I feel deep apprehensions. There is a severe level of mediocrity in understanding Asian social mental mood, in the way US is handling the Saddam trail.

What it is giving to Saddam is not fair trail, but actually a perfect platform for propaganda and focusing of emotional empathy. There is poignancy in the air, when one pauses to think where it will all lead to.

Asians understand Asians. No Asian would extend another Asian, who is one’s enemy, any platform for performance; for he knows what powers a person kept in a particular position has, in certain languages. To give a respectable position to one’s enemy is to gather honour for him, in feudal language systems. This is one of the greatest mistakes, English nations always did, when they were guided by persons who sit in the seclusion of their own nations.

Saddam’s leadership quality and personal capacities would outshine that of Bush’s, for in Asian language situations, leadership is gauged by a different calibration, from that used in English nations.

In this regard, one may pause to consider the claim that the personal hold over their own followers would be greater for Napoleon, in comparison to Nelson, for Hitler in comparison to Churchill, and for many other persons including M.K.Gandhi in comparison to the contemporary British rulers of India.

I remember being told by one person, in the know, of one assault by an Asian nation’s military on a rebel stronghold. All media men were removed, and those who did not move out were taken into custody. And then the military moved in, with no one to monitor any violation. What I was told was that within a few days time, the rebels negotiated for truce. It was granted. But, when they came out with the flag of truce, they were one and all bayoneted, including the charismatic leader of the rebels.

English nations wouldn’t do like this in civilised settings. Yet, when they moved with the negative nations, they too did learn the benefits of this type of malicious actions.

But here, what the US is doing is an action, which goes through very, very perilous routes. For, in Asian nations, many common people do not really get information, nor are they generally interested in information that does not concern themselves immediately. In fact, another man’s distress is not a thing that disconcerts. It actually is a matter for rejoicing. Power is respected, not politeness. In such circumstances, if US claims the Saddam had killed many Iraqis, only the actual victims family would be bothered; others would not be bothered.

And when thinking of Saddam himself, there is one thing that needs to be understood. It is most possible that any successful leader, who functions in the same language and social situation, would just be a replica of Saddam. Any other type of leader could be a failure. So, the fact remains that Saddam is a creation of the language (or social) system, and he, more or less, represents not just himself, but a host of others, who design him.

Coming back to the trial, let me tell you that democracy is a wonderful thing, if only English nations existed in the world. But then, a grotesque manifestation of this exists in many other nations, where, even though the general populace lives in mental shackles, they are very much aware of their right to vote and hence that their opinion, however much uninformed it is, does have a significance.

In this background, let me tell you the Saddam trial would be a theme on which the newspapers and visual media of the mediocre nations would feast upon. And it sure can gain support for Saddam, who would be seen as a man of supreme endowments, whose children were killed, and he himself made a prisoner by imperialistic powers. And one of these powers was a world conquering power of the yesteryears.

Trial only makes Saddam equal to the victorious powers. And to put it in more candid words, it is pouring oil into simmering fire.

I truly hope US knows what it is doing, and that there are capable persons who can guide it through the treacherous waters.

NOTE dec 2021: As of now, it is my considered opinion that the US had not business to attack Iraq.