Bush is calling for a "public trial" of Saddam. But to Bush, "public" only means that there will be an audience - it doesn't mean the audience will represent the people. Just as, during all of Bush's "public press appearances" the audience is handpicked, all dissenters removed to "protest zones" up to two miles from the site of the appearance. We already have a sign of what is to come: a tribunal directive was already set hastily in place on Dec. 10, three days before the Saddam capture - without the knowledge or consent of the Iraqi people.

Unfortunately, Bush's syncophants in the US media are trying to legitimize the "public tribunal" concept. For example, in the 12/16 edition of the "Baltimore Sun," the lead editorial page commentary extolls the virtues of trying Saddam by tribunal. The anonymous editor brushes aside the idea of using a tried and true world court like the Hague as a trial venue and claims that a "public trial" in Iraq - controlled by Bush, of course - is what the Iraq's "deserve." If that's the case, then he/she must not think much of the Iraqi people.

I myself believe that the Iraqi people deserve a FIRST CLASS real trial - not a hastily scraped-together tribunal with a cast of hand-picked attendees and "experts," organized by wanted criminal Ahmed Chalabi. They deserve to have their nation's suffering recognized on an international scale, which is what the Hague represents: the world community's highest court for the highest crimes. Even if some of the truly worst global criminals never get dragged to the Hague (Henry Kissinger and Ariel Sharon come readily to mind), the ideal of the court has been unflaggingly pursued, against the odds, and is recognized.

To relegate the trial of Saddam to what amounts to an American military proceeding - worse, a scripted White House theatrical event, just like the "Turkey in Baghdad" and "Pretend Fighter Pilot Declares Major Conflict at an End" extravaganzas is a gross affront to Iraqis. This does not show respect for the Iraqi people - it only demonstrates that Bush views Iraqis as second class citizens...conquered underlings.

Secondly, and of equal importance, conducting a trial of questionable integrity in Iraq will only invite more conflict and bloodshed as outrage grows and different political factions in Iraq become more polarized. The event would also trigger more, perhaps even fiercer attacks against American troops. Which of course will lead to retaliation, which will lead to more attacks, and so it endlessly goes. There have already been riots in Tikrit and brutal retaliatory actions against the protestors by US troops. To remove Saddam and his trial from the center of Iraq would be like removing a bomb to a safe site where it can be disarmed without killing or maiming anyone.

"Openhanded Justice"


Last but not least, why should Bush make American taxpayers bear the finanical brunt of this trial when it is not necessary to do so? Chalabi is already complaining about the huge amount of preparation required, the need to build special facilities, etc. What will this translate into? Another "supplemental" requested from the US Congress, to the tune of a few hundred more million? If millions are going to be spent in Iraq, I suspect Iraqis would prefer it was used to rebuild medical facilities and the water and power supply systems. If Saddam is transported to a world court setting, the cost would without doubt, be shouldered by the world community.

Which brings me to critically important reason for moving the trial to the Hague: the involvement of the world community. If Bush were to agree to move the trial to the Hague, it would be the biggest step forward he has yet taken toward internationalizing the situation in Iraq. This action would also appear to say that he believes has nothing to hide. His keeping the trial under his thumb in Baghdad has only fueled the already smoldering suspicions of many that Bush fears what Saddam may say in a setting where Saddam cannot be controlled, intimidated, bribed, or in some other way pushed to lie or remain silent.

In short, I can think of nothing but good things that would come of moving the trial to the Hague. But as to keeping it in Baghdad, under the control of Ahmen Chalabi, G. W. Bush, and the CIA...I can think of nothing good.



Note: Photo by Cheryl Seal. This is a life-sizebronze statue at Druid Ridge Cemetery in Pikesville.