Saddam Hussein is typical of a leader who
personalized power. This streak runs throughout his life from the time when he
was a young boy to his career as a political leader (Post & Baram, 2002). A
critical examination of Saddam’s live reveals that he operated on the ideology
that all actions were justified so long as they served the interest of Saddam.
Early on in his life, it was clear that
Saddam was not the type of person to accept limits. He narrates in one of his
autobiographies of how he once left his home to his maternal uncle’s home so
that he could have an opportunity to get an education (Post, 2002). A cousin of
his had apparently visited them and young Saddam was impressed by his cousin’s
ability to read. Saddam then demanded that his family give him an education. This was not easy given that there was no
school in the village explaining why Saddam decided to leave to his uncle’s
place.
When Hafez al–Assad succeeded in taking over
power in Syria, Saddam felt that the fellow Baathist was taking a role that
rightfully belonged to him (Post & Baram, 2002). The ideological found of Baath party, Aflaq,
had named Saddam as his successor and Hafez al-Assad coming to power than early
before Saddam made him feel challenged. Saddam made a point of confronting the
new Syrian government creating a division that was to persist throughout
Saddam’s life.
Saddam did not allow past loyalty to come in
the way of dealing with those he thought to be enemies due to change of circumstances
(Hauss, 2010). The then head of Iraqi military intelligence helped him to
launch and succeed in a coup back in 1968. Saddam was at that time grateful and
assisted the military intelligence chief to go for exile. Saddam was to later
order the assassination of the same person when he thought circumstances were
now different. This just testifies on how brutal the man was.
Saddam was always craving to be the centre of
attention in the whole world. Achieving this seemed not to be forthcoming for a
long time (Post, 2002). He never seemed to be shying away from unnecessary
controversy. For instance, he was at the forefront of the oil crisis in 1970s. His
moment was to come during the Gulf War in the 1990s when international
attention shifted to Saddam. Prior to this, Saddam had been overshadowed by
other prominent Middle East leaders like Khomeini of Iran.
For supporters, Saddam relied on a coterie of
indoctrinated members of the Baath party (Beaumon, 2008). It was not easy for
someone like Saddam to enjoy genuine support from people. He was very
successful in building a long list of sycophants while those who did not like
his way were intimidated into feigning support for him. A great majority of his
supporters were the downtrodden Iraqis who saw his bellicose attitude as
admirable.
I do not think Saddam displayed an effective
use of power. Leaders are to use their power for the good of those they lead. In
contrast, Saddam was engaged in killing his own people. In addition, his
aggression against other countries such as Iran and Kuwait created threats to
international peace and security. Many Iraqis who were perceived to be disloyal
to Saddam were executed. Even Saddam’s own cousins ended up being killed for
opposing him.
References
Beaumont,
P. (2008, January 12). Iraq Opens Door to Saddam’s Followers. The Observer.
Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jan/13/iraq.peterbeaumont
Hauss,
C. (2010).International Relations in the
21st Century: International Conflict Resolution, Second Edition.New
York: The Continuum International Publishing Group.
Post, J.M. & Baram, A. (2002).Saddam is
Iraq: Iraq is Saddam. In B.R. Schneider & J.M. Post (Eds.,), Know thy Enemy:
Profiles of Adversary Leaders and their Strategic Cultures. Retrieved 21 April, 2013 from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc
pubs/know_thy_enemy/postbaram2.pdf.
Post,
J.M. (2002).Saddam Hussein of Iraq: A Political Psychology Profile.
0 comments:
Post a Comment