Al-Ahram Weekly | Special

This week two years ago, while Allied tanks rumbled into Baghdad, the collapse of Saddam's infamous statue symbolised the fall of a dictatorship. But have the two intervening years brought Iraqis freedom? Ploughing through political, social and economic territory, analysts and first-hand witnesses provide Al-Ahram Weekly with a balance sheet of the occupation

Big surprise

"We were about 400 Special Guard soldiers and officers. Our task was to protect the presidential palace. We had nothing but automatic rifles and shoulder-held rocket launchers, but were determined to fight and win. The last time we saw Saddam Hussein was when he came to us accompanied by his secretary, Abd Hammud, on 3 April. Saddam told us to be brave and resist and said he had prepared a big surprise for the invading troops."

"His spirits were very high. He spoke with such high confidence that our morale rose. For the rest of the day, we kept discussing the surprise that would get the Americans out. But the surprise turned into a disaster.

"Two US tanks were all it took to capture the presidential palace that was Saddam's official headquarters. We attempted to resist but our guns were no match for their weapons. Only 14 soldiers stayed of a force of 400. When the gates were opened to those who burned and looted the palace, and as TV cameras took in the scene, we had a chance to escape. We scaled the palace's eastern wall after taking off our military clothes. How did Baghdad fall? Now, two years on, I would say that this happened because of incorrect thinking and poor estimation of the US force. The army fought well at the beginning and many gave their lives. When Iraqi cities fell rapidly, I thought the Iraqi plan was to draw the Americans to Baghdad and surround them. I was wrong.

"My salary with allowances totalled 750,000 dinars, compared with 150,000 dinars for a major-general in the regular army. We in the Special Guard and the Republican Guard were pampered at a time, but army personnel had it tough because of the conditions under the blockade. I remember that my belief in Saddam was such that had he asked me to kill my own father I would have done so without hesitation, not because of the money and the perks but because of his patriotic statements about the restoration of usurped Arab rights. Now I know how naïve I was when I see the vehicles of occupation everywhere, a sight so humiliating.

"As to how we succeeded in scaling the wall. What helped us was an orange tree that I watered regularly and tended to. It was young and thin, as if sickly, and I used to prevent the soldiers from approaching it for fear that its trunk may break. It was this tree that carried the weight of 14 men who escaped to bear witness to the disaster, to the fall of Baghdad."

Denying truth

"I was one of the few Iraqi officials received daily by Saddam for the entire month before the invasion. I think if there was someone responsible for the fall of Baghdad was Abd Hammud, Saddam's personal secretary who got promoted to major-general practically overnight.

"Abd Hammud used to prevent us from telling the truth in front of Saddam Hussein. I remember once, after praise was lavished, the cameras were turned off, and the discussions began, that I said that the Iraqi army would not be able to resist because the blockade left it ill-equipped. Abd Hammud asked me to stay behind afterwards for lunch. I stayed only to be harangued by Saddam, Abd Hammud, and Qusay, who held a trial for me, stripped me of my military rank and told me to go home. They accused me of lying and trying to demoralise others. I went home knowing that Abd Hammud will lead Iraq into perdition. Two weeks after the fighting started, they wanted me to come back and lead the brigade I once commanded. I refused to do so because I did not want to be part of the fall of Baghdad.

"I admit that the fall of Baghdad made me cry for months. My eyes still well up with tears and many questions are still on my mind... Perhaps there has been no treason in the literal sense. But the great treason was that Saddam refused to hear the truth. And Abd Hammud was largely responsible for this."

Political limbo

"Iraq had to be occupied whether Saddam was in power or not. But Saddam gave them the chance. Iraq, a country with great wealth and location, repeatedly came under invasion, but it always triumphed in the end.

"Two years have passed since the war and the Iraqis are discovering that American promises of prosperity, stability and democracy were just lies. The occupation made things worse not better. The Iraqi leadership that came to form the ill-famed Interim Governing Council boosted the sense of ethnicity and sectarianism.

"The last elections were a case in point. The Iraqis did not choose the best man, but the one who represents their sect or ethnic group. Because of high unemployment and extreme poverty, crime has gone up. Iraqis need jobs, not emergency law. I do not expect the Americans to leave and I do not expect the security situation to stabilise soon. Nor will the reconstruction begin, nor will the elected officials carry out their promises. They are leaving the country in a political limbo until they divide top posts among themselves."

Inviting terrorists

"The decision to disband the Iraqi army, the Republican Guard, the police, and the security and intelligence services was not made at random. The decision was made on the very first day of occupation and it was an invitation to terrorists and to everyone with a grudge against the Americans to come to Iraq, so that Bush's war against terror may unfold in Iraq, away from America and its safety and security. Let the Iraqis die. Two years have passed since the occupation and no one knows how many Iraqis died. There is determined resistance and the Iraqis can distinguish among the resistance operations and attacks by looking at the types of weapons used and the manner of implementation. I, just as many, am opposed to terror. But we wonder, is occupation not terror? Is the US administration, which imposes its control and views on Iraqis and countries of the region not terrorist?"

"Among the definitions of terror approved by the Arab League and the UN is one that says that terror is the murder of civilians. Now the world can see US terror in action, but it does nothing about it. The weapons of mass destruction were just an excuse, so were Saddam's threat to the world and his presumed link to Al-Qaeda. All these were lies. Rumsfeld is not going to mention ever that, after meeting Saddam Hussein in 1983, he told President Reagan and Vice-President Bush that Saddam 'is our man in the region' who is going to give the Iraqis justice and save them from the daily bloodbaths. I do not blame the world for looking and doing nothing. The Arabs are not even looking, and when they look they do nothing."

Facing loss

Big surprise

Denying truth

Political limbo

Inviting terrorists