Gary Fitleberg, December 17, 2003

As U.N. Secretary General, Kofi Annan did everything possible to prevent the U.S. efforts to build a coalition against the repressive tyrannical regime of Iraq under Saddam Hussein to liberate the people and give them democracy and freedom. It therefore comes as no surprise that Kofi Annan would publicly issue a statement in support of not giving Saddam Hussein the same death sentence he freely gave to countless of others so mercilessly over the 35 years as ruthless ruler of Iraq.

No death penalty for Saddam Hussein? Why not?

Has Kofi Annan conveniently forgot all the crimes against humanity and war crimes by Saddam Hussein? Why does he seem to protect and support such ruthless tyrants as Yasser Arafat and Saddam Hussein so consistently? Should he remain U.N. Secretary General? These are all questions that need to be answered.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he does not support the death penalty for Saddam Hussein and emphasized any tribunal would have to meet international norms and standards.

Annan, who offered UN help in the judicial process, said he was encouraged by Bush administration comments that Saddam would be treated humanely "even though this is a treatment he in the past did not accord those who fell into his hands."

But he said the world body has not supported the death penalty in any court it set up previously.

"So as Secretary-General ... I am not going to now turn around and support a death penalty," he said.

The President of Iraq's Governing Council, Abdelaziz al-Hakim, said in Paris that Saddam could face execution. He also said he recognized the need for an international role in the proceedings but gave no details.

Annan said it was essential that Saddam's prosecution should be conducted under due process of law.

"It is essential and it is absolutely vital that all those responsible for these crimes should be brought to account," he said. "I believe this should be done through open trials in properly established courts of law which will respect basic international norms and standards, including respect for international humanitarian law."

Annan said the former Iraqi leader had "cast a rather long shadow" over the country as it moves toward self-rule.

"With his capture, that shadow has been removed and I hope this will help us move ahead with the transition period and also accelerate the process of reconciliation and attempts to establish a provisional Iraqi government that is inclusive and transparent," he told reporters.

U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte said earlier that Washington hoped for Security Council support for its timetable to transfer political power to Iraqis in July.

"I think an affirmation or affirmations of support for the political, economic and security development of Iraq would be most welcome indeed and most appropriate under the circumstances," he said.

But Negroponte told reporters he did not expect a resolution from the council, which on Tuesday reviews the timetable for establishing a new Iraqi provisional government. It will also hear from Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari.

The council approved a terse statement on Monday welcoming Saddam's capture, reflecting members' wary approach to continued U.S. pleas to provide political and financial aid for Iraq and forgive some of its debts.

Most council members believe Washington should not alone oversee Iraqi reconstruction and want a major UN role that would open the door to other nations.

At the same time, Annan has been cautious in planning for a return of UN political staff to Iraq following the Aug. 19 bombing of UN headquarters in Baghdad, which cost 22 lives.

"The only thing that will hasten the UN's return is the establishment of a security environment. And if the capture of Saddam Hussein leads to that development, it will be helpful," Annan said on Monday

Annan last week ruled out a quick return for safety reasons and said the United Nations must have a clear and independent role, an indication he believed this had not been the case since the March invasion.

Let’s analyze Kofi Annan’s defense of a well-known "War Criminal"!!! Annan has a history of defending those with well documented evidence of murder and mayhem internationally. Let’s take for example Yasser Arafat and Saddam Hussein.

Should Kofi Annan also serve a sentence for "aiding and abetting" Arafat and Hussein in their campaigns and crimes against humanity via terrorism internationally? Maybe Kofi Annan is right. Perhaps Saddam Hussein should not receive the death penalty? Why not you may ask? Maybe it is better to inflict a life sentence of torture that he imposed on many innocent people during his ruthless regime.

One thing is crystal clear. Saddam Hussein should stand trial for all the atrocities for which he is gravely responsible. An international trial like that of Adolf Eichmann by Israel. This time before the Hague. So Saddam is afforded no opportunity to have one nation decide his fate ultimately. One that does not have Kofi Annan as Judge nor serving on the jury. After all it appears that Annan is not the best judge of character!!!

Saddam Hussein deserves a "fair and speedy trial" and his sentence should be equivalent to his war crimes against humanity for over three decades internationally.

Gary Fitleberg is a Political Analyst specializing in International Relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs.

Copyright © 2003 Gary Fitleberg