Saddam Dies, Will Iraq Survive?

While it had been expected for some time, the timing of the execution of Saddam Hussein this afternoon (Melbourne time) a bit sudden. Reaction from the Coalition countries has been predictably positive, with Bush even getting into the idea that this was an important milestone:

It is an important milestone on Iraq's course to becoming a democracy that can govern, sustain, and defend itself

Perhaps the effects of the Iraq Study Group report is starting to wear off on Bush. Whatever the case, I share little of the optimism displayed by Bush. Iraq still has massive problems to overcome to just stay together let alone become a model democracy and the death of Saddam I feel will do little to help the situation and could indeed make the situation a lot worse.

While undoubtedly Saddam was one to the most brutal dictators of the latter Cold War period, it looks more and more like it was only a strongman such as himself that could hold together the highly artificial state of Iraq. The tensions between the different demographic groups in Iraq have been exposed tragically since the US invasion with little hope of "putting the genie back in the bottle". The highly possible breakup of Iraq, already a rather loose three part federation, is likely to expose regional tensions, especially regarding Turkey and a possible Kurdistan. This conflict could prove an old saying about war "never believe that things can only get better".

Shifting focus slightly, I would also question the wisdom of executing Saddam rather than giving him a life sentence. To begin with, Sir Spell Cheque is against capital punishment, so of course I have problems with the execution on that fundamental level. However there is more to my opposition to the death penalty for Saddam than that. The trial was rather shifty to begin with, with judges and lawyers involved harassed and/or killed. Saddam should have been handed over to an independent international tribunal where a fair trial was much more likely. US refusal to hand Saddam over to such a tribunal leaves even less than cynical minds to wonder what motives the US had in keeping Saddam in Iraq. It surely could not have been fears of not securing a conviction over human rights abuses as, unlike with the WMDs, the evidence was overwhelming.

In his weaker moments Sir Cheque might start to think that Saddam had information that the US would prefer the world not to know. Could be a bit embarrassing. Unfortunately now we may never know. The phrase might say that we should learn history to avoid making the same mistakes, but it is hard to do when we are denied the information (i.e. history) in the first place. Was it worth the risk of creating a martyr that militant people could rally around to avoid the divulging of some embarrassing information in an international court and a slight propaganda boost in the US. Sadly only time will tell.