Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, being accused of ordering mass killings and other atrocities, stands on trial at last. The delayed process was hailed by Iraqis as "a trial of century" and described by deputy spokesman of the US State Department, Adam Ereli, as "an Iraqi process managed by Iraqis" according to Iraqi laws and procedures.

Is Ereli telling the truth? Let us study the words of the senior official at the same time and the same place before we make a reasonable judgment.

Ereli told a news briefing on July 1 that "I would note that our embassy is working closely with the Iraqi legal and judicial authorities. Currently, there is a regime crimes adviser as well as staff who are working with Iraqi counterparts to support the Iraqi Special Tribunal."

"I would also note that the United States has contributed 75 million US dollars to the Iraqi government to help fund the Iraqi Special Tribunal and to fund investigations into crimes of the former regime," he said.

In addition to the remarks, information from a leading US newspaper The Washington Post dated on July 2 might also be useful.

The report said, "The (US) Justice Department says it has sent 50 people to Baghdad to cooperate with the Iraqis. The head of the US Regime Crimes Liaison Office, Greg Kehoe, has had contact with the US intelligence officials who control most of the Baathist archives, now stored in Qatar."

Financial aid plus verbal instructions has apparently demonstrated that the US government is deeply and deliberately involving itself in the cases of Saddam and his 11 associates.

However, looking back at what has happened since the US-led war on Iraq in March 2003 and the downfall of the Saddam regime, the current American involvement in Saddam's trial is simply nothing as compared to its interference and engagement in Iraqi political process and the post-war reconstruction.

It has been known that the US Congress approved an aid package of US$18.4 billion last October after the Bush administration called for a quick infusion of cash into Iraq to finance reconstruction.

Such a huge amount of investment into Iraq will by no means be made without convincing reasons and careful consideration.

Bush and his top aides have reasons to put everything in Iraq under their tight control while a number of American opponents certainly have theirs.

The Washington Post said editorially on July 2, "Iraqis would benefit from allowing some international lawyers to participate, if not as judges or prosecutors then as investigators, both to increase the numbers and experience of their own team and to make clear that the court has international recognition."

Such a statement sounds very much like a reserved warning for the Bush administration for its over-direct involvement into Saddam's trial after the hand-over of sovereignty to Iraqis although it appears to be a suggestion for the Iraqi interim government.

Saddam and his regime are politically dead now, but their influence remains. Therefore, there is no point for the Bush government to withdraw from Iraq at this moment. On the contrary, it will go by leaps and bounds in the coming days to defend what it has gained, and to realize its dream of realizing "democracy in the Middle East" before it enters a dead end.

(Xinhua News Agency July 7, 2004)