獨裁者被絞死了……
――綜述對薩達姆之死的主要評論
作者：馬銘　於2007年1月

伊拉克的前獨裁者薩達姆（Saddam Hussein）以反人類罪被吊死了，於是表演開始了。
輿論要主導，俗話說“上陣父子兵坐鎮親兄弟”，首先粉墨登場的是英國、美國和澳大利亞哥們幾個。
英國人說我們歷來反對死刑，但是這事發生在伊拉克的法庭，是伊人做的決定。（"We oppose the death penalty in all cases, regardless of the individual or the crime," said Rob Tinline, spokesman for the British Foreign Office. "[But] it's an Iraqi trial, with Iraqi defendants, in an Iraqi court — it's a decision for the Iraqi authorities."）
英國人這番話的潛台詞是什麼？是想說，整個事情與我們無關呢，還是想表明對薩旦姆的審判及執刑是公正的、是基於民主法律程序的？對於西方世界來說，能向世人表明這是一個對獨裁者公正的審判，是至關重要的；能不能說服他人是一回事，但是起碼能讓英國外交發言人說話的底氣更足、表情更自然。
偉大的上帝信民布什總統直接上陣了，布什總統發表意義重大的專門聲明，說，這是伊拉克民主進程的里程碑，雖然薩旦姆的死無助於減少伊拉克每日的殺戮；此乃伊拉克一個民主國家的勝利，從此伊國政府就可以自治、自持自受、自護了，就可以真正成為一個反恐戰線的堅定盟友了。（U.S. President George W. Bush released a statement late Friday night, saying the ????ution comes "at the end of a difficult year" for the Iraqi people and for U.S. troops.　"Bringing Saddam Hussein to justice will not end the violence in Iraq, but it is an important milestone on Iraq's course to becoming a democracy that can govern, sustain and defend itself, and be an ally in the war on terror."）
澳大利亞說，這是一件相當“英勇的”的事情，伊國正在勇敢地享受痛苦。（Australian Prime Minister John Howard said due process in accordance with Iraqi law was followed leading up to the ????ution."And I believe there's something quite heroic about a country that's going through the pain and suffering that Iraq is going through, it still extends due process to somebody who was a tyrant and a brutal suppressor and murderer of his people."）
一個典型的全球輿論模式，任何涉及全球的事情發生了，哥幾個定個基調，德法日等國作個點評，有時教皇出來發表一些講話。
梵蒂崗說，我們反對死刑，即使對一個罪惡的人進行死刑也是我們所反對的。阿門！（A Vatican spokesman on Saturday called Saddam Hussein's ????ution "tragic" and said it could escalate the fighting in Iraq."The killing of the guilty is not the way to reconstruct justice and reconcile society," Rev. Federico Lombardi said in a statement. "There is rather the risk that it might fuel the spirit of vengeance and sow the seeds of new violence."）這是天主梵國對崗對處死薩達姆的譴責嗎？
無論是從基督博愛精神還是從當今天世界宗教的微妙關係來講，對於處死薩達姆，梵蒂崗不能說錯話了。教皇本篤十六世2006年9月在德國的一間大學發表演講，談到基督教是理性的宗教，談到暴力與主賦予的天性和精神不同，並且引用了十四世紀拜占庭帝國皇帝曼紐爾二世的話，“讓我看看穆罕默德帶來什麼新東西，你會發現邪惡和野蠻，以刀劍傳播他所宣揚的信仰。”為了平息此番演講帶來的風波，2006年11月教皇訪問土耳其，呼籲基督教與伊斯蘭教之間"真摯的對話"，並且表示支持土耳其加入歐盟，本篤十六世說他訪問土耳其是希望在基督教為主的西歐和以穆斯林為主的土耳其之間建立一座橋梁。“真誠的話語”說了不少，可惜在訪問土耳其期間教皇依然受到數萬穆斯林的示威抗議。
對於處死薩達姆，“世界主流言論”強調的是此乃對獨裁者的制裁，是為受薩達姆迫害的伊拉克人民申冤，這件事根本與天主教伊斯蘭教之間的鬥爭無關。但是，對於西方世界的普通民眾來說，他們願意不願意了解了此事在穆斯林世界的反響，除了聽到支持者的歡呼聲外，願意不願意聽到更多其他穆斯林人的聲音？

全球輿論大談特談民主的勝利和獨裁的滅亡。對於處死薩達姆，中國大陸的輿論又作如何反應呢？
刊登在人民網上的一篇名為《從“倒薩”到“絞薩”》的文章寫道：
“事實上，從被推翻到被逮捕、被判刑，薩達姆這個政治符號早已成了一隻“死老虎”。選擇在伊拉克亂象環生而美國又遲遲拿不出新的對伊政策之時“絞薩”主要原因有三：一是要從肉體上消滅，讓對薩達姆時代的懷念失去“物質憑依”；二是要對美國國內有個交代，以此作為一個階段性的“成果”；三是以此吸引世人的眼球，淡化大家對美國向伊增兵等舉措的注意力。……古語云：“慶父不死，魯難未已。”薩達姆死了，可是伊拉克並不會因此停止教派的衝突與仇殺。“
與西方主流輿論不同，中國大陸的媒體儘量少談不談獨裁者死亡的意義，而是着重於分析背後的國際利益和厲害衝突。
中國媒體選擇性地評論薩達姆之死，但是，展轉流動在北美歐洲等地的 “中國未來鬥士”卻不會放過這麼一個絕好時刻，一個絕好的對中國大陸進行“政治批判”的偉大時刻。一位充滿希望憧憬的作者這麼寫道：
“數年前驕奢淫逸的薩達姆，如今已緊步歷史法西斯頭目歷史法西斯頭目墨索里尼東條英機的後塵，被人民以同樣的方式，結束了反人類惡貫滿盈的一生。對於薩達姆的死，伊拉克人民當然是高興的，看到巴格達街頭人們載歌載舞的情景，不由得讓人們想起30年前，以中國第一夫人為首的四人幫被粉碎時，神州大地一片歡騰的日子。1989年六四之後，羅馬尼亞的齊奧塞斯庫和東德昂納克相繼被人民審判，他們的鷹之犬，狗腿子們也都受到了應有的清算。現在，中國人民心目中的民族英雄米洛索維奇和薩達姆們一個個地被送上了歷史的審判台，人們不禁要問：國際法庭審判台上，下一個該輪到誰？
鄧小平李鵬命令軍隊屠城，江澤民羅乾親自鎮壓宗教信仰自由，目前，這些反人類的罪行已經開始送上了國際審判的程序。從親自上馬鎮壓西藏喇嘛，到變本加厲打壓國內異見，可見胡錦濤也是一個專橫跋扈的暴君，他的雙手，已經沾滿了種種反人類活動的血腥。“（詳見章笑拳所寫的《老薩已被處絞刑 人民最終審暴君》）
上述文章的內容和語調，並不罕見，正如中國大陸流亡的“英明偉大的理論家”曹長青先生早前所指出的，“中東問題的癥結是民主和專制的對立，是先進和落後、文明和野蠻的衝突，要用軍力剷除所有的恐怖組織”。今天，最終對獨裁者執行了極刑，來自一些人群的陣陣歡呼和歷史憧憬是必定的。

這位作者“笑拳”，不僅發出了公審中國政府首腦的訴求，而且“苦口婆心”地警告眾多海外華人網民：
“自民大潮，浩浩蕩蕩，順之者昌，逆之者亡。這樣一個簡單的道理，暴君的許多賤民們至今糊裡糊塗，他們甘當愚民暴民，長期以來，在海外網絡也經常活躍着一批愚民賤民暴民。他們狂呼東京大屠殺，叫囂原爆洛杉磯，威脅導彈彈壓民主台灣，甚至用死亡威脅恫嚇網絡民主人士，實際上，這一切都構成了形形色色的反人類罪行。”
如引講來，如何把“反人類罪”罪名上層次、運用到極點，還要看中國人，估計布什總統都會自嘆弗如。
其實，與其給一些華人網友扣上“反人類（協助）罪行”的帽子，還不如給“世界銀行、跨國公司、自由貿易”帶上反人類罪行的“桂冠”。此話從何而講？一個例子：
地處南美中部的玻利維亞（Bolivia）政府為了履行與總部位於加州的全球公司Bechtel的合約，在本國卡恰邦布市（Cochabamba）實行戒嚴並且對抗議民眾進行搜捕。事情的原由是，1997年世界銀行要求玻政府將卡市的公共供水系統私有化，以作為援助玻國水利建設的附加條件，玻利維亞政府迫於“自由貿易”的壓力實行自來水民營化政策，並於1999年批准Bechtel子公司Aguas del Tunari為特許經營法人給卡恰邦布市提供各種水服務。其後，此公司大幅增加水價，甚至禁止貧民儲蓄雨水，結果引發當地民眾的示威遊行和數次罷工。當地政府的戒嚴搜捕事件發生後，引起各方關注，迫於壓力，該市的供水系統於2004年重新回歸公營。為此，Bechtel公司向玻政府提出5000萬美元的索賠。
卡市供水事件背後的關鍵詞是“自由貿易、跨國公司、腐敗政府對強權的屈從和助虐”，對於整個事件是不是我們也可以運用“反人類罪”來形容呢？

動不動就“上綱上線”，這已經不是很奇怪的事了，多年來一些中國人已經養成了“做秀遠大於討論解決問題”的習慣。在他們眼裡，非黑即白，身在自由世界享受着自由的空氣，但是對中國的事務卻奉行着極端的意識形態言行。比如，“反人類罪”這個名詞，不能說是時髦新詞，但卻是近年來一些人非常喜歡玩弄的字眼，而且運用這個字眼時帶有強烈的傾向性，對自己不喜歡的則批頭批腦地給對方帶上這頂帽子，而對一些行為卻是不知情、不關心。

如果作為華人網友的你，還不夠格被帶上反人類罪行的帽子，一些“先知先覺”“富有啟蒙思想”的中國人會放柔身段，關心地問你“中國人，你為什麼要同情薩達姆”？
而事實是，大多數中國人對事物的觀察是直觀的感性的，比如一位網友說了粗話，“看照片好象是恐怖分子在殺人,究竟誰TM是恐怖分子呀?”。而我，當看到當地報紙上刊登的處死薩達姆這一突然消息（Break News）時，第一感卻是“竊鈎者盜，竊國者侯。堂堂一個國家去執法，卻如同做賊一樣，可笑可憐。”

最後，讓我們看一篇文章。
作者是英國獨立報（The Independent）在中東的記者生於肯特郡的英國人羅伯特. 菲斯克（Robert Fisk），他長期居住在黎巴嫩。
2006年12月30日，羅伯特在獨立報上發表文章《一個由美國製造和毀滅的獨裁者》（A dictator created then destroyed by America）:
薩達姆走上了絞架。我們的領導人告訴我們這是非同尋常的一天。但是阿拉伯人不會忘記，執行薩達姆死刑是在穆斯林的古爾邦節（宰牲節）前夕。
我們的報紙也不會報道，雖然現在處死了一個罪惡的人，那麼其他有罪的人怎麼辦？（what about the other guilty men?）
當然，布萊爾首相不是薩達姆，他並沒有象薩達姆一樣用毒氣殺害敵手；布什總統也不是薩達姆，他並沒有入侵伊朗和科威特，他只是占領了伊拉克。但是數十萬伊拉克平民喪生了，同時數千名西方士兵死掉了。為什麼發生這樣的死亡，只是因為在2003年布什、布萊爾及西班牙首相、意大利首相、澳大利亞首相等先生們發動的戰爭，一場基於謊言的戰爭（a potage of lies and mendacity）。
我們鼓勵1980年的薩達姆入侵伊朗，這場戰爭導致百萬級別的人口傷亡。在這場戰爭中，是誰出售給化學武器給薩達姆，這些武器被用在伊朗人和庫爾德人身上。既然存在着這樣的事實，那麼我們也就不用驚訝於在審判薩達姆的法庭上美國人禁止提及任何與此相關的薩達姆罪行。
至於在始於2003年的這場戰爭中曾經使用過的貧鈾彈、集束彈、白磷燃燒彈，以及在所謂勝利之後所釋放出來的無政府災難，誰會感到有罪惡感呢？也許將來，當布什和布萊爾享受着舒適富有的退休生活之時，會在他們的自傳中發現那麼一些對罪惡感的補償性（expiation）描寫。
對於薩達姆，我已經分類例舉過他的罪行，也曾經與庫爾德的受害者談過話，他們的不少親人被薩達姆吊死了。我的同行，湯姆.弗里德（Tom Friedman），早在2003年以前，就深入地刻畫了諸如薩達姆此類獨裁者的殘酷成性的特徵。
但是，這是不是就是阿拉伯世界對薩達姆的看法呢？不可否認，那些遭受薩達姆迫害的　阿拉伯人對薩達姆的死刑是非常歡迎。但是數百萬的其他穆斯林如何看待呢？
大家都清楚，死刑的判決雖然來自於伊拉克政府，但卻是代表着美國人的意志。
同時，大家也清楚死刑是發生在伊斯蘭世界的宰牲節前夜。我們知道，宰牲節來源於可蘭經中的這麼一段記載：上帝要求易卜拉欣把愛子殺掉，以驗其對上帝的誠意，易卜拉欣欣然照辦，帶着兒子來到曠野準備處死孩子，但就在此時，天使奉上帝之命送來一頭糕羊，以代表其子作為向上帝的奉獻。我們也知道，由猶太教派出了基督教和伊斯蘭教，二者都認可舊約中亞伯拉罕部分，在聖經舊約中，我們可以看到與宰牲節起源同樣的情節。宰牲節到來，穆斯林們穿新衣宰牲口，煮肉做飯，施捨窮人，青年男女載歌載舞，招待來賓。（對於古爾邦節中國政府規定這一天給穆斯林職工放假，根據伊斯蘭教曆此次古爾邦節在公曆2006年12月30日）
在這麼一個特殊的節日背景下，對薩達姆的死刑，會產生什麼樣的效果？是不是可以認為美國人處死了一個阿拉伯領導人，而這個領導人因為不再聽從華盛頓的命令而被處死？是不是可以認為薩達姆作為“殉教者”死於新“十字軍戰士”手下？
估計奧薩馬•本•拉登（Osama bin Laden）與布什、布萊爾同樣高興看到薩達姆之死。更多的罪惡，伴隨着復仇而興起（So many crimes avenged）。

―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
附文：
Robert Fisk: A dictator created then destroyed by America
Published: 30 December 2006　 http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article2112555.ece

Saddam to the gallows. It was an easy equation. Who could be more deserving of that last walk to the scaffold - that crack of the neck at the end of a rope - than the Beast of Baghdad, the Hitler of the Tigris, the man who murdered untold hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis while spraying chemical weapons over his enemies? Our masters will tell us in a few hours that it is a "great day" for Iraqis and will hope that the Muslim world will forget that his death sentence was signed - by the Iraqi "government", but on behalf of the Americans - on the very eve of the Eid al-Adha, the Feast of the Sacrifice, the moment of greatest forgiveness in the Arab world.

But history will record that the Arabs and other Muslims and, indeed, many millions in the West, will ask another question this weekend, a question that will not be posed in other Western newspapers because it is not the narrative laid down for us by our presidents and prime ministers - what about the other guilty men?

No, Tony Blair is not Saddam. We don't gas our enemies. George W Bush is not Saddam. He didn't invade Iran or Kuwait. He only invaded Iraq. But hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians are dead - and thousands of Western troops are dead - because Messrs Bush and Blair and the Spanish Prime Minister and the Italian Prime Minister and the Australian Prime Minister went to war in 2003 on a potage of lies and mendacity and, given the weapons we used, with great brutality.

In the aftermath of the international crimes against humanity of 2001 we have tortured, we have murdered, we have brutalised and killed the innocent - we have even added our shame at Abu Ghraib to Saddam's shame at Abu Ghraib - and yet we are supposed to forget these terrible crimes as we applaud the swinging corpse of the dictator we created.

Who encouraged Saddam to invade Iran in 1980, which was the greatest war crime he has committed for it led to the deaths of a million and a half souls? And who sold him the components for the chemical weapons with which he drenched Iran and the Kurds? We did. No wonder the Americans, who controlled Saddam's weird trial, forbad any mention of this, his most obscene atrocity, in the charges against him. Could he not have been handed over to the Iranians for sentencing for this massive war crime? Of course not. Because that would also expose our culpability.

And the mass killings we perpetrated in 2003 with our depleted uranium shells and our "bunker buster" bombs and our phosphorous, the murderous post-invasion sieges of Fallujah and Najaf, the hell-disaster of anarchy we unleashed on the Iraqi population in the aftermath of our "victory" - our "mission accomplished" - who will be found guilty of this? Such expiation as we might expect will come, no doubt, in the self-serving memoirs of Blair and Bush, written in comfortable and wealthy retirement.

Hours before Saddam's death sentence, his family - his first wife, Sajida, and Saddam's daughter and their other relatives - had given up hope.

"Whatever could be done has been done - we can only wait for time to take its course," one of them said last night. But Saddam knew, and had already announced his own "martyrdom": he was still the president of Iraq and he would die for Iraq. All condemned men face a decision: to die with a last, grovelling plea for mercy or to die with whatever dignity they can wrap around themselves in their last hours on earth. His last trial appearance - that wan smile that spread over the mass-murderer's face - showed us which path Saddam intended to walk to the noose.

I have catalogued his monstrous crimes over the years. I have talked to the Kurdish survivors of Halabja and the Shia who rose up against the dictator at our request in 1991 and who were betrayed by us - and whose comrades, in their tens of thousands, along with their wives, were hanged like thrushes by Saddam's ????utioners.

I have walked round the ????ution chamber of Abu Ghraib - only months, it later transpired, after we had been using the same prison for a few tortures and killings of our own - and I have watched Iraqis pull thousands of their dead relatives from the mass graves of Hilla. One of them has a newly-inserted artificial hip and a medical identification number on his arm. He had been taken directly from hospital to his place of ????ution. Like Donald Rumsfeld, I have even shaken the dictator's soft, damp hand. Yet the old war criminal finished his days in power writing romantic novels.

It was my colleague, Tom Friedman - now a messianic columnist for The New York Times - who perfectly caught Saddam's character just before the 2003 invasion: Saddam was, he wrote, "part Don Corleone, part Donald Duck". And, in this unique definition, Friedman caught the horror of all dictators; their sadistic attraction and the grotesque, unbelievable nature of their barbarity.

But that is not how the Arab world will see him. At first, those who suffered from Saddam's cruelty will welcome his ????ution. Hundreds wanted to pull the hangman's lever. So will many other Kurds and Shia outside Iraq welcome his end. But they - and millions of other Muslims - will remember how he was in????ed of his death sentence at the dawn of the Eid al-Adha feast, which recalls the would-be sacrifice by Abraham, of his son, a commemoration which even the ghastly Saddam cynically used to celebrate by releasing prisoners from his jails. "Handed over to the Iraqi authorities," he may have been before his death. But his ????ution will go down - correctly - as an American affair and time will add its false but lasting gloss to all this - that the West destroyed an Arab leader who no longer obeyed his orders from Washington, that, for all his wrongdoing (and this will be the terrible get-out for Arab historians, this shaving away of his crimes) Saddam died a "martyr" to the will of the new "Crusaders".

When he was captured in November of 2003, the insurgency against American troops increased in ferocity. After his death, it will redouble in intensity again. Freed from the remotest possibility of Saddam's return by his ????ution, the West's enemies in Iraq have no reason to fear the return of his Baathist regime. Osama bin Laden will certainly rejoice, along with Bush and Blair. And there's a thought. So many crimes avenged.

But we will have got away with it.