A senseless act

As it seems, an unknown group of Iraqi radicals did this gruesome execution. They apparently tried to find justification for their crime in the American abuse of the prisoners in utter disregard to the Geneva Convention. At best Nicholas Berg could have been treated as a prisoner in the armed conflict as he was an American (the conflict was between America and Iraq) and treated fairly under the Geneva Convention. However, it appears from Berg family statement that Nick Berg was treated well since his abduction in mid April, but suddenly environment changed when the news and photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse by American forces came out in the media. This is why Berg family put the blame squarely on Bush Administration. But whatever may be the arguments, nothing could justify the execution of Nick Berg.

There is no doubt that this execution has produced adverse reactions around the world and particularly in the USA. But the world would expect delivery of justice from the US Congress keeping in view America's values about which they are so rightly boastful. This is all the more necessary in today's turmoil in the Middle East and particularly in Iraq. Iraqis are the real sufferers. It is good that the US has started to release some prisoners from Abu Graib prison. Indeed, it's high time to demolish Abu Graib and release all prisoners. However, if anyone has committed crime, he should be dealt with according to law.

Abuse of Iraqi prisoners was a completely different issue which was being condemned by the world as a whole and by most Americans. Indeed, the way the US Congress has reacted on the prisoner issue and been conducting the inquiry clearly show that such abuses were totally unacceptable to the Americans. Of course, nearly all have blamed the Administration for this disaster which may cost President Bush his November election despite the fact that he also expressed his 'abhorrence' on the prisoner abuse. President Bush probably could not have asked Rumsfeld to resign for domestic political reason, but the general view is that Rumsfeld, being the head of the Ministry of Defence should have resigned soon after he took the responsibility for this disaster.

There were horrifying pictures, nearly 1800, and videos depicting the crimes committed by some of the soldiers. There was serious failure of command responsibilities and the chain goes up even beyond Rumsfeld.. So there were sufficient reasons even for dismissal of Rumsfeld; but instead President found some nice words like "good Secretary" to praise him. But the question is why did President Bush reportedly rebuke Rumsfeld privately if he was a good Secretary? It was a question of America's honour and prestige which stands "tainted" as President himself said. So it was reasonable to suggest that Rumsfeld failed to act effectively even after he knew that such abuses had been systematically going on (Red Cross reports) for some time. If he acted effectively and kept the President informed, things would not have gone so far. So there is justification for the demand for Rumsfeld's resignation. It is unfortunate, but Rumsfeld will be the real liability of President Bush in his November election.

It's time to "internationalise" (as said by John Kerry) Iraqi issue and hand over the command and everything to the UN. Further continuation of the occupation may bring unknown disasters to everyone engaged in Iraq. Some countries have already deserted American coalition; others may now do so after the prisoner abuse stories. We have said time and again that the very decision and announcement of the departure without any big if of the American forces may reduce the "fight" to half and rest can be achieved through implementation of the withdrawal of the American forces.

The latest decision of the US to leave Iraq if asked by the Interim Government after June 30 with handing over of sovereignty to Iraqis may reduce the tension somewhat. It's certainly a good decision provided the US does not demand too much from the Interim Government. Once the sovereignty is transferred through the UN resolution, the Iraqis and the UN should handle the matter in Iraq. America should decide to leave. By such a gesture America can show to the Iraqis that it did not intend to go for occupation of Iraq; it only wanted to remove dictator Saddam. This may gradually improve American position in Iraq and probably in the Middle East as a whole.

Muslehuddin Ahmad, a former Secretary and Ambassador, is presently the Vice Chancellor of Presidency University.