Worldwide, the range of reactions to Saddam Hussein’s death sentence – including a European outcry over capital punishment and doubts about the fairness of the tribunal – reflected new geopolitical fault lines drawn after America’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003 and depose its dictator.
The European Union welcomed the verdict but said Hussein should not be put to death. At the Vatican, Cardinal Renato Martino, Pope Benedict XVI’s top prelate for justice issues, called the sentence a throwback to “eye for an eye” vengeance.
“This is not the way to present the new Iraq to the world, which is different from Saddam, who was behind hundreds of thousands of deaths as well as death penalty sentences,” said Hands Off Cain, an Italian organization working to rid the world of capital punishment.
Islamic leaders warned that executing Hussein could inflame those who revile the U.S., undermining President Bush’s policy in the Middle East and inspiring terrorists.
“The hanging of Saddam Hussein will turn to hell for the Americans,” said Vitaya Wisethrat, a respected Muslim cleric in Thailand, which has its own Islamic insurgency in the country’s south.
Bush called the verdict “a milestone in the Iraqi people’s efforts to replace the rule of a tyrant with the rule of law.”
Praising the Iraqi judiciary for its independence, the White House denied arranging for the verdict to be announced two days before pivotal elections in which Democrats are fighting for control of Congress.
“The idea is preposterous,” said Tony Snow, Bush’s spokesman.
Although some voiced doubts that Hussein would be hanged, the International Federation for Human Rights denounced the death sentence, warning that it “will generate more violence and deepen the cycle of killing for revenge in Iraq.”
Louise Arbour, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, urged Iraq to ensure a fair appeals process and to refrain from executing Hussein even if the sentence is upheld.
In Pakistan, an opposition religious coalition claimed American forces have caused more deaths in Iraq in the past 3 1/2 years than Hussein did during his 23-year rule and insisted Bush should stand trial for war crimes.
In the Arab world, some Muslims saw the sentence as divine retribution, but others decried it as a farce.
“Saddam is being judged by traitors, Americans and Iranians, and those who came on the backs of American tanks,” said Mahmoud al-Saifi of the Arab Liberation Front.
Key U.S. allies – including Britain and Australia – welcomed Sunday’s verdict, which had been widely expected.
“Appalling crimes were committed by Saddam Hussein’s regime. It is right that those accused of such crimes against the Iraqi people should face Iraqi justice,” British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said in a statement.
Amnesty International questioned the fairness of the trial, and international legal experts said Hussein should be kept alive long enough to answer for other atrocities.
“The longer we can keep Saddam alive, the longer the tribunal can have to explore some of the other crimes involving hundreds of thousands of Iraqis,” said Sonya Sceats, an international-law expert at the Chatham House foreign-affairs think tank in London. “The problem really is that this tribunal has not shown itself to be fair and impartial – not only by international standards but by Iraqi standards,” she said.
