Our modest view is that this trial, like January’s parliamentary election and the likely imminent ratification of the constitution, is a triumph for the new Iraq and a vindication of America’s war aims [Wall Street Journal editorial]
The beginning of the Saddam trial highlights again the disconnect between the majority views of Iraqis versus the big media perspective. While experience should haved prepared us for negative, pessimistic coverage by the New York Times, it is still a shock to see this: What we have is a narrow sectarian government, still struggling to come up with a nationally inclusive constitution, that is conducting what looks like a show trial, borrowing noxious elements of Baathist law to speed the way toward an early and politically popular execution.
The WSJ commentary said just what I was thinking – we, and more importantly the Iraqis, are seeing a historic moment, the rule of law being implemented in the Middle East outside of Israel. Where Iraqis can learn about and gain confidence in their new rights:
… if news accounts are to be believed, nothing about it is right and nobody is pleased.
…The trial also has practical benefits. For Iraqis, it can offer an education both in Saddam’s destructiveness and in modern legal proceedings. That goes equally for what the court gets right and what it gets wrong. Saddam’s lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi is already complaining that he hasn’t had time to review the hundreds of pages of evidence related to the Dujail indictment. The mere fact that this complaint can be raised and addressed indicates a degree of legal fairness unthinkable in the old regime. Such disputes, broadcast on TV, will go far to inform Iraqis about the rights to which they themselves may be entitled as plaintiffs or defendants.
And for those arguing “the trial should have been with the International Criminal Court”
As for the virtues of The Hague, the inability to convict Milosevic after so many years ought to inspire more modesty about the presumed legal and moral superiority of the “international community.” No doubt Saddam’s trial will have its mishaps and spectacles. But the fact that one of the world’s great killers is finally facing justice at the hands of his victims is another sign of progress for Free Iraq.
Neo-Neocon has it right on every key point. She includes a number of excellent references in two posts. First, A new press hero: Saddam, defendant:
I watched a bit of coverage, enough to assure me that Saddam was playing his outraged defiant role, as expected, and that the judges are among the bravest men on the face of the earth to let their faces be shown and their names be known.
The sight brought back memories of the joy I felt the morning I learned Saddam had been captured alive, and of the photos of the Iraqi press corps whooping it up on hearing the news. But the danger always was that a living Saddam standing in the docks would try to turn his trial into an showcase for himself, a la the interminable Milosevic trial, and in the process turn himself into that most unlikely of things: a victim.
Makes a person wonder what would have happened had Hitler not killed himself. We’ll never know, but times and attitudes were certainly different then.
As for Saddam, it seems that some media outlets are already taking up his case–the case for the defense, that is. Well, if not the defense exactly, then certainly the case of criticizing the prosecution and the court, and of a sort of sneaking admiration for Saddam’s moxie and “defiance,” a word I’m already heartily sick of.
And second, The justice of a trial, drawing on commentary from Mohammed of Iraq the Model.
Tigerhawk has a great post The fascinating trial of Saddam Hussein fisking the negative big media reporting, including Wretchard’s great post. Closing with:
One gets the feeling that the editors of the New York Times don’t read The Belmont Club. Their loss.
UPDATE: Jack Kelly weighs in:
Saddam Hussein has pleaded innocent
to charges of murder and torture in his trial on a 1982 massacre, which began today in Iraq. O.J. Simpson has offered to help him find the “real killers.” The Washington Press Corps is casting a careful look at Karl Rove.
Recent Comments