Back to the future
Most of the world dances to America's tune but a significant minority refuses to join in the celebrations marking Saddam Hussein's capture,
writes Gamal Nkrumah
Circus, soap opera or merry-go-round? Commentary on the capture of Saddam Hussein was laden with ideology and emotion. In Europe, Asia and Africa official statements were somewhat restrained, but most expressed satisfaction and a hope that his capture would lessen the incidence of violence in Iraq. Most reactions were firmly focussed on the future of Iraq. Even though some doubted that resistance to the military occupation of the country would recede.
The international media -- barring perhaps the overstated headlines in much of the British press -- celebrated Saddam's ruin in somewhat more muted tones.
Hardly anyone sympathises with the man, particularly not in poor, developing countries that have suffered long under the misrule of tyrants and dictators. But his capture has neither endeared the Americans to anyone nor quieted the international controversy over the legitimacy of the American invasion and occupation of Iraq.
In a number of developing countries the news of Saddam's capture was greeted with indignant derision. It was a rude reminder of the history of defeat, humiliation and subjugation suffered at the hands of European colonialists. The image of Saddam being publicly shamed, dragged out of a "dirt-hole" distraught, dishevelled and "broken" was an enactment of the capture in colonial times of dozens of African, Asian and Native American "tyrants" -- the Zulu King Cetshwayo captured by the British at the end of the Zulu wars, or Geronimo of the Apache people. Most of these symbols of resistance to foreign rule were supposed to have treated their subjects abominably and their people therefore had to be grateful for the European colonial intervention which saved them from the despotic rule of their tribal chiefs and kings.
The Spanish conquistadores who conquered the Americas practiced the Inquisition at home even as they preached their civilising mission and pillaged the land. Cortez captured the Aztec ruler Cuitlahuac, Pizaro captured the Inca ruler Atahuallpa and both were branded despots. The humiliating capture of Saddam, the drive to lay hands on Iraqi oil, the lust after reconstruction contracts, the cynical advocacy of democracy drove the point home.
Few editorials in developing countries and former colonies likened Saddam to the pre-colonial heroes of yesteryear. But the bear-baiting -- the analogy of national humiliation and foreign occupation -- was hard to miss. It was as if time stood still. Then and now, the military defeat and foreign occupation spelt disaster for the people and was symbolised by the ritual humiliation of the captured figurehead by the victorious colonial powers .
In other words, there was a familiarity that was difficult to mistake. Saddam's capture was more than some of them could bear; it touched a raw nerve and opened up old wounds.
"The arrest of former President Saddam Hussein by the US military is part of the American drive to impose a pliable regime in the country," a statement by the Communist Party of India- Marxist (CPI-M) read. "The apprehending of Saddam Hussein will not end the ongoing resistance to the occupation. It is an opposition based on the national traditions of the Iraqi people of fighting against colonisation and imperialism."
In Africa as well, commentators had an eye on the immediate future of Iraq. "In the aftermath of the momentous capture of Saddam Hussein, car bombings, shootings and death have remained a daily diet mixed with a new twist of street violence from angry supporters of the ousted president," said South Africa's Mail and Guardian.
"As we have seen, yet again today, terrorists and Saddam sympathisers will continue [to resist occupation]. And though small in number and in support, their terrorist tactics will require vigilance, dedication and determination," concurred Nigeria's This Day News.
Official commentaries in Africa and Asia expressed much the same sentiments of misgiving and apprehension. "Indonesia did not share the international joy following the capture," said Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda in an interview with the Jakarta-based daily Kompas. "But at least the shadow of fear that the regime will return no longer exists. The capture becomes all the more important because it gives an opportunity for reconciliation and transition, which ultimately will result in the restoration and handover of sovereignty to the Iraqi people."
The British Prime Minister Tony Blair adopted a more reconciliatory tone than United States President George W Bush. In an interview with the BBC Arabic service he said that Saddam must face a "proper independent judicial process". Blair also made overtures to Iraq's Sunni Arab population -- Saddam's main loyal constituency -- saying that, "What is extremely important is for us to give strong support to the Sunni population in Iraq that they have a place in the new Iraq."
While United States President George W Bush hoped that Saddam would be executed, others expressed concern over the fate of the fallen Iraqi leader himself. The United Nations Secretary- General Kofi Annan set the tone. "I've been encouraged by the assurance given by the [US] president and other senior members of the administration that Saddam Hussein will be treated humanely, even though this is the treatment he never, in the past, accorded those who fell into his hands. The UN does not support the death penalty, and all the courts we've set up have not included the death penalty. We as an organisation are not going to turn around and support death penalty," Annan said.
Russian officials played down the ramifications of Saddam's capture. "There is no international tribunal on Iraq," Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov pointed out. "We are talking here about what is mainly a symbolic event," said Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov, Moscow's old Iraq hand.
But inevitably, the pundits pointed out the obvious inadequacies of the Russian military compared with the Americans. The Moscow Times unfavourably compared American efficiency in Iraq with Russian incompetence in Chechnya. "The Russian military and spooks have not been as effective in penetrating enemy lines in Chechnya. After nine years of confrontation they have not managed to capture a single truly prominent Chechen rebel leader, while the United States have apprehended virtually all of Hussein's henchmen of prominence in a country that is some 30 times bigger than Chechnya in territory and population."
The paper speculated about Saddam's "hidden billions". "Hussein was dug out of his underground hideout dirty, tattered and bearded. It does not seem that he was ... running the anti-US resistance from his hole in the ground, though he could have been the main source of funds for running the show: to pay unemployed former officers and soldiers of the regime to attack soldiers and their Iraqi supporters, and to pay foreign jihadist groups to send suicide bombers."
The paper also pointed out that Saddam's capture was not the only breaking news. "One of the only places in the world where they weren't talking about the capture of Saddam Hussein on Monday was Azerbaijan. As the dishevelled former Iraqi dictator faced his interrogators, hundreds of thousands of Azeris were filing past the coffin of their leader Haider Aliyev," the Moscow Times said in a report from Baku, the Azeri capital.
On the other hand, British papers were in celebratory mood. "Saddam is a broken man who has given his captors vital information which has already led to the capture of two more of Iraq's most wanted men," thundered The Scotsman.
"A member of the Iraqi Governing Council who visited Saddam in custody said he appeared demoralised and miserable," The Scotsman reported. "Muwafaq Al-Rubaie, a Governing Council member who met Saddam on Sunday said the former leader appeared to have given up the fight," the paper continued.
Ugandan papers, more in line with other African commentaries were far less jubilant. Press coverage in Africa reflected wide differences in opinion over the capture and its implications for Iraq. "Several MPs yesterday expressed delight at the capture of Saddam Hussein, but many legislators said the former Iraqi dictator should face trial for his alleged crimes in an international court."
The issue of an international tribunal cropped up in the coverage in Africa and Asia, Europe and the Americas.
"Let leaders start seeking a life other than material gains. They should get this through God. There are people like Saddam who seek authority and think they are above God," Ugandan MP Miria Matembe was quoted as saying in The Monitor of Uganda. But the paper reported that opinions varied among the country's legislators. Another Ugandan MP, a Muslim, was quoted by the Ugandan paper as demanding that "America should also explain why it went to Iraq."
