History Visits Vanderbilt
Unless it is through tomes of learning, students of history rarely get to interact with those figures that actually make history. On January 31, however, students of Professor Thomas Schwartz's class on Power and Diplomacy in the Modern Middle East were so fortunate.
In 1988, over the course of eight military campaigns, thousands Kurds were murdered in the northern regions of Iraq. Some estimates put the death toll at 200,000. Vanderbilt Professor Michael Newton said, in a lecture delivered last October at the Vanderbilt Law School, that this was a âdeliberate, systematized, and orchestrated series of campaigns intended to eradicate every trace of Kurdish civilization and culture across a broad swath of Northern Iraq. The campaign was one meant to deny the Kurds their fundamental human right to exist in peace and dignity. Saddam Hussein and others, such as Chemical Ali, had made history carrying out one of the most horrific genocides to date.
From 2005 to 2007, during the Anfal genocide trials, many of those responsible for these atrocities were brought to justice by men who have certainly made their own impressions on the pages of history. The trial's implications for the future of Iraq were great.
Those present at the forum were selected from a delegation led by the United States Regime Crimes Liason, a division of the United States Department of State. While there were sixteen members of the delegation in total, only eight, including a translator, met with our class. Only four, including the translator, spoke. They were: Judge Arif Abdul Razzaq Shahen, the President of the Iraqi High Tribunal (IHT); Mohammed Oraibi Majeed Al-Khaleefa, the Presiding Judge of Trial Chamber II, IHT; Munqeth Takleef Mubder Al-Firaoon, Prosecutor, IHT; and Ali Abdulwahid Faraj; Translator. Because Nashville is home to the largest settlement of Kurds in the United States, their visit was especially symbolic.
Most panels that happen on Vanderbilt's campus offer a wide variety of opinions, and each member is able to offer some sort of unique perspective or contribute a special kind of knowledge. The Iraqi judges could not have been more different. There was a distinct pecking order, so to speak Mr. Shaheen always answered first, and then assigned one of the other men to answer each question. Most queries he fielded himself. As indicated above, four of the men did not speak at all. Even so, the information provided by these judges and prosecutors ranged from the status of women in Iraq to the changes in the legal system since Saddam Hussein to the impact of the Anfal Genocide trial on the men's family lives.
While the lack of any nameplates and the language barrier made note-taking and the scribing of direct quotations difficult (not to mention the asking and interpretation of questions), there were nevertheless several important issues addressed that reflected greatly on the impact of Saddam Hussein's fall, the role of America in Iraq, and the status of the current Iraqi legal system.
Let me preface my description and commentary of this event by indicating two things. On a personal level, the event was a testament to the monumental role that lone individuals can play in history. On a political level, it was proof to me that, regardless of how one feels about America's decision to go into Iraq, the current American presence there has achieved noteworthy, noble accomplishments, and the continuance of that American presence is necessary to achieve a stable Iraq, and a stable Middle East.
Many questions were somewhat side-stepped. For example, when asked if the guilt of Saddam Hussein and others was a foregone conclusion, the judges responded that they tried to stay away from governmental politics and that no defendant's guilt was automatically assumed. In fact, only five of the six defendants were convicted. My question regarding the availability or desire of any foreign assistance military or otherwise that might have helped prevent the deaths of so many Kurds in 1988 went misinterpreted.
However, the most important questions did get answered in a meaningful way. In describing the current state of the Iraqi legal system versus its state under Saddam Hussein, Mr. Shehaan illustrated a drastically improved Iraq. Under Hussein, he said, the legal system was entirely governed by the Department of Justice. However, this government entity was not autonomous. Rather, it was all controlled by the head executive Saddam Hussein. While Iraqi judges tried to resist his influence in judicial matters, those that did were risking punishment and imprisonment. In today's Iraqi legal system, Mr. Shaheen says that there is no such conflict between the judicial, legislation, and executive branches of government. What's more, he says, Iraqis feel comfortable in the system.
The judges did not stop there in their analysis of the Iraqi legal system, however. When asked about their vision for the future of Iraq, Mr. Shaheen enthusiastically emphasized the need for a stable, federal legal system, which seemed to demonstrate his support for a single, unified Iraq. The process of rehabilitating, Iraq, however, was harder than we thought due to the eradication of civil procedure and civil concepts that occurred under Saddam Hussein. It is necessary for the U.S. to exist in Iraq, he said, adding that the cooperation between American advisors and those in the Iraqi legal system was very important.
Granted, these men were representatives of the system they were praising. However, they are also the men who will be the most knowledgeable about that system, and how American efforts have impacted it. They were attorneys and judges during Saddam's reign, and remain so after. They are therefore best equipped to give students of historical and current events a primary account of what it is like within the government of a country we see every night on the news, but do not ever fully experience. To me, their words provide clear support for America's mission to stabilize Iraq.
The afternoon ended on a note that was simultaneously somber and hopeful. One member of the audience inquired as to how each man's personal life was impacted by their work. We have all heard the media reports on CNN and in The New York Times about terrorist attacks that targeted various Iraqi officials and their families. Few have heard a group of those judges, sitting a few feet away, describe their experiences of moving their children from school to school, watching their families leave Iraq for the safety of Britain, or telling how Mr. Al Khaleefa, a member of the panel, lost many of his family members to terrorism. As Mr. Shaheen relayed this information to the audience, and with no need for any kind of interpretation, Mr. Al Khaleefa placed his hand over his heart and nodded towards his audience.
This is our life, Mr. Shaheen said resolutely. Americans should honor the bravery of individuals like these and work with them to bring a long-absent peace to Iraq.
Comments