The “democratic world” sometimes gives the curious impression of coping better with the living dictators of the planet than with those executed by the justice of their countries. Many voices have thus been raised to denounce the hanging of the former Iraqi president. Some of these voices remain, for their part, much more discreet with the tyrants currently in power. After all, the former president of Turkmenistan, Saparmurat Niyazov, sadly known for calling himself the “father of the Turkmens,” died peacefully in his bed. The upcoming elections tasked with finding his successor already exclude members of the democratic opposition who have taken refuge abroad. On another continent, the funeral of former Chilean General Augusto Pinochet revealed at least unexpected expressions of sympathy addressed to his family by a former British Prime Minister. Other leaders around the world who notoriously imprison or eliminate all their opponents remain well in sight. Efforts are made to understand them, if not to satisfy them. Military juntas are taking over in Asia, religious extremism is spreading in the East, and in Africa, presidents “democratically elected for life” behave much like small dictators without the “international community” being truly disturbed. Many of them, it is true, were educated in Western universities or military schools where they managed to forge useful political protections. Not to mention those who lead countries with essential energy resources crucial for our daily comfort and who would, under these conditions, be inappropriate to criticize. In our turbulent world, an iron grip with predictable reactions reassures more than it displeases many governments.
The international reactions following the execution of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein thus leave us questioning. Indeed, we can lament the poor conditions of his trial during which three of his direct defenders were murdered. We can equally regret that the Kurds and the Shiites—the former for the massacre of the inhabitants of Halabja and the latter for their systematic extermination in the marshlands of Basra—were somewhat deprived of justice. We criticize, rightly so, the indignity that pervaded the execution. But the Iraqi authorities, not without difficulty, are working to strengthen the sovereignty of the new state and took a decision that was as risky as it was courageous. The law stipulated that after his last appeal, the condemned had to be hanged within thirty days. The law was applied. One cannot simultaneously blame the Baghdad government for its instability or weakness and, at the first sign of firmness, attack its actions just as vehemently. The condemnation of the European Union—but were Europeans from the twenty-seven member states even consulted on this subject for one to speak on their behalf?—or the more traditional condemnation of the Vatican reflect positions that hold ethical value. In this sense, they are nonetheless as generalizable as self-evident truths. Yes, the death penalty should be abolished worldwide. Just like war. But there is a long way from philosophical principle, however flamboyant it may seem to Westerners, to ground realities. There’s undoubtedly a bit of arrogance and just as much condescension in making such a statement and wanting to apply it in a country with institutions as embryonic and fragile as Iraq’s.
The French President wishes to enshrine the principle of abolishing the death penalty in the Constitution. France simultaneously takes the lead among countries demanding a universal moratorium on capital punishment at the UN. “A strong symbol,” it is commented here and there. It appears that the obsessive attachment to the symbol often aims to compensate—in vain—a powerful denial of realities. In this chorus of complaints, it is appropriate to note the polite but firm reservation of the new UN Secretary-General, who refused to condemn an execution whose principle remains legal in his country of origin. By focusing more on the massive crimes committed by the former dictator and highlighting the sovereignty of Iraq in this matter, South Korean Ban Ki-moon has certainly sided with this reality and history. No doubt those who think and judge in the moment will hold this against him… for a long time.
