President Bush’s emphasis on the certainty that Saddam Hussein would get a fair trial properly established the tone and direction of what happens next to the former Iraqi leader. Similarly, his refusal to urge that Mr. Hussein face the death penalty – President Bush said he has his “own personal views” on the matter, but the decision was up to the Iraqis – was important to the transition of an Iraq without a U.S. occupying force.

The debate already has begun on whether an Iraqi court or an international court should try the former dictator. The internationalists want to ensure a fair trial based on the foundation of respected law. This is an understandable desire but there are also good reasons for trying him in Iraq. The Iraqi Governing Council, which was appointed by U.S. officials, has said it wants Mr. Hussein to be tried by Iraqi judges with the supervision of international experts. A special tribunal set up in Iraq last week to try leading members of the former government is a natural venue for such a trial, where he may face charges of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Trying Mr. Hussein in Iraq gives substance to the emerging government there. More forcefully than any other measure, it would tell the Iraqi people that they would have control over events within their borders. Such a trial might even serve as a catharsis for the many grieving families who lost members because of the Iraqi president’s brutal means of holding onto power.

A trial, whether inside or outside Iraq, would not decide whether Mr. Hussein had committed certain crimes – the tortured bodies are there, the wars took place, these are not in question. It would determine his culpability and determine how extreme he was in preserving power. Legal standards used to decide his fate already exist at the international courts and are being used in trials concerning Yugoslavia and Rwanda. These or similar recognized standards could be used in Iraq so that the court is seen as legitimate.

The range of charges against Mr. Hussein would be determined by how far back in his career Iraqis choose to go. Already, Iran has asked that he be tried for crimes concerning the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, a tricky question for the United States, which supported him during that war. Charges that reportedly are being considered include his campaign against the Kurds in the 1980s, including the use of poison gas; suppression of Kurdish and Shia revolts after the first Gulf War; brutality against the Marsh Arabs; crimes committed during the war against Kuwait; and possible involvement in recent attacks on coalition forces and other targets in Iraq.

President Bush came into office eschewing nation-building and international involvement generally. His administration has learned much since then and fortunately now sees the importance of helping other nations strengthen themselves. A full and fair trial of Saddam Hussein in Iraq would help accomplish that in a nation remaking itself even as it sheds its past.