Interview with
Hamid Alkifaey
The Guardian 21/5/2003
The removal of Saddam Hussein was, in my opinion, the greatest-ever US achievement, and was also a personal triumph for the president, George Bush.
Saddam Hussein was an extraordinary terrorist, and he was armed with the most sophisticated weapons on earth. He spent Iraq’s wealth on weapons of mass destruction that he used against the Iraqi people and Iraq’s neighbours. He would have used them again against anyone who might have posed a threat to his rule.
His regime was a real danger to international peace and the stability of the region. There was no way the Iraqi people could have removed him on their own, because they would not have been able to face chemical and biological weapons. It needed a superpower to get rid of the regime.
Saddam was the worst dictator and human rights violator in history, and I do not believe that the discovery of weapons of mass destruction is necessary to justify the war to remove him. The discovery of so many mass graves in Iraq is a testimony to brutality of his regime and the right to remove it by force. Western countries supported Saddam in the past, and it was their duty to the Iraqi people to free them from him.
We all know that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons, because he used them. He could have hidden these weapons anywhere in Iraq. It is too early to say that he did not, but he could have destroyed them just before the war, thinking that it could have saved his regime.
If Saddam had been kept in power he would, at some point, have attempted to acquire nuclear weapons. The question that should be asked is why did the world remain silent about his crimes when these crimes were known to everyone – especially decision-makers across the world? The other question is why did some “democratic” countries want Saddam’s rule to continue, despite their knowledge of his human rights record?
The Iraqi people are over the moon that Saddam has been removed, and they are grateful to the US and Britain, in particular to President Bush and the prime minister, Tony Blair. I have yet to meet an Iraqi who is not thankful for the removal of Saddam.
Now, however, the priority is to establish a government that will restore law and order as well as basic services like electricity, water, and communications. The country also needs a new constitution that will guarantee freedom of the press as well as other fundamental freedoms. In turn, we need the return of the judiciary and the press, which should be independent of the government.
In the longer term, we need a stable country that is prosperous, that can produce its oil and benefit from it, and, above all, that is at peace with itself and its different racial and religious components, as well as political and social currents.
I am confident that Iraqis will now adhere to a democratic system, which they have always aspired to. Democracy means secularism, and secularism is not hostile to religion. Islam will always be a source of inspiration and moral strength to people but, as far as government is concerned, it will be democratic and secular.
Even the religious leaders have expressed this opinion. The Iraqi religious leader and politician, Ayatollah Mohammed Baqir al-Hakim, has called, upon his return to Iraq, for justice, unity and independence. He did not call for an Islamic government, because he recognises that such a government is not in the best interests of all Iraqis, and may not achieve the unity he has called for.
Obviously, there will be some people who want an Islamic state, and there are others who want a communist state. Some want a pan-Arab state, while others may want a tribal state.
Those forces have always been in Iraq, but democracy means that these people can live and work together: they cannot do that under any other system.
Such a system guarantees the right of individuals and groups to practice free speech and thoughts, free assembly, free membership of trade unions, professional associations and political parties, as well as the right to embrace any religion or religious doctrine they feel comfortable with.
All internationally accepted laws and conventions must form part and parcel of the Iraqi law, and this must be guaranteed by a permanent constitution.
Paul MacInnes
