that the basic cultural patterns and national characteristics of these countries be gently brought into line with modern forms of government. In doing so, it is the Arab world itself that has to make key contributions toward developing political systems that go beyond the unsuitable model of a religious state.

Western societies on the other hand should accept that their democratic catalogue of values can not be exported wholesale. Adjustments have to be made and omissions accepted. Otherwise the dictators and despots may end up hanging by their necks, but the general population will be no better off.

Tomas Avenarius

© Süddeutsche Zeitung/Qantara.de 2007

Translated from the German by Paul Cohen

This article was previously published by the German daily, Süddeutsche Zeitung.

Qantara.de

The Verdict in the Trial of Saddam Hussein
How Many Deaths Can a Dictator Die?
The trial of Saddam Hussein was above all supposed to prepare the ground for a national reconciliation. Yet exactly this has not happened, says Peter Philipp in his commentary

Interview with Saad Salman
"Europeans Have Missed an Opportunity"
Iraqi film director Saad Salman underlines the importance of the American presence in his country of origin and regrets that France, his home for thirty years, did not help in the downfall of Saddam Hussein

Interview with Sadiq al-Azm
"Democratisation is a Gradual Process"
Qantara.de interviewed Sadiq Jalal al-Azm, one of the most prominent Arab intellectuals, about democracy in the Arab world, and about the stance Arab intellectuals take towards authority