Arafat Chose to Fight for 6 Months... Moscow’s Position Was his Greatest Disappointment 

Asharq Al-Awsat publishes recollections of influential players during 1982 Israeli invasion of Beirut. 

Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)
Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)
TT

Arafat Chose to Fight for 6 Months... Moscow’s Position Was his Greatest Disappointment 

Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)
Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)

On this day in 1982, Beirut was besieged by the Israeli army and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat boarded a ship that took him to his new exile in Tunisia. The Palestinian Liberation Organization’s loss of its last front with Israel would leave its mark on the Palestinians and Lebanon.

As Israel tightened its siege of Beirut, Arafat took a secret decision to carry on fighting for six months until regional and international stances emerged. He was forced to leave Lebanon after 88 days, marking an end of what he described as the “longest Arab-Israeli war.”

The greatest disappointment to the Palestinian resistance and its allies in the Lebanese National Movement came from their Soviet ally. Moscow had refused to deliver a serious warning or send a destroyer off the Lebanese coast or a ship to evacuate the wounded.

Arafat’s insistence that he leave Lebanon by sea, not through Damascus, reflected the extent of the differences between him and Syrian President Hafez al-Assad. Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) Ahmed Jibril recalled that Arafat had bluntly told him that the Syrian leadership will not be credited for him holding out for three months in Beirut.

Asharq Al-Awsat will publish a series of features highlighting the significant developments and recollections of influential players during that heated summer of 1982.

From a building in east Beirut, Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon observed Arafat as he boarded the ship that would take him to Tunisia. He wrongly believed that had broken the Palestinian resistance and that it would fade away in exile. The invasion failed in luring Lebanon to strike a peace deal with Israel. The current Lebanon has an even more hardline position towards Israel.

Against the backdrop of the war, Syria and Iran will lay the foundation of their alliance. Hezbollah would be born in Lebanon. Syria, which had withdrawn its troops from Beirut in wake of the invasion, would redeploy them years later, before again being forced to pull them out in 2005 after the assassination of Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

In the besieged city, I was determined to record the testimonials of influential political and security figures. I tried to obtain Arafat’s testimony, but he turned down the offer, saying he didn’t want the Palestinian people to be punished “because of his memories.”

In Tunisia, Arafat told me: “What do you want me to recount? To tell you about Sabri al-Banna (Abou Nidal), who was hosted by three Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus and Tripoli, and who was obsessed with assassinating Palestinians, not Israelis?”

“Do you want me to tell you about the so-called intifada in Fatah that was backed by Syria and funded by Libya? Or do you want me to complain about the practices of Palestinian groups that tarnished our image of resistance or led to our labeling as terrorists? I’m not saying that Fatah was faultless. We all made mistakes, but we always tried not to lose our way and lose our cause.”

“The Palestinian people have been punished a lot. They were punished for clinging on to their cause and for firing the first shot. (...) The PLO was punished for adopting a hard line and punished when it adopted a moderate approach. Do you want the Palestinian people to be punished because of my memoirs? I don’t want to open old wounds.”

“As I was leaving Beirut, a journalist asked me: ‘Where to?’ I replied: ‘To Jerusalem. We are preparing for our date in Palestine and Jerusalem. We don’t have any other place to be.’”

The KGB general and Iran

In 1980, Palestinian ambassador to Tehran and Fatah central committee member Hani al-Hassan received an urgent call to head to Beirut. Upon his arrival, Arafat told him they were headed to a meeting at the Soviet embassy. Hassan understood that he needed to voice Arafat’s views. He knew how influential the Soviets were in the Palestinian revolution. He knew of the consequences of refusing delicate Soviet proposals.

Other Fatah members at the meeting included Salah Khalaf (Abou Ayad) and Khalil al-Wazir (Abou Jihad). The Soviets were represented by General “Alexander” who was the KGB official overseeing operations in the Middle East. The insistence that Palestinian leaders, not their representatives, be present at the meeting meant that Moscow expected the talks to yield a decision.

General “Alexander” spoke about the situation in the region, especially Iran, in wake of the Soviet military invasion of Afghanistan. He said the time had come for the Palestinians to cooperate with the Soviets to facilitate the Communist Party’s control of Iran. The Soviet Union wanted to expand its power in the region and Iran was a significant prize given its geographic location and resources.

Hassan was surprised with the proposal and asked to be excused from the meeting, but Arafat refused. Hassan said he would not stand against the Iranian revolution that had “offered us several major services,” referring to its severing of Iranian-Israeli relations that were forged under the shah.

Tensions soon erupted and the Soviet general declared that the Palestinians “won’t be able to do anything without us.” Hassan replied: “If the Soviets enter Iran, then Israel’s strategic value will grow a million-fold to the West. So, don’t even think about it. For our part, we will ensure that every effort is made to form good Iranian-Soviet relations.”

Hassan believed that the meeting exposed how the Soviets dealt with the situations in Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan and future conflicts in these countries.

Meeting in a Soviet forest

Another significant meeting was held years earlier. In the early 1970s, head of the PFLP’s External Operations Wadie Haddad met with KGB chief Yuri Andropov in a forest on the outskirts of Moscow. The meeting was held in utmost secrecy because Haddad at the time had been planning plane hijacking operations for years. Haddad asked for weapons from the Soviets, and they were smuggled to him off the coast of Aden, Yemen.

The first high-level contacts between Moscow and the Palestinian revolution took place in 1968 at the suggestion of Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser. Nasser and Arafat traveled to Moscow together on a secret visit. Two years later, a Soviet envoy met with Arafat in Jordan and the relations between the Palestinians and Soviets came out to the open.

Moscow realized the importance of relations with the Palestinians so it forged ties that allowed it in a few years to wield influence in Palestinian political and security decisions. Moscow formed close ties with the Palestinian left, including the PFLP, Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and leftists in the Fatah movement.

These relations led the Palestinian resistance and allied parties in Lebanon to rule out the possibility of Israel invading Beirut. It had already launched its invasion on June 6, 1982, and was advancing on the capital. On the day of the invasion, the Fatah and Lebanese National Movement met in Beirut. Present were Abou Ammar, Abou Jihad, Abou Ayad, Abou al-Walid, Secretary General of the Lebanese Communist Party George Hawi and Secretary General of the Communist Action Organization in Lebanon Mohsen Ibrahim.

They discussed the possibility that the invasion could go beyond southern Lebanon, especially with Sharon as defense minister. They never predicted, however, that the Israeli forces would advance on Beirut and reach its outskirts because Syrian troops were in the capital and any clash with the Israelis could lead to a full-scale war between them. They believed that Israel would not provoke Syria, an ally of Moscow.

They were proven wrong when the Israeli army was met with little resistance and eventually besieged Beirut. It was later revealed that the Soviets and their allies did not have information about the Israeli plans. The Syrians were also in the dark.

Meeting with Bashir Gemayel

When the Israeli forces reached the Chouf area in Mount Lebanon and appeared intent on Beirut, a secret meeting was held between Abou Ammar al-Hassan, head of the Lebanese Forces Bashir al-Gemayel and Lebanese military intelligence chief Johnny Abdo. Gemayel wanted to hold the meeting to deliver a message to Arafat that the Palestinians must lay down their arms and leave Lebanon. “I am ready to secure a safe and dignified exit. I want an immediate answer before the Israelis reach Beirut,” he said. Hassan suggested that they take their conversation to the balcony because they feared Abdo’s house would be wiretapped.

Hassan noticed how worried Gemayel appeared. He told him: “Let me speak to you frankly. I follow you and it is my duty to follow you. I know you have presidential ambitions, but you won’t achieve them this way. You were the one who paved the way for the Syrians so that they could strike the Palestinians. Now, you have brought in the Israelis so that they can strike them both.”

“At the end of this game, we will both be struck, and you will be finished. Lebanon is enticing. Neither the Israelis, nor the Syrians will pull out. You are opposed to both of them. Let me repeat, you are mistaken in thinking this is the way that will lead you to the presidency. Your odds will be better if you decide to side with us and the Lebanese National Movement.”

“Who will agree to hosting the Palestinian fighters? Jordan, Syria or others? He vowed that he will ensure that a small number of fighters would remain and they would answer to the Lebanese army. The game slipped from his hands when the Israelis reached Beirut.”

Hassan later informed Mohsen about the meeting. Mohsen then met with Arafat and Hawi. They were primarily concerned with determining whether Moscow could stop the invasion. Hawi, with his close ties to the Soviets, believed that striking the Palestinian revolution was a red line for both sides the Soviets and Communists. After a month or so, he realized that everything was permissible, and nothing was off limits. Arab countries had no way of influencing international powers.

Hawi was hoping Moscow would threaten Israel to withdraw from Lebanon. He hoped they would send a naval vessel off the coast of Beirut or at least evacuate the wounded. Soviet ambassador to Beirut Alexander Soldatov could promise nothing of the sort. Hawi kept relaying these disappointing stances to Arafat. Hawi and others could not believe that the Soviets would stand idly by as Israel invaded Lebanon.

Arafat was dealt a crushing blow during a meeting with Soldatov. The ambassador told Arafat to leave Beirut, even if he had to board an American destroyer. Arafat was incredulous and refused to leave. He would eventually relent when it appeared that the Soviets would not support him or stand against the Israelis.



Khartoum Markets Back to Life but 'Nothing Like Before'

Men walk along a street past destroyed high-rise building, as efforts to restore the city's infrastructure resumes after nearly three years of devastation caused by war, in the Sudanese capital Khartoum on January 17, 2025. (AFP)
Men walk along a street past destroyed high-rise building, as efforts to restore the city's infrastructure resumes after nearly three years of devastation caused by war, in the Sudanese capital Khartoum on January 17, 2025. (AFP)
TT

Khartoum Markets Back to Life but 'Nothing Like Before'

Men walk along a street past destroyed high-rise building, as efforts to restore the city's infrastructure resumes after nearly three years of devastation caused by war, in the Sudanese capital Khartoum on January 17, 2025. (AFP)
Men walk along a street past destroyed high-rise building, as efforts to restore the city's infrastructure resumes after nearly three years of devastation caused by war, in the Sudanese capital Khartoum on January 17, 2025. (AFP)

The hustle and bustle of buyers and sellers has returned to Khartoum's central market, but "it's nothing like before," fruit vendor Hashim Mohamed told AFP, streets away from where war first broke out nearly three years ago.

On April 15, 2023, central Khartoum awoke to battles between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, who had been allies since 2021, when they ousted civilians from a short-lived transitional government.

Their war has since killed tens of thousands and displaced millions. In greater Khartoum alone, nearly 4 million people -- around half the population -- fled the city when the RSF took over.

Hashim Mohamed did not.

"I had to work discreetly, because there were regular attacks" on businesses, said the fruit seller, who has worked in the sprawling market for 50 years.

Like him, those who stayed in the city report living in constant fear of assaults and robberies from fighters roaming the streets.

Last March, army forces led an offensive through the capital, pushing paramilitary fighters out and revealing the vast looting and destruction left behind.

"The market's not what it used to be, but it's much better than when the RSF was here," said market vendor Adam Haddad, resting in the shade of an awning.

In the market's narrow, dusty alleyways, fruits and vegetables are piled high, on makeshift stalls or tarps spread on the ground.

- Two jobs to survive -

Khartoum, where entire neighborhoods were once under siege, is no longer threatened by the mass starvation that stalks battlefield cities and displacement camps elsewhere in Sudan.

But with the economy a shambles, a good living is still hard to provide.

"People complain about prices, they say it's too expensive. You can find everything, but the costs keep going up: supplies, labor, transportation," said Mohamed.

Sudan has known only triple-digit annual inflation for years. Figures for 2024 stood at 151 percent -- down from a 2021 peak of 358.

The currency has also collapsed, going from trading at 570 Sudanese pounds to the US dollar before the war to 3,500 in 2026, according to the black market rate.

One Sudanese teacher, who only a few years ago could provide comfortably for his two children, told AFP he could no longer pay his rent with a monthly salary of 250,000 Sudanese pounds ($71).

To feed his family, pay for school, and cover healthcare, he "works in the market or anywhere" on his days off.

"You have to have another job to pay for the bare minimum of basic needs," he said, asking for anonymity to protect his privacy.

For Adam Haddad, the road to recovery will be a long one.

"We don't have enough resources or workers or liquidity going through the market," he said, adding that reliable electricity was still a problem.

"The government is striving to restore everything, and God willing, in the near future, the power will return and Khartoum will become what it once was."


Trump Heads into Davos Storm, with an Eye on Home

FILE - President Donald Trump is illuminated by a camera flash as he gestures while walking across the South Lawn of the White House, Nov. 2, 2025, in Washington, after returning from a trip to Florida. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)
FILE - President Donald Trump is illuminated by a camera flash as he gestures while walking across the South Lawn of the White House, Nov. 2, 2025, in Washington, after returning from a trip to Florida. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)
TT

Trump Heads into Davos Storm, with an Eye on Home

FILE - President Donald Trump is illuminated by a camera flash as he gestures while walking across the South Lawn of the White House, Nov. 2, 2025, in Washington, after returning from a trip to Florida. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)
FILE - President Donald Trump is illuminated by a camera flash as he gestures while walking across the South Lawn of the White House, Nov. 2, 2025, in Washington, after returning from a trip to Florida. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)

Donald Trump returns to the Davos ski resort next week after unleashing yet another avalanche on the global order. But for the US president, his main audience is back home.

Trump's first appearance in six years at the gathering of the world's political and global elite comes amid a spiraling crisis over his quest to acquire Greenland.

Fellow leaders at the mountain retreat will also be eager to talk about other shocks from his first year back in power, from tariffs to Venezuela, Ukraine, Gaza and Iran.

Yet for the Republican president, his keynote speech among the Swiss peaks will largely be aimed at the United States.

US voters are angered by the cost of living despite Trump's promises of a "golden age," and his party could be facing a kicking in crucial midterm elections in November.

That means Trump will spend at least part of his time in luxurious Davos talking about US housing.

A White House official told AFP that Trump would "unveil initiatives to drive down housing costs" and "tout his economic agenda that has propelled the United States to lead the world in economic growth."

The 79-year-old is expected to announce plans allowing prospective homebuyers to dip into their retirement accounts for down payments.

Billionaire Trump is keenly aware that affordability has become his Achilles' heel in his second term. A CNN poll last week found that 58 percent of Americans believe his first year back in the White House has been a failure, particularly on the economy.

Trump's supporters are also increasingly uneasy about the "America First" president's seemingly relentless focus on foreign policy since his return to the Oval Office.

But as he flies into the snowy retreat, Trump will find it impossible to avoid the global storm of events that he has stirred since January 20, 2025.

Trump will be alongside many of the leaders of the same European NATO allies that he has just threatened with tariffs if they don't back his extraordinary quest to take control of Greenland from Denmark.

Those threats have once again called into question the transatlantic alliance that has in many ways underpinned the western economic order celebrated at Davos.

- 'Economic stagnation' -

So have the broader tariffs Trump announced early in his second term, and he is set to add to the pressure on Europe in his speech.

Trump will "emphasize that the United States and Europe must leave behind economic stagnation and the policies that caused it," the White House official said.

The Ukraine war will also be on the cards.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is hoping for a meeting with Trump to sign new security guarantees for a hoped-for ceasefire deal with Russia, as are G7 leaders.

But while the largest-ever US Davos delegation includes Secretary of State Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner, who have all played key roles on Ukraine, no meeting is assured.

"No bilateral meetings have been scheduled for Davos at this time," the White House told AFP.

Trump is meanwhile reportedly considering a first meeting of the so-called "Board of Peace" for war-torn Gaza at Davos, after announcing its first members in recent days.

Questions are also swirling about the future of oil-rich Venezuela following the US military operation to topple its leader Nicolas Maduro, part of Trump's assertive new approach to his country's "backyard."

But Trump may also pause to enjoy his time in the scenic spot he called "beautiful Davos" in his video speech to the meeting a year ago.

The forum has always been an odd fit for the former New York property tycoon and reality TV star, whose brand of populism has long scorned globalist elites.

But at the same time, Trump relishes the company of the rich and successful.

His first Davos appearance in 2018 met occasional boos but he made a forceful return in 2020 when he dismissed the "prophets of doom" on climate and the economy.

A year later he was out of power. Now, Trump returns as a more powerful president than ever, at home and abroad.


Russia, China Unlikely to Back Iran Against US Military Threats

A man stands by the wreckage of a burnt bus bearing a banner (unseen) that reads "This was one of Tehran’s new buses that was paid for with the money of the people’s taxes,” in Tehran's Sadeghieh Square on January 15, 2026. (AFP)
A man stands by the wreckage of a burnt bus bearing a banner (unseen) that reads "This was one of Tehran’s new buses that was paid for with the money of the people’s taxes,” in Tehran's Sadeghieh Square on January 15, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Russia, China Unlikely to Back Iran Against US Military Threats

A man stands by the wreckage of a burnt bus bearing a banner (unseen) that reads "This was one of Tehran’s new buses that was paid for with the money of the people’s taxes,” in Tehran's Sadeghieh Square on January 15, 2026. (AFP)
A man stands by the wreckage of a burnt bus bearing a banner (unseen) that reads "This was one of Tehran’s new buses that was paid for with the money of the people’s taxes,” in Tehran's Sadeghieh Square on January 15, 2026. (AFP)

While Russia and China are ready to back protest-rocked Iran under threat by US President Donald Trump, that support would diminish in the face of US military action, experts told AFP.

Iran is a significant ally to the two nuclear powers, providing drones to Russia and oil to China. But analysts told AFP the two superpowers would only offer diplomatic and economic aid to Tehran, to avoid a showdown with Washington.

"China and Russia don't want to go head-to-head with the US over Iran," said Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior policy expert for the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank.

Tehran, despite its best efforts over decades, has failed to establish a formal alliance with Moscow and Beijing, she noted.

If the United States carried out strikes on Iran, "both the Chinese and the Russians will prioritize their bilateral relationship with Washington", Geranmayeh said.

China has to maintain a "delicate" rapprochement with the Trump administration, she argued, while Russia wants to keep the United States involved in talks on ending the war in Ukraine.

"They both have much higher priorities than Iran."

- Ukraine before Iran -

Despite their close ties, "Russia-Iranian treaties don't include military support" -- only political, diplomatic and economic aid, Russian analyst Sergei Markov told AFP.

Alexander Gabuev, director of Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, said Moscow would do whatever it could "to keep the regime afloat".

But "Russia's options are very limited," he added.

Faced with its own economic crisis, "Russia cannot become a giant market for Iranian products" nor can it provide "a lavish loan", Gabuev said.

Nikita Smagin, a specialist in Russia-Iran relations, said that in the event of US strikes, Russia could do "almost nothing".

"They don't want to risk military confrontation with other great powers like the US -- but at the same time, they're ready to send weaponry to Iran," he said.

"Using Iran as a bargaining asset is a normal thing for Russia," Smagin said of the longer-term strategy, at a time when Moscow is also negotiating with Washington on Ukraine.

Markov agreed. "The Ukrainian crisis is much more important for Russia than the Iranian crisis," he argued.

- Chinese restraint -

China is also ready to help Tehran "economically, technologically, militarily and politically" as it confronts non-military US actions such as trade pressure and cyberattacks, Hua Po, a Beijing-based independent political observer, told AFP.

If the United States launched strikes, China "would strengthen its economic ties with Iran and help it militarize in order to contribute to bogging the United States down in a war in the Middle East," he added.

Until now, China has been cautious and expressed itself "with restraint", weighing the stakes of oil and regional stability, said Iran-China relations researcher Theo Nencini of Sciences Po Grenoble.

"China is benefiting from a weakened Iran, which allows it to secure low-cost oil... and to acquire a sizeable geopolitical partner," he said.

However, he added: "I find it hard to see them engaging in a showdown with the Americans over Iran."

Beijing would likely issue condemnations, but not retaliate, he said.

Hua said the Iran crisis was unlikely to have an impact on China-US relations overall.

"The Iranian question isn't at the heart of relations between the two countries," he argued.

"Neither will sever ties with the other over Iran."