“It
is a wrong move that sends the message clear to democracy advocates
that occupation forces are forcibly stretching muscles of other
political factions,” Negad al-Bir’ee, a human rights activist,
told IslamOnline.net Saturday, May 17.
Al-Bir’ee,
who doubles as a lawyer, warned that barring key Baathists from any
future Iraqi government with their large number of members estimated
at more than a million “violates international conventions,
including the Geneva conventions”.
“The
Baath is an ideological formation, not a religious trend, so Baathism
could not be extirpated from the Iraqi society whatever blows it would
be dealt,” he added, dismissing Iraqi civil administrator Paul
Bremer’s assurance that the exclusion move would “put a stake in
the heart” of the former ruling party.
“It
is inevitable that some troublesome Baathists will slip through the
cracks while others with more modest party roles will be mistakenly
fired,” Washington Post quoted American officials as
acknowledging.
The
purge reversed a previous U.S. policy that excluded only the disbanded
party's most senior members and those closest to Saddam, the paper
added.
“Illegal”
“The
occupying powers, as they were defined in a U.S-British-Spanish U.N.
Security Council draft resolution, are only empowered to restore basic
services to the war-torn country without interference in the political
process,” Ahmed Abu al-Wafa, an International Law expert, told IOL.
“The
occupation is originally illegal, so all of the decisions taken
through it are consequently illegal,” Abu el-Wafa contended.
Some
legalists agreed that some members accused of committing crimes or
torture acts could be legally excluded of assuming any government
posts.
“But
imposing such a punishment on others is an unacceptable justification
for acting against the principle of equality granted to all
citizens,” said al-Wafa.
According
to the new U.S. policy, all Iraqis who work for the government will be
required to sign "some form of denunciation or renunciation"
of the Baath party.
But
the policy will also lead to the rejection of some talented
technocrats and the ouster of some Baathists already recruited for
leadership positions, U.S. officials said.
"De-Baathification
will necessarily entail some inefficiency in the running of
government. We recognize this is not going to be a very tidy
process," a senior U.S. who announced the policy was quoted as
saying.
“Vacuum”
 |
|
Any
decisions by the occupation powers are deemed illegal, according
to experts
|
Experts
also warned that the set-up of a new administration with new people
would take a long time, something that further exacerbates the
situation in a country already plagued with anarchy and lawlessness.
“The
U.S. should have banned those very loyalists to Saddam, and not 40,000
people,” Hassan Nafaa, an Egyptian political writer, told IOL.
“Out
of the exclusion decision, there will be an administration vacuum too
big to be filled up in a short time,” Nafaa said.
Full
party members who served as top managers in the country's ministries,
hospitals and universities must be dismissed, as required under the
new policy. There are also 2,000 Baathists still holding sensitive
posts in the war-torn country.
Nafaa
said turning Baathists away from the new Iraq was expected as the U.S.
only wants a “democracy that does service to its interests, and not
a one that ensures the participation of all political and ethnic
factions”.
The
Americans still maintain that divided and untested Iraqi parties are
unprepared to take charge of reviving the economy and rebuilding the
government. It also called in its Security Council draft resolution
for a free hand to run the country’s oil revenues without
international oversight.
Asked
if the purge of Baathists is a sort of a new wave of McCarthyism,
Nafaa answered in positive, citing that U.S. authorities expect to
question individuals about any Baath past, check with co-workers and
consult whatever government records or public records that can be
found.
Egyptian
Deputy Foreign Minister Abdullah al-Ashaal said the ban on
largely-numbered Baathists is a new attempt to “make the change in
society as radical as possible”.
“Under
International Law, such a change is not allowed,” Ashaal said,
adding the American move is a rerun of “de-Nazification” in
Germany.
Questioned
Iraqis
felt skeptical over the U.S. step to ban the Baathists, as the U.S.
forces even failed to get to grips with the breakdown of law more than
one month after rolling into and declared the fall of the Baathists
regime.
When
Stephen Browning, the U.S. manager overseeing the Iraqi Health
Ministry, required signatures last week denouncing the Baath Party,
more than 50 aspiring administrators signed, but they later questioned
the fairness of the requirement, the Post reported.
Several
said they were incredulous that the U.S. government, which has pledged
to bring democracy to Iraq, has banned a political party even the
Baath Party, with its record of abuses, added the American daily.
Others
said they were amused, with one woman calling it "hilarious"
that Iraqis who had to pledge fealty to the party to get jobs in
Saddam's Iraq will have to renounce the party to get jobs now.
