Backlash of death penalty for Saddam

AS EXPECTED, former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who had been facing trial on charges of crimes against humanity, has been sentenced to death byt he court set up byt he occupation forces in his own country. US and Britain have hailed the guilty verdict amidst rejoicing among a section of the Shia community in the war-revaged country. There has been widespread resentment amongst the Sunni population though every one realizes that Saddam during his ruthless rule ordered mass murders of those elements he suspected of plotting against his regime.
His trial has been tainted from Day One. The court was presided over by persons who hated him. Obviously, no one could expect an impartial and fair trial. However, it would have been a lot better if the Americans had handed him over to the International Crimes Tribunal which tried former Yugoslav leader Milocevic charged with genocide of Bosnian Muslims. US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad has termed the verdict as “milestone” in Iraq’ history. No doubt. This will prove to be a turning point for the Iraqi nation already bleeding and burning with increasing ferocity in the sectarian conflict. The sectarian divide would further widen. More bloodshed is feared. Ousted Iraqi leader’s hanging will not help the ongoing civil war which will surely be exacerbated. the Bush Administration is not going to benefit in the midterm elections tot he Congress. US President George W. Bush’s credibility will further suffer.
Saddam showed defiance when the court announced death verdict. His supporters and the elements resisting the occupation of Iraq by US troops will be further emboldened. Saddam Hussein’s execution will make him a martyr. US tropps much now brace for a strong backlash. Iraq’s unity is now at stake. The country is likely to disintegrate giving rise to endless fighting among various religious and ethnic groups. George W. Bush’s dream of planting democracy in the war-torn country had already been shattered. He was trying to find an escape route for his embattled troops. His commanders already frustrated witht he developments shall have tpo rush with the exit plans.
The execution of former President Saddam Hussein will cast its shadows on the war on terror. The beleaguered George W. Bush has dragged the world to the brink of a nuclear holocaust. Overwhelming majority of mankind across the globe has begun to dream the consequences of his current policies. The world is surely more unsafe since the terrorist attacks on Nine Eleven. No one has any sympathy for Saddam Hussein but the way he is being sent to gallows will arouse sympathies for the ruthless dictator. American version of the Iraq war is not acceptable. Even the public in the US is convinced that their President lied to the world.

Clarity on climate change

Another report has highlighted evidence of the serious, long-term consequences of global warming. Yet governments continue to pay only lip service to the threat. As the new study makes clear, the cost of environmental destruction will be severe — but there is still time to avoid the worst impacts, if the world takes immediate and cooperative action. The latest warning is from former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern, who was tasked by Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer with providing an independent assessment of the economics of climate change. His conclusions are striking and simple. First, “the scientific evidence points to increasing risks of serious, irreversible impacts from climate change associated with business-as-usual paths for emissions.”
The current level of greenhouse gases is nearly twice the level that existed before the Industrial Revolution, and the annual emissions rate is accelerating. As a result, there is at least a 77 percent chance — “and perhaps up to a 99 percent chance” — of a global average temperature rise exceeding 2 C. There is at least a 50 percent risk that temperature change will exceed 5 C. Second, the impact of these changes — even at the lower end of the scale — will be severe. The report notes one-sixth of the world’s population will experience water shortages; tens, perhaps hundreds, of millions of others will be threatened by rising sea levels. As much as 15 to 40 percent of species will be threatened with extinction. Humanity will not be threatened as a whole, but entire regions will be hard hit. Africa could lose one-third of its crop yield and there could be a 25 to 60 percent rise in hunger worldwide. At the high end of the spectrum, even developed countries will lose fertile lands. The Stern report estimates that the economic damage wrought by climate change could equal that caused by the Great Depression or a world war — 5 to 20 percent of global gross domestic product.
The third conclusion is the most alarming: There is a window of opportunity to halt this disaster, but action must be taken quickly. The effect of climate change is cumulative: As Mr. Stern succinctly explains, “the sting is in the tail.” What is most disturbing about this conclusion is Mr. Stern’s estimate that the cost of stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions is not that high: He reckons it will be about 1 percent of GDP by 2050. But that is only if we act fast. Waiting a decade or two would make it impossible to stabilize emissions at a lower level and significantly increase the costs of mitigating the negative effects of climate change.
Contrary to popular wisdom, moving to a greener economy need not be drag on economic growth. In fact, the cost of mitigation is likely to be considerably less than the amount that would be spent on the consequences of climate change. The Stern report notes that the market for low-carbon energy products could be worth $ 500 billion a year by 2050. And governments already spend about $ 250 billion annually on energy subsidies that can be rejiggered to promote greener alternatives — or eliminated altogether.
The Stern report is much more than that. It is a measured assessment of the risks of climate change and the rewards that will follow from concerted action. It provides a rallying point for action that is the only way to offset impending climate change. And, quite simply, it uses self-interest as motivation. The choices are becoming clearer. Future generations will know whom to blame if we do not take action now.

—Japan Times