So Saddam appears in court eh? I guess many people are now expecting us detractors to be all ashen-faced and bowing to the US sesne of democratic justice. Would that this concept were true, but let’s think for a moment why the US administration may have chosen to hand Saddam over to the Iraqi authorities rather than try him in an international court in The Hague like Slobodan Milosevic. Bearing in mind the US chose a unilateral approach on the removal of Saddam you might think that they would chose to authenticate their stategy by using international UN means to try Saddam. Now the US/UN were reluctant to let the Yugoslavs try Milosevic and insisted that he face an international court along with Radovan Karadzic and Radko Mladic, interesting that the Bosnian Serb leader and general have not surfaced and the US & UN don’t appear especially bothered with them. Now if the US had sought to be heavily involved in the trial of Saddam it would have been politically tricky whereas there decision to hand him over plays perfectly for them, the Iraqis are more likely to pass a death sentence on Saddam, something the US would like to be able to do but not feel empowered to do in light of the resistance to the war. Furthermore they do not wish to be seen to be martyring Saddam. If the Iraqi trial screws up the US can take the moral high ground and claim that it did it’s best to allow Iraq its own autonomy (this of course is debatable bearing in mind the oil and reconstruction which are the key to Iraqs autonomy are not actually in Iraqi hands)

Perhaps I’m being overly cynical but there is an element of discomfort when one listens to Milosevic’s claims of being subject to a Victor’s Justice because there is no cohesive international policy that lays down a set of guidelines. The US refuses to be subject to any international law including the International Court, the Geneva Convention, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Kyoto Accord the list goes on, and yet the US insists on unilaterally deciding who else must be subjected to international justice. This is not surprising as the US holds with capital punishment and it is the same arguement that means capital punishment cannot have a legal framework. I’m afraid the US’s refusal to integrate into anything that may have a detrimental effect undermines their whole foreign policy and renders any justice mooted out by them as having no legitimacy.

Song Of The Day – Social Distortion ~ Pretty In Pink

Original Comments:

Rachel made this comment,
loved today’s title. i don’t know how anyone is going to be able to judge him, just because there isn’t anyone who doesn’t have some personal grudge against him. and a judge and/or jury has to remain “objective” but i don’t know if i would be able to remain objective, when i know what the facts are, assuming i know all the facts. but now that i mention it, i have no idea if i know all the facts. maybe something will come out when he does go to court.
Visit me @

comment added :: 2nd July 2004, 02:47 GMT+01
john made this comment,
If the Americans are not in charge of the Saddam trail, how come that they cut off the sound when the opening proceedings were shown live on TV ? and what was the point of such an action ? Did they really believe that no one would report his words ?
Visit me @

[Redbaron responds – It is all rather akin to the British tactic of having Gerry Adams’ words read by an actor back in the 80s -it was as if they were saying “look the content we’re not frightened of, but hear his Ulster brogue and there’ll be rioting in the streets!”]

comment added :: 2nd July 2004, 16:45 GMT+01