The first reactions inside Iraq to the capture of Saddam Hussein were grimly symbolic of the problems ahead. Equally passionate displays of joy and anger showed that Iraq is every bit as divided as it was before the former tyrant was dragged from his hiding place.
In the hours following confirmation that Saddam was now a prisoner , Iraqis in the Kurdish-controlled areas in the north and in the Shia-dominated parts of Baghdad and the south, expressed their joy in a spontaneous demonstration. Jubilant crowds took to the streets to celebrate the capture and humiliation of the man they had every reason to hate. They called for his trial and execution. They expressed their sentiments in biblical terms: those who live by the sword must die by the sword.
But there were no such demon strations Sunday in the Sunni parts of Baghdad, and what has come to be known as the Sunni triangle all the way up to Mosul in the north. It was not until the following days that the protests at the capture began. While some of the demonstrators were no doubt diehard supporters of Saddam, it would be misleading to interpret these demon strations as universally in his favour. Sunnis suffered at the hands of Saddam too. It is therefore more accurate to interpret the pattern that emerged in the Sunni areas as one that is more anti-American-occupation than pro-Saddam.
Here was a forecast of the shape of the Iraqi politics to come: a shifting sand of temporary alliances which will ultimately fracture along ethnic lines. The coming together of the Sunni Kurds and the Shia Arabs is motivated by their shared experiences of oppression at the hands of Saddam and his henchmen, some of whom were ironically Kurds and Shia. But this alliance may not last if the Shia emerge as the dominant party in any future Iraqi government elected on the basis of one-person one-vote. If this happens, we would quickly see a redrawing of the political map of Iraq in ways that will bring the Shia majority into collision with the other ethnic communities and, ultimately, the Americans.
The Shia leaders are engaged in a very astute political game – they know that it is not in their interest to upset the status quo or to press their case hard for the time being – but so too are the Kurds. By showing unwavering loyalty to the American presence in Iraq, the Kurds can expect to receive their support for autonomy in the Kurdish areas should the Shia press their demographic advantage and exploit the power that may flow from it in an anti-American direction. This would create a political space for the Sunni Arabs to play a balancing role and to act as the glue that can hold Iraq together.
The fact that the first attack against the American forces in the Gulf after the capture of Saddam took place in Kuwait, not Iraq, is seen by Arab analysts as an indication of the deep resentment against American policy in the area. Contrary to Tony Blair’s statement said last Sunday, the capture of Saddam Hussein is unlikely to be the beginning of the end in Iraq. The attacks against American interests in Iraq may in fact intensify, but it would be a disaster for Iraq if the coalition forces were to withdraw or scale down their presence significantly without a viable alternative. Should this happen for reasons of political expediency, there is no doubt that Iraq would slide towards terrifying civil strife at an alarming speed.
The split in public opinion within Iraq was nowhere better demonstrated than during an hour-long phone-in programme broadcast by al-Jazeera last Sunday. A few Iraqis in Europe, and one or two viewers from Saudi Arabia, called to express their delight at Saddam’s capture. Other callers phoned in to draw the lesson from this capture: Saddam’s fate should be the fate of all Arab dictators, although no one dared name any of them.
Others sought to redress the balance and read out eulogies in praise of Saddam and his defiance of the Americans. They blamed those around him for his capture, his own untrustworthy relatives, who broke the Arab code of honour by giving vital information to the Americans that led to his arrest. A few callers, including one from inside Iraq, poured scorn on those misguided Iraqis who celebrated Saddam’s capture. They accused them of treason.
They in turn were contradicted by callers who insisted that, when the ultimate test of courage came, Saddam failed it disgracefully and proved to be a coward. Why didn’t he kill himself, they thundered? What was the point of having two AK-47s and a pistol in his hideout if he was not going to use them to fight his captors or to kill himself? If only he had killed himself, the callers pointed out, Saddam would have entered the annals of Arab history as a great hero, a mythic figure who in death would have become a more potent symbol than in life.
Most of the callers pleaded with al-Jazeera to stop showing the footage of Saddam’s medical examination, which induced in them a state of anger, mixed with helplessness and pain. Some viewers felt so enraged that they accused al-Jazeera of being an instrument of American imperialism.
Reaction to the capture may be divided but perhaps the only point of general agreement during the al-Jazeera broadcast was that Saddam’s capture would not stop the Iraqi resistance. Some callers expected that, if anything, the resistance will intensify. They argued that the capture of Saddam would enable those who opposed his regime, but felt enraged at the occupation of their country, to join the ranks of the resistance, which they have not done so far. One participant argued that, with Saddam out of the way, Iraqis could now fight for their country without the fear of being branded as supporters of the man most have good cause to loathe.
These views were reiterated in much of the Arab press at the beginning of this week. Saddam’s eldest daughter Raghad spoke for those Arabs who still see in Saddam a symbol of defiance, even in captivity. She declared that, “a lion is a lion, even when it is shackled.” Bushra Al-Khalil, a Lebanese lawyer, said in a letter she planned to send to Saddam through the Red Cross: “Your image which appeared on TV showing you in the hands of those hypocrites made me feel that you are the only free Arab man, while … all other Arabs without exception are the real prisoners.” This is a powerful sentiment because it equates captivity with freedom and associates freedom with captivity.
The capture of Saddam Hussein last week was the best “Season’s Greetings” card that George W Bush and Tony Blair could have wished for at this point in their political careers. But as one senior Iraqi analyst said this week, this may prove to be a temporary respite from the current troubles in Iraq. Voters have short memories, and as one seasoned politician once said “a week in politics is a long time”.
Professor Yasir Suleiman is Director of the Edinburgh Institute for the Study of the Arab World and Islam, University of Edinburgh
www.sundayherald.com/38817E-mail this article