Publius:
The benefits I see are:
- A chance to give the Iraqi Governing Council authority on a rather important matter. Considering that the first act of the council was to make April 9 a holiday (the day Baghdad fell and the Saddam statues came tumbling down), something tells me the council’s decision on what to do with Saddam’s body will not meet with U.S. objection.
I think the 25-member council (despite being made up of a majority of Shi’ites, some of whom might object to the anything other than immediate burial on religious grounds) nevertheless also has an interest in proving Saddam is dead in order to reduce the fear to cooperate on the part of the Iraqi people.
- A chance for the Iraqi Governing Council to gain legitimacy with the Iraqi people (granted, many folks will continue to be suspicious of the council’s decision on what to do with the body).
I don’t deny what Marley23 said is true in that some will view the council’s decision as a U.S. decision by proxy. But that’s unavoidable anyway, and if the U.S. loudly retorts that it’s trying to give decision-making ability to the council, it helps to mute that criticism.
- A chance for the U.S. to prove that it is transferring authority to the council on an issue in which it’s unlikely that the council and the U.S. would disagree.
The U.S. can always weigh in that it prefers the body is not paraded around the streets, but that it will respect the decision of the council.
Where did I ever say that? 
From what I can tell, the European press seems to be objecting to the U.S. display of the Uday/Qusay bodies on the grounds that it’s ghoulish. On the whole, that’s a fair complaint (although I suspect it’s mostly politically driven, since I don’t remember too much bitching when the Romanians killed Ceaucescu and showed it on TV).
But again, if the U.S. responds that it’s trying to give some real decision-making ability to the Iraqis as well as dispelling fear among the Iraqi people, then it helps in defusing the inevitable criticism, and it’s decent PR for the U.S. (goodness knows we need some).
Whether the council decides to bury him according to Muslim ritual, hang him from a lamppost, or just show video of the body, the decision becomes an Iraqi one. If the European or Arab press wants to bitch, the U.S. can proclaim that it’s an IRAQI DECISION.
The U.S. is the only entity in the world that can make the odious Uday and Qusay into somewhat sympathetic figures. The benefits of disowning the decision on what to do with Saddam’s body and transferring the decision to the Iraqi council seem readily apparent.
censored:
I agree. As I said before, since the council has significant religious influence, the decision could be made to simply bury the body according to Muslim burial rites. Or, to display the body on video (which I suspect would be most likely). Or, hang it from the swords over the highway.
No matter the council’s decision, the U.S. can just say that it’s attempting to give the council real authority.
Dissonance
Then the world can be outraged at the Iraqi council (and, as censored and I both said, it’s far from inevitable that the council would barbarically parade Saddam’s body down the street). And, as I said, the U.S. can weigh in with its preferences but say that it will respect the Iraqi decision.
And from a U.S. perspective, I suspect the U.S. is much less concerned what the world thinks than what the Iraqi people (and by extension, the Arabs) themselves think.
Marley23 :
OK, then how about the council having a debate and a vote (both of which open to public scrutiny) on the matter? Besides transparency and the public display of the workings of some small level of democracy, it might go a long way toward muting the criticism that the U.S. is pulling the strings (although I do grant that many in the Arab world will continue to believe that).
