Hanging update

I heard a couple of interesting things yesterday. I can't verify their truth but I was talking to someone who tends to be in the know about this kind of thing.

The first one is that the original "team" who were supposed to oversee the hanging were "replaced" at the last minute by members of al Sadr's militia (the Mahdi army). Hence the way his name was said by the executioners. Apparently the way they put the noose around his neck (at the side rather than from the back) is another giveaway. Apparently that was the way the British used to do it as well.

The other thing is that Maliki actually tried to resign last Wednesday, but the Iraqi President and the US wouldn't accept it / urged him to stay on. That suggests to me that they're still just trying to get a few things in place so that when his successor comes in he'll have less problems with militias to deal with initially. The extra US troops will presumably have getting rid of the militias as their top priority. I don't think the US has done a great deal properly here and obviously I think they shouldn't have invaded in the first place, but I have to say I think this is the right idea. For once, Bush might have got it right, but that will depend on how the thing is done. They're also now trying to get factories working again (mainly goods like textiles and concrete) so that they can get men back to work. This is crucial in sorting the violence out. It might take a little while to really start working but it's good that they're really starting to focus on "soft" ways to resolve the violence as well as the "hard" option which is coming. If the State department and the Pentagon had worked together in the first place maybe we'd have been at this point 3 years ago....

They say there are 2 potential candidates to replace Maliki, but the smart money has to be on Iyad Allawi. You may remember him from such Iraq interim prime ministerships as 28 June 2004 to 7 April 2005. More about him here. He may have been a CIA stooge but it's widely felt, most importantly by Iraqis themselves, that he is the only person who can hold some sort of government together and get a genuine process of reconciliation moving. Watch this space...

Just thought I'd comment on one more thing. The British Education Secretary, Alan Johnson said "I agree with John Prescott's remarks about the way it was handled and I am an opponent of the death penalty. But it was a matter for the Iraqi people to make that judgment. What happened shouldn't detract from the terrible crimes that Saddam committed. I knew the trade union leader he sentenced to death for organising a trade union in Iraq." I don't think that's the full story. One of the things that has stunned me as I have looked at some Iraqi laws is how progressive they were. The Labour Code, which is still in force today, actively encourages trade unions, and disciplinary action in some cases can't be taken against an employee unless a trade union representative is present. So whoever it was that was sentenced to death by Saddam was probably up to something else. British politicians should check their facts. Nothing new there then...