Lebanese Ex-FM to Asharq Al-Awsat: I Differed with Hariri, But We Were United over Calamitous Emile Lahoud

Lebanese lawmakers are seen at parliament during a session to extend the term of then President Emile Lahoud in 2004. (Getty Images)
Lebanese lawmakers are seen at parliament during a session to extend the term of then President Emile Lahoud in 2004. (Getty Images)
TT
20

Lebanese Ex-FM to Asharq Al-Awsat: I Differed with Hariri, But We Were United over Calamitous Emile Lahoud

Lebanese lawmakers are seen at parliament during a session to extend the term of then President Emile Lahoud in 2004. (Getty Images)
Lebanese lawmakers are seen at parliament during a session to extend the term of then President Emile Lahoud in 2004. (Getty Images)

In 1998, then Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri turned to his Syrian and French allies to prevent the election of staunch Syria ally Emile Lahoud as president. He found out that the decision to elect him was taken and not up for discussion.

He tried coexisting with the new president, but realized that Lahoud had only one agenda: weakening Hariri and ensuring his failure.

Hariri refused to surrender. Parliamentary elections in 2000 were held according to a law that was tailored to defeat Hariri, but the PM came out victorious, turning the table on Lahoud. Hariri was again appointed prime minister and Lahoud had no choice but to “booby-trap” his governments with ministers who would obstruct his agenda.

Asharq Al-Awsat sat down with Lebanese former Foreign Minister Farez Boueiz to discuss Lahoud’s two tumultuous terms in 1998 and 2004 and the president’s strained relations with Hariri.

Boueiz said he differed with Hairiri on political affairs, but they were united over a “calamity called Emile Lahoud.” At the time, Syria had enjoyed political and security hegemony over its smaller neighbor, Lebanon.

In 1998, Lebanese and Syrian officials began to float Lahoud’s name to late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad as a successor to Elias Hrawi. They explained that Lahoud, then army commander, was not interested in politics, but was rather more invested in other pursuits, such as swimming and other sports, allowing Syrian intelligence free reign to assume the role of president should he be elected.

These factors favored Lahoud’s election and led to Boueiz’s opposition to him. He declared that he would not have allowed Syrian intelligence to play the role of president.

Ultimately, pro-Syrian Lebanese parties and Syria itself succeeded in securing Lahoud’s election in 1998, paving the way for Damascus to have complete control over Lebanon. Boueiz believed that someone in Lebanon actually headed to Damascus on a daily basis to received the “order of the day.” Lahoud was not opposed to this. He did not argue, ask questions or object to any of this.

Assad died in 2000 and was succeeded by his son, Bashar, with whom Lahoud saw eye-to-eye. “Lahoud was content to do what he was told by Syria, believing that it knew more than us what to do. He was a very disciplined officer,” Boueiz said.

Minister in Hariri’s government

Boueiz said he did not expect to be appointed as a minister during Lahoud’s term in office, saying he was part of the opposition. Days before the formation of a government headed by Hariri, he learned from the media that he would be named minister of environment, rather than foreign affairs.

“Truthfully, I didn’t want to become a minister. I believe that being named minister of environment was a step down from minister of foreign affairs,” he stated, adding, however, that he had no real objections to the environment portfolio. “I soon arranged for a press conference so that I would declare my resignation as soon as a government is formed,” he revealed.

Moreover, he said Hariri had not even consulted him about being named a minister.

“One night, Hariri telephoned me. At the point, with Lahoud in office, the strained relations I had with Hariri were no more. We were united in our calamity,” Boueiz continued. He said the PM telephoned him to persuade him to be a minister in his government.

He explained that he needed a minister who would be loyal to him, expressing his confidence in Boueiz, whom he described as bold figure who could stand against Lahoud.

“Without you, I would be alone in the confrontation. I need Maronites by my side,” Boueiz recalled Hariri as saying.

Boueiz told Asharq Al-Awsat that he initially refused to be a “hired” or “mercenary” minister who would “wage Hariri’s wars.” “Hariri told me that he was certain that if I were part of the government, I would confront Lahoud. ‘I appeal to you and hope that you would consider this as a permanent understanding between us,’ the PM told me,” Boueiz added.

After much insistence, Boueiz relented and agreed to become minister despite knowing that he would be at odds with Lahoud.

Tussles at cabinet

“And so it was, I became a minister and disputes erupted over the smallest details. As minister of environment, I believed in environment work and I wanted to work,” stressed Boueiz. He recalled that he had drafted a project on “national planning for crushers.” “The ministry had poured all its energies into the project, while Lahoud avoided addressing it whenever I brought it up at cabinet. He did not want to approve it. He did not want to acknowledge that Fares Boueiz had made an accomplishment,” he recalled, saying he had proposed the draft no less than five times at cabinet.

“One day I received a telephone call from [head of Syrian intelligence in Lebanon] Rustom Ghazale,” said Boueiz. “I had served as foreign minister for nine years and not once did a Syrian security official telephone me. Now they were calling me even though I was just an environment minister with no real power.”

“For nine years no Syrian had contacted me and now Ghazale wanted to talk to me about crushers?! Syria only ever talked to you about politics,” remarked Boueiz.

“I told Ghazale that my project was ready, but I have no idea why Lahoud was not allowing it to be approved by the government. The next time the cabinet met, Lahoud told me, ‘We are still waiting on your crusher project.’ I smiled and knew that Ghazale had spoken to him. ‘It’s good that you have finally woken up to it. I have raised the issue at cabinet five times already and you have been avoiding it. I don’t know what happened to make you change your mind. Perhaps something unexpected has taken place,’” Boueiz added.

“Of course, the Syrians had their interests, and some political parties were perhaps benefitting from the crushers,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Liaison between Lahoud and Syrians

Asharq Al-Awsat asked Boueiz about Jamil al-Sayyed, Lebanon’s head of General Security during Lahoud’s term. “Al-Sayyed was the liaison between Lahoud and the Syrians. In effect, he was the one bringing the ‘order of the day’ to Lebanon. He was Lahoud’s godfather and the official responsible for his behavior. He was the figure who had initially promoted Lahoud to Bashar al-Assad.”

As Lahoud’s time in office drew to an end, heated discussions started to emerge over the contentious issue of extending his term. Boueiz expressed his objection to the extension at cabinet. “Of course, I was unsuccessful. I also expressed my objection at parliament and was unsuccessful there as well.”

“Hariri, who was on a visit to Damascus, came back to inform us that the decision to extend Lahoud’s term had been taken by Syria. I informed him that I would resign as a result,” continued Boueiz. The next day, instead of submitting his resignation to Lahoud, he made the announcement to the media.

Lahoud’s extension and Syria’s threat

Boueiz vividly remembers the infamous visit Hariri paid to Damascus, which had demanded that he support the extension.

The PM traveled to the Syrian capital a week before the extension came into effect in 2004. He recalled that it was a Saturday and that Hariri had headed to Damascus at around 2 pm and was back in Lebanon two hours later.

“I headed to his mountain residence. I noticed that there were no guards around,” he added. He recalled seeing a defeated Hariri seated alone at the home. “‘There is nothing we can do. They want the extension,’ he told me. I asked him if he had fought against it, and he replied: ‘Do you insult me? What do you think?’ With tears in his eyes, he added: ‘They said they would destroy Lebanon on my head and on the head of [former French President and Hariri’s personal friend] Jacques Chirac.’”

Hariri’s assassination

Boueiz recalled to Asharq Al-Awsat the fateful day when Hariri was assassinated on February 14, 2005. The minister and PM were at parliament in downtown Beirut. Boueiz revealed that Hariri had invited him to his house for lunch, but he had to turn down the offer because he was scheduled to attend a parliamentary committee meeting on the electoral law.

“He told me ‘Why are you wasting your time? The law has already been prepared,’ nodding his head in Damascus’ direction. I told him, ‘I know that, but I will simply express my objection to it.’ He told me: ‘Listen to me, let’s go have lunch together. It will be more useful than this and we will prepare for what is to come.’ I again respectfully declined because I had commitments at the committee. ‘I will speak for five minutes and then catch up with you,’ I told him.”

“Of course, if I had agreed to the lunch invitation, I would have joined him in his car and would have died with him,” Boueiz said. Hariri was killed in a massive explosion in Beirut minutes later.

The minister completed his work at parliament and was speaking to the media when the explosion happened. He headed outside and saw a plume of black smoke in the near distance.

“I immediately got into a car. I sensed that Hariri was the target. I contacted his residence at Qoreitem and asked about him. The employee on the line asked if I wanted the call to be transferred to him. His answer led me to believe that Hariri was at his residence, so I declined and ended the call. Soon after, MP Farid Makari approached me and asked me who I thought was targeted in the attack. He too had contacted Qoreitem and believed Hariri was safe,” Boueiz said.

Boueiz and his entourage headed to the scene of the blast and were astounded by the devastation. “We didn’t linger and couldn’t make out anything from the scene. We turned back and I wanted to go to Hariri’s residence, still assuming that he was expecting me for lunch.”

“On my way, I came across journalist Faisal Salman. I stopped to talk to him, and he said: ‘My condolences and may he rest in peace.’ I asked him who he was talking about, and he told me: ‘Hariri’. I replied: ‘How? I am on my way to have lunch with him’. He told me that he had just come back from the hospital where he had seen his corpse. I couldn't believe it. I made my way to Qoreitem and saw the angry and mournful crowd and found out the truth.”

Boueiz then headed to the nearby residence of MP Walid Jumblatt who said a meeting would be held at Hariri’s house in hours to declare a united front and revolt against Emile Lahoud. The movement would become known as March 14.



Where Things Stand in the US-China Trade War

OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA - APRIL 09: The container ship CMA CGM Osiris arrives at the Port of Oakland on April 09, 2025 in Oakland, California.  Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/AFP
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA - APRIL 09: The container ship CMA CGM Osiris arrives at the Port of Oakland on April 09, 2025 in Oakland, California. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/AFP
TT
20

Where Things Stand in the US-China Trade War

OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA - APRIL 09: The container ship CMA CGM Osiris arrives at the Port of Oakland on April 09, 2025 in Oakland, California.  Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/AFP
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA - APRIL 09: The container ship CMA CGM Osiris arrives at the Port of Oakland on April 09, 2025 in Oakland, California. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/AFP

US President Donald Trump has ramped up his trade war against China, further raising import tariffs on Beijing to 125 percent despite pausing them for other countries.

The move came hours after China announced reciprocal action against the United States in response to a previous levy hike.

AFP looks at how the escalating trade war between the world's two biggest economies is playing out -- and what impact it might have:

What actions has Trump taken so far?

Trump said Wednesday that the US would raise tariffs on Chinese imports to a staggering 125 percent, citing a "lack of respect" from Beijing.

The announcement came as the mercurial president announced a halt on tariffs for other nations for 90 days, following panic on global markets.

The new levy on China marked the latest salvo in a brewing tit-for-tat trade war between the two global superpowers.

A previous round of US tariffs had come into force earlier on Wednesday, jacking up duties on China to 104 percent.

As well as the blanket levies, China is also under sector-specific tariffs on steel, aluminium and car imports.

How has China responded?

China has vowed to fight the measures "to the end" and so far has unveiled reciprocal tariffs each time Trump has upped the ante.

Responding to the 104 percent duties on Wednesday, Beijing said it would raise its own tariffs on US imports from 34 percent to 84 percent, effective from Thursday.

It also said it had filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO), citing "bullying" tactics by the Trump administration.

China had not responded to the latest hike in tariffs to 125 percent levies as of Thursday morning.

But its countermeasures have begun to step outside the economic sphere, with government departments warning citizens of the "risks" of travelling to the US or studying in parts of the country.

And while Beijing has blasted the US with fiery rhetoric, it has continued to urge "equal dialogue" to resolve the trade spat.

Zhiwei Zhang, chief economist at Pinpoint Asset Management, said China had sent a "clear signal" that it would not back down, adding that there was "(no) quick and easy way out" of the conflict.

Haibin Zhu, chief China economist at J.P. Morgan, agreed, saying "the bar for a possible deal is high".

- Why is China so vulnerable to tariffs? -

Trade between the world's two largest economies is vast.

Sales of Chinese goods to the US last year totaled more than $500 billion -- 16.4 percent of the country's exports, according to Beijing's customs data.

And China imported $143.5 billion in goods from the United States in 2024, according to the office of the US Trade Representative.

That trade was dominated by agricultural products, primarily oilseeds and grains, according to the US-China Business Council. Oil and gas, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors are also among major US exports to China.

Beijing has long drawn Trump's ire with a trade surplus with the United States that reached $295.4 billion last year, according to the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Chinese leaders have been reluctant to disrupt the status quo, in part because the country's export-driven economy is particularly sensitive to vicissitudes in international trade.

US duties also threaten to harm China's fragile post-Covid economic recovery as it struggles with a debt crisis in the property sector and persistently low consumption -- a downturn Beijing had sought to slow with broad fiscal stimulus last year.

But an intensified trade war will likely mean China cannot peg its hopes for strong economic growth this year on its exports, which reached record highs in 2024.

What impact will US tariffs have?

The head of the WTO said Wednesday that the US-China tariff war could cut trade in goods between the two countries by 80 percent.

Given the two economic giants account for three percent of world trade, the conflict could "severely damage the global economic outlook", Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala said.

Analysts expect the levies to take a significant chunk out of China's GDP, which Beijing's leadership hope will grow five percent this year.

Likely to be hit hardest are China's top exports to the United States -- everything from electronics and machinery to textiles and clothing, according to the Peterson Institute of International Economics.

And because of the crucial role Chinese goods play in supplying US firms, the tariffs may also hurt American manufacturers and consumers, analysts have warned.

Paul Ashworth, chief North America economist at Capital Economics, said it was "difficult to see either side backing down in the next few days".

But, he added, "talks will eventually happen, although a full rollback of all the additional tariffs... appear unlikely".