EDITOR’S NOTE: This editorial appears in the December 31, 2003, issue of National Review. You can subscribe to National Review here and to the digital-only version of NR here. (The Digital version is included in a traditional subscription.)

. . . on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter’d visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp’d on these lifeless things . . .

The visage of the modern tyrant, plucked from his spider hole, is still lively. Nevertheless we savor the all-too-rare spectacle of a brute brought low, and brought to justice.

The pithiest tribute to the American soldiers who caught Saddam Hussein was delivered by the captive himself, when a member of the Iraqi Governing Council asked scornfully why he had not gone down fighting, as he had so often pledged. Indicating the GIs guarding him, Saddam asked, “Would you fight these men?” He should have asked that question before he provoked their country.

Saddam’s trial should be fair, soon, and swift, run by Iraqis, who were his chief victims. His crimes should be spelled out, to the world and to his face; his denials noted and dismissed; and the supreme penalty imposed. No escapable Elba, no endless Spandau for him. The world judicial system has no role to play. Since his crimes against humanity were committed primarily in his own country, other nations-especially including those that defended him to the last-should step aside.

President Bush noted that “the capture of Saddam does not mean the end of violence in Iraq.” The foreign jihadists with whom Saddam long cooperated and who have swarmed into the country since his fall may become even more vindictive and desperate. The United States should continue to profit from the lessons in counterinsurgency learned by the British in Malaya and by the Israelis today. Developing local intelligence and sealing off suspected areas worked well in this case. We should train the Iraqi army and police force in these techniques, as well as guarantee them good pay and a proud status. They are on the firing line now too, and will continue to be so after we have gone.

Though Saddam’s capture does not preempt the tasks ahead, it will make many of them easier. The disappearance of any prospect of a restoration will dispirit Baathists, and encourage men of good will. Both will be more willing to provide information about guerrillas, and about Saddam’s secrets, including terror links and WMD. Saddam’s fall is also a lesson to neighboring despots, that is, to most of his neighbors. They had already learned they could lose wars and power; now they know they can lose their dignity and their lives, if they press us too hard. Pathetic as well as wicked are those Palestinians who mourn Saddam as their champion. When will they learn that such patronage gets them nothing?

At home, Democrats coped with the awkward task of running against a president who is seeing a difficult job through. The Oliver Stone prize went to Rep. Jim McDermott (Wash.), who wondered if bagging Saddam hadn’t been timed deliberately to help Bush. The presidential candidates were better than that-somewhat. Howard Dean, in a speech to the Pacific Council on International Policy, said that “the capture of Saddam has not made America safer.” Joe Lieberman, reclaiming his spine from storage, accused Dean of being in “his own spider hole of denial.” If Howard Dean were president, Saddam Hussein would still be president. If any of the other Democrats were president, would they have summoned the will to topple Saddam, whatever their intentions?

A curse has been lifted, a threat has been ended. The war goes on.