SAUDI PUBLIC REACTION TO SADDAM HUSSEIN'S

C O N F I D E N T I A L RIYADH 008799

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT PLEASE PASS TO NEA/I; NEA/ARP FOR BSHUKAN/SWALKER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/07/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV PINR PTER IZ SA
SUBJECT: SAUDI PUBLIC REACTION TO SADDAM HUSSEIN'S
SENTENCING MIXED

REF: RIYADH 6940

Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Michael Gfoeller for reasons 1.4
(b) and (d).


1. (C) Saudi public reaction to the November 5 sentencing to
death of Saddam Hussein has been mixed. While there are
those who question the legality of Hussein's trial and the
credibility of the proceedings, others agree with the verdict
and sentencing. At the same time, some Saudis have expressed
concern that Saddam's sentencing will result in an upswing of
violence, while others suggest that it will not significantly
impact the violence -- at least not in the long term. There
is, however, broad consensus that the timing of the verdict
was designed to coincide with the November 7 midterm
elections. As one local Saudi contact put it, "President
Bush needed this to offset negative U.S. public reaction to
all the losses in Iraq."


2. (U) Both the English and Arabic press ran numerous
articles on November 6 and 7 regarding the verdict in
Saddam's trial. The English language Saudi Gazette ran on
November 6 an article quoting the opinions of several Saudi
political analysts. Khaled al-Habbas, who teaches
international political science at King Abdul Aziz
University, told the Gazette that the trial was "politicized
and the outcome known." He claimed that the sentence was
unlawful, in part he claimed, because the court was formed
"in accordance with the wishes of American officials."
Al-Habbas pointed to the fact that Hussein's guards were
Americans, his lawyers repeatedly fired and the judges
changed several times as further evidence that "the judgment
was biased." Al-Habbas further claimed that the violence in
Iraq is aimed at the "occupation," not Saddam or his trial.
Analyst Ali al-Harabi questioned the competence of the judges
and suggested that Arab tribes would seek revenge for
Hussein's execution.


3. (C) There are many Saudis, however, who feel that justice
was served by the verdict in Hussein's trial. A Saudi
businessman told PolOff on September 7 that Saddam "got what
he deserved," claiming that the majority of "educated" Saudis
have the same opinion. One local Saudi contact even claimed
that the sentence was not harsh enough. Another contact said
there are many Iraqis who continue to suffer as a result of
Hussein's actions, suggesting that the better alternative
would be life imprisonment. One local contact said that,
while he feels the verdict is fair, it is a mistake to
execute Hussein. He claimed it would only result in disaster
for Iraq because it would further increase the violence by
providing the insurgents with yet another excuse. Executing
Hussein would only serve to give him "hero" status, he
argued.


4. (C) COMMENT: It is not surprising that there has been
mixed -- albeit somewhat cautious -- reaction by the Saudi
public to Saddam Hussein's sentencing. Saudi public reaction
very much reflects how the rest of the international
community has responded to the news. What is important to
note, however, is that there has been no official comment to
date by SAG officials. Despite its self-proclaimed role as
the nexus for regional "Arabism," as well as its vested
interest in what happens in Iraq, Saudi officials have thus
far refrained from public commentary on the Saddam verdict.
While there is certainly an element of Arabic unity at play
-- the SAG continues its efforts to be a regional mediator --
it is also likely that the SAG learned a hard lesson with the
Israeli/Lebanon crisis. The Government took a strong
position that resulted in significant public backlash
(reftel). With a public that is already critical of SAG
support of unpopular U.S. policies, the SAG's silence about
Hussein's sentencing should come as no surprise. END COMMENT.

OBERWETTER