Despot or hero, for Egyptians speaking to Jailan Halawi, the execution of Saddam was the assassination of a nation that buried many secrets As the dawn broke of the Muslim Eid El-Adha, or feast of sacrifice, so too did news of the execution of ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein with footage of the event aired on many satellite channels. The execution was no secret, yet the timing and cruelty with which Saddam was globally displayed on the gallows sent shock waves through the Muslim and Arab nation. While the scene further fanned the flames of already existing strife between Sunnis and Shias, it equally aggravated anti-American sentiments in a region already fuming with rage over the US administration's "double-standard" in handling the Middle East. In Egypt, people were dismayed at the appalling scene of the once leader of a nation being ridiculed in such a manner by his enemies who gloatingly paid no respect to a man in his moment of death. Whether describing Saddam as a tyrant or a leader of a nation, all interviewed by Al-Ahram Weekly agreed that he was not afforded a fair trial, that his destiny was predetermined, and that the Iraqi government is not independent but US-imposed and directed. As a prisoner of war, interviewees noted that Saddam should not have been tried and executed at the hands of his enemies in an occupied country, but rather before an international tribunal where he would be guaranteed a fair trial. With the exception of few, many who spoke to the Weekly noted that despite atrocities committed in Iraq under Saddam, the country was in a much better state than it is nowadays, expressing concern over the future of Iraq, noting that worse than the execution was the lost hope for a peaceful Iraq anytime in the coming 20 years. "A tyrant as he was, one ought to ask how was Iraq under Saddam's rule compared to now. Back then it was a nation that enjoyed all its resources for itself. But now, it has become a preserve of militias rather than a state, while its invaders are tightening their grip on its wealth. They sentenced Saddam to death over the killing of 148 people while currently 3000 Iraqis fall each month. Who shall we take to the gallows for that? "It is misleading to fall for the US's rhetoric of America being the guardian of democracy and freedoms worldwide. Had the target genuinely been ridding a nation of a despot, the US could have assassinated Saddam or simply banished him, but from current events one can obviously detect it was interested in Iraq's wealth and only used Saddam as a scapegoat and/or a pretext for the invasion of a nation and meddling in its internal affairs. The US target is hence clearer now. It wanted to destroy Iraq as a military power and possible threat to Israel, and in its stead, deploy its own troops on the ground. The US is sending a message to Arab and Muslim leaders that he who dares stand in our way will face the same destiny," argued financial controller Soheir Gaafar. Voicing the same opinion, taxi driver Sayed El-Tanani explained how at his modest neighbourhood of Masr Al-Qadima it was a day of sorrow and mourning over Saddam's execution. "We love Saddam, for he was a man of courage who stood his ground before the tyrannical Americans and dared to refuse surrendering to their orders. They killed him for holding on to his principles and fighting for his nation's rights. How many have died since the invasion compared to those dying in the Saddam era?" he questioned. Even those who did not think highly of the ousted president and believe he deserved a taste of his own medicine agreed that the whole process of Saddam's execution was not handled intelligently and, if anything, it backfired. Filmed by mobile phones and displayed internationally, the deplorable way in which Saddam was taken to the gallows amidst voices of his rivals gloating at his impending death while he remained fully composed, "gave him the chance to show his supporters that he was a man of courage, even in the face of death," explained former deputy head of BBC Arabic Mustafa Anwar. And while people had every right to be appalled by the fact that these images were broadcast, Anwar finds no problem in Saddam's execution on the first day of the feast since "Saddam had no qualms about killing people anytime." During his reign, noted Anwar, Saddam sent over half a million people to death "in cold blood," leaving behind numerous orphans and widows. "It is amazing that people could have such a short-term memory, turning [Saddam] suddenly into a hero and the master of martyrs. Yet, as monstrous as he might have been, why [did his opponents] compete with him in monstrosity, giving him the chance to steal victory from them by appearing so composed in the face of death?" Adding insult to injury, the carrying out of the execution on the first day marking the Muslim feast of sacrifice cast doubt over what it implies, where many read it as an act of muscle flexing where the US administration demonstrated to its enemies what deterring measures it is capable of when facing dissent. The timing further provoked the feelings of Muslims over what they described as "the humiliation and mutilation of a once symbol of an Arab Muslim nation, showing no respect to the sanctity of our feast. Depicting Saddam as what resembles a sacrificial lamb was so flagrantly provocative, especially that they failed to tell us in whose stead he was slaughtered," said businesswoman Ola El-Saadani. While having no political affiliations or interests, El-Saadani explained how the scene of Saddam made her feel for the first time in her life like taking to the streets. "If they were trying Saddam for his atrocities, why not Israel too for its shameless crimes against the Palestinians? How many lives has it wasted and for how long?" she asked. The US invasion of Iraq, El-Saadani explained, "is like when a stranger raids your house under the pretext of liberating you from your tyrant father; in the process he not only humiliates him but further steels your wealth and in the end expects you to be grateful and asks you to further pay him to bring his men and rebuild what he destroyed. The US needs to stop meddling in our affairs. Only we are capable of handling our issues," she insisted. Housewife Salwa Mohamed seconded El-Saadani's argument noting that: "As a leader, Saddam knew how to deal with the various sects in his country. In the end what matters is that the state remains functional, where people go to work each day and children to school without fear of getting killed, be it by urban warfare or the guns of invaders. With all his claimed vices, Iraq was a much better place under Saddam. In my book, Saddam is a leader who died as a martyr and his name will survive," she said. Anwar, begged to differ. "Calling Saddam a martyr gives martyrdom a very bad name. And if the Americans and the Britons have committed crimes in Iraq, this in itself should not make people lose sight of those crimes committed by Saddam. One crime does not exonerate another. People should ask themselves who is mourning Saddam and they will know that it is those who have never suffered under his rule. What has Saddam achieved for the Arab world, let alone Iraq? Nothing. If anything, he distracted attention from the main Arab cause, that of Palestine. Same goes for Bin Laden who sadly also has many admirers in the Arab world." Theories were soon to arise, with many interpreting the hastening of Saddam's execution to his foes' wish to bury many of their secrets along with his corpse, especially that his eight-year war with Iran and invasion of Kuwait were far from being waged away from the supervision, blessings and aid of the world's lone superpower, the United States, and many of its Middle East allies. To this effect, messages were forwarded through the Internet showing documents implying that Saddam was a key US ally and that they supplied him with chemical and other weapons used in his wars and the crimes over which he was being tried. "Not in the name of Saddam, nor in his support, but rather in that of human rights, that of the peoples' right to know, and the rule of law, we ask why did they kill Saddam before we knew the reasons for which he engaged in war with Iran and invaded Kuwait? This is history they are trying to blur. In whose interest was he killed so swiftly? What secrets were they attempting to bury for good? Was he a US agent in the Middle East whose role had expired and hence he was terminated, a paranoid psychopath, or a patriotic leader? All these are questions that would have only been answered had Saddam been subjected to a fair trial under the overview of the international community, but obviously that secret will forever remain veiled," noted Gaafar. Other theories alleging Saddam to be a US agent implied that the whole gallows scene was a ploy using one of Saddam's doubles while whisking him away to a safe haven somewhere to live happily ever after with his family. Such theory, however, appears weak or absurd, especially to those who knew him. Only Saddam could have showed such extraordinary strength in the face of death and with defiance scorn his enemies whose rope was tightly tied around his neck.
