Lebanese Ex-MP Recalls Shocking Meeting between Rafik Hariri, Bashar Assad on Lahoud Term Extension

One article on the agenda: Insulting Rafik Hariri

President Bashar al-Assad receives PM Hariri for a meeting. (Getty Images)
President Bashar al-Assad receives PM Hariri for a meeting. (Getty Images)
TT
20

Lebanese Ex-MP Recalls Shocking Meeting between Rafik Hariri, Bashar Assad on Lahoud Term Extension

President Bashar al-Assad receives PM Hariri for a meeting. (Getty Images)
President Bashar al-Assad receives PM Hariri for a meeting. (Getty Images)

Asharq Al-Awsat is publishing a series of excerpts from a new book by former Lebanese MP Bassem al-Sabeh in which he recalls the thorny relationship between slain former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri and members of the ruling elite in Syria. “Lebanon in the Shadows of Hell: from the Taif Accord to Hariri’s Assassination” is published by All Prints Distributors & Publishers.

Sabeh worked as an aide to Hariri until his killing in February 2005. He served as lawmaker from 1992 to 2009. He was also appointed information minister in Hariri’s government between 1996 and 1998. Sabeh is a member of Hariri’s Mustaqbal Movement and a pillar of the March 14 movement that opposed Syria’s political and security hegemony over Lebanon.

Anjar ... mandatory gate to Syria

Lebanese officials headed to Damascus must make a mandatory stop in the Lebanese Bekaa town of Anjar. For over 30 years, the town was the headquarters of the Syrian intelligence in Lebanon. Major General Mohammed Ghanem assumed that post from 1976 to 1982. He was succeeded by Major General Ghazi Kanaan from 1982 to 2001 and then Rustom Ghazaleh in 2001 until Syria’s military withdrawal from Lebanon following former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri's assassination in 2005.

Ghanem had also taken up Beirut as the headquarters of his command, allowing it to be closer to the Arab Deterrent Force that was formed in 1976 to help end the Lebanese civil war (1975-90). The force eventually withdrew from Lebanon shortly after, leaving behind the Syrian army in Lebanon. Syria initially deployed 25,000 soldiers, but that figure eventually grew to 40,000.

The deployment of the Syrian troops took place in March 1976 at the official request of President Suleiman Franjieh to President Hafez al-Assad. He asked for military intervention to stop Palestinian organizations and leftist militias from carrying out attacks against Christian regions.

Ghazi Kanaan acted as the Syrian “high commissioner” in Lebanon. He took up residence in Anjar and Beirut’s Ramlet al-Bayda area. I visited Anjar with Hariri and alone a handful of times. Throughout those visits, Kanaan was always courteous and never abused his position for political gain. I did notice, however, how he could be courteous to some visitors and deliberately offensive to others, including lawmakers, ministers, businessmen and clerics.

It was rare for any Lebanese official or public figure to head to Damascus without passing through Anjar or receiving its approval. I met several heads of political blocs, senior ministers, security officials, judicial officials, clerics, muftis, university professors, bank directors, businessmen and others in Anjar seeking favor with Damascus or “help” in passing a violation at a ministry or other public administration.

Ghazi Kanaan addresses an audience with Rafik Hariri seated the background in 2002. (EPA)

In 2001, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad decreed that Kanaan return to Damascus. He appointed Ghazaleh in his place with the direct support of Assef Shawkat, Assad’s brother-in-law and head of military intelligence – one the most important branches of Syrian intelligence. A rivalry would soon emerge between Kanaan and Ghazaleh.

The name Rustom Ghazaleh has haunted me in my personal and political life. One of my most shocking encounters with the official dates back to early 2001 when a Lebanese youth visited my home in Beirut’s Bir Hassan area. I usually received friends and citizens asking for services during morning hours. One such figure was a youth who asked to meet me alone.

After completing the morning meetings, I received him while my bodyguards remained by the door because they were suspicious of him. “I carry a political message. I am unarmed and I only want a one-on-one meeting,” he said in a Lebanese accent with a slightly southern lilt.

“It is unimportant for you to know my name, but it is important that you understand the purpose of my message,” he said, identifying himself Khaled. “I can humbly pave the way for PM Rafik Hariri to Assef Shawkat. My ties with Assef are greater than you can imagine.”

“I can play a positive role in PM Hariri’s favor. He is now the closest person to Bashar. I am the only one who can open the doors to Hariri. Try and you won’t lose. Khaddam’s role is finished. Shehabi has resigned and Kanaan will meet the same fate,” he said referring to Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam and army commander Hikmat al-Shehabi.

I quickly made my way to Hariri’s residence in Qoreitem in Beirut. I told him in detail everything that happened that morning. He picked up the phone, called Kanaan and informed him that he was heading to Anjar to inform him of “something important.” Kanaan replied that he would be out of the office and that I should meet with Ghazaleh.

I headed to the headquarters of Syrian intelligence in Ramlet al-Bayda to meet Ghazaleh. We sat alone in the office and I recounted the meeting with Khaled. He then got up and contacted Kanaan by phone. He held a military salute the entire time he was on the line, detailing to him what I had just told him. “As you wish, sir,” he kept on repeating.

At the end of the conversation, he turned to me and said: “Is this dog going to visit you again tomorrow?... Thank you for your cooperation. I hope that you will receive him and inform me of anything new.” Concerned, I returned to Qoreitem again and briefed Hariri on the meeting.

The next day, Khaled came to visit me. No sooner had he stepped foot into the house that I saw Ghazaleh storming in with two armed men. They beat Khaled up and Ghazaleh ordered them to “take the dog to the car. He will see what happens to those who undermine their masters.” He thanked me and hastily left. I was left in shock and quickly made my way to Qoreitem.

Hariri had not expected Ghazaleh’s reaction to be this severe. I expressed my concern that I may have inadvertently caused a dispute between Syrian intelligence branches. Hariri contacted Ghazaleh, who asked that I meet with him.

He stood behind his desk, holding the same club that he used to beat up Khaled. He showered me with thanks and praise, while I voiced my alarm over what happened. He replied: “There is no need to be afraid. He got what he deserved... He will rot away in prison. He is in the custody of the military police. He is a nobody and has no ties with anyone in the leadership.”

For months guilt ate away at me for what happened to Khaled. Was he killed or was he really imprisoned?

Bassem al-Sabeh and Rafik Hariri are seen at parliament in Beirut an hour before the bombing that killed the former PM in February 2005. (Courtesy of Bassem al-Sabeh)

Syrian ‘high commissioner’

My attention then shifted to news of Ghazaleh’s appointment as Syria’s “high commissioner” in Lebanon and Kanaan’s transfer to Damascus. Ghazaleh’s appointment forced Hariri to change his approach. The PM had enjoyed good ties with Kanaan, Shehabi and Khaddam.

Ghazaleh celebrated his appointment to the “Anjar throne” for three days during which he received well-wishers. Syrian intelligence intensified its activities in Beirut’s Hamra neighborhood, the southern Beirut suburbs, northern Metn region and northern city of Tripoli. Local Lebanese parties and economic, judicial, security and media figures were expected to queue up in Anjar to gain Ghazaleh’s blessing.

Kanaan, meanwhile, carried out a farewell tour throughout Lebanon, starting with the presidential palace where President Emile Lahoud awarded him with the National Order of the Cedar - the country’s highest order - “in appreciation of his work for Lebanon”. Hariri threw a reception in his honor that was also attended by Ghazaleh. He bestowed upon him the key to the city of Beirut in recognition of his services. At the Defense Ministry, Kanaan was also bestowed with a medal in recognition of his work.

Hariri was aware that Kanaan’s transfer was the result of a secret meeting held between Lahoud, Shawkat, Ghazaleh and Jamil al-Sayyed, the head of Lebanon’s General Security. Lahoud had expressed his irritation with Kanaan’s role in the parliamentary elections and how he had joined Hariri’s celebrations in the western Bekaa town of al-Khiyara. Lahoud went so far as to contact Assad himself to request Kanaan’s transfer.

Ultimately, Hariri’s Lebanese and Syrian rivals worked together to clip Kanaan’s wings. They succeeded in taking out an ally of sorts out of the picture, replacing him with Ghazaleh, who relished political, financial and security blackmail and in playing the dirtiest of roles.

Syrian intelligence chief in Lebanon Rustom Ghazaleh. (AFP)

Days after his appointment, Ghazaleh sent Hariri a list of pressing demands related to furnishing his home in Chtaura, paving the road leading to it, and generally providing whatever the new Syrian high commissioner in Lebanon needed in his new house. It was from this home that Ghazaleh waged campaigns against Hariri, completely ungrateful to the man who had furnished it for him.

I visited that house in late 2004, when I was returning to Beirut from Damascus with Hariri. The visit took place weeks after the failed assassination attempt against minister Marwan Hamadeh. We were warmly greeted by Ghazaleh, who denied that he had anything to do with the extension of Lahoud’s term in office. He also stressed that Syria would never cover up the failed assassination attempt, amid accusations by the Lebanese opposition that Damascus was behind the attack.

As we got up to leave, Ghazaleh told me: “Brother Bassem, rest assured. Don’t be afraid of anything. We won’t let what they did to Marwan happen to you. Your brother is here whenever you want.” I was shocked. In the car, Hariri said: “Did you hear what he said? He is crazy. He is either dumb or threatening you.” I replied: “Those words were for you.”

Ghazaleh reaped the rewards of Syria’s intelligence operations in Lebanon. He gained a fortune that was not simply a product of whatever payments he received from Hariri, politicians, businessmen and people asking for favors. He used to receive 50,000 dollars a month from Hariri. He also took part in looting the Al-Madina Bank following its scandal in Lebanon.

Kanaan himself was affected by the scandal and soon after, his influence in Lebanon ended with Ghazaleh taking over completely. Hariri and I visited Kanaan in Damascus less than two months after his transfer. He appeared defeated, telling Hariri: “You have given so much to Lebanon and Syria. We wronged you at times, but you stood tall.” Out of respect, Hariri did not bring up Ghazaleh, who on the contrary, used to bring up Kanaan whenever he could to deride his work.

Extension of Lahoud’s term

Tensions over the extension of Lahoud’s term in office reached boiling point in early 2004. For once, Lebanese politicians were no longer afraid of speaking out against Syria’s role in Lebanon.

The Council of Maronite Bishops issued a strongly worded statement expressing their rejection of the extension and undermining of the constitution. “Syria is dealing with Lebanon as though it were a Syrian province. It has the final say in everything, appoints governors and organizes elections. It appoints whoever it wants and interferes in all state affairs,” it said. Hariri remarked at the time: “Lebanon is headed towards a dead end if the way in which it is governed does not change.”

President Emile Lahoud and PM Hariri. (AFP)

In late March 2004, Hariri was summoned for an urgent meeting with Assad. He believed the meeting would be an opportunity to reconsider the extension of Lahoud’s term given Lebanon’s opposition to it. He had high hopes, especially with international pressure on Syria and efforts to draft United Nations Security Council resolution 1559 that would be issued in September and call for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanon.

The Syrian leadership had other things in mind completely. It received Hariri for an unprecedented meeting in the history of Lebanese-Syrian relations.

Hariri arrived at the meeting on time. He was met with Bashar and all senior officers who had overseen Syria’s operations in Lebanon: Kanaan, Ghazaleh, and Mohammed Khalouf. Assad had set only one article on the meeting agenda: Insulting Hariri.

He said: “Comrades Ghazi, Rustom and Mohammed had dedicated their work in service of Lebanon and they helped you in assuming your responsibility. While you, you dedicated all your relations to strike Syria. You will fail in preventing the extension of Lahoud’s term. Lahoud is me and I am Lahoud. What you are doing with your French and American friends will backfire against you. The extension will happen and you will not stand in its way, neither will statements nor pressure from your friends.”

Assad then gave the way for Kanaan to launch his own attack. He deliberately tried to soften the blow by detailing the support Syria has offered Lebanon and the history of relations between them. He warned of the danger of using Lebanon and the position of its prime minister to attack Syria. He also hailed Hariri’s role during the rule of late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad.

It was then Ghazaleh’s turn. Like Bashar, he did not hold back. “Who are you without Syria and its president?” he told Hariri. “You are just a businessman. You would never have dreamed of becoming prime minister were it not for Syria’s approval. We helped you. We supported your policies. We opened doors for you here and in Lebanon. But you have been ungrateful for everything we have done for you. You stand with [French President Jacques] Chirac against us. You are inciting him to harm Syria. You, Chirac and the Americans will not have your way. Syria is your master. If the president wants the extension to happen, then you will make it happen. You have no choice in this.”

Bashar watched the blows rain down on Hariri in a state of nothing short of elation.

The meeting ended with Hariri not uttering a word in his defense.

Abdul Halim Khaddam. (Reuters)

Back in Beirut, he said: “Never in my life have I ever been hurt this way. I almost stormed out of there without permission and could have created a big problem. A problem with whom? The president of Syria. Should I have spoken back right in front of his officers?! I chose silence and patience ... and left afraid for Syria and Lebanon.”

Hariri did not speak of the meeting to Khaddam, who had telephoned to ask about it. Hariri told him: “Ask Abou Arab, he was there. I will stay at home. You won’t see me in Syria anymore.” Khaddam realized that the situation was dangerous, and I was summoned to meet him the next day.

What happened to Hariri is “unacceptable”, Khaddam told me. He said he had contacted Bashar to express his alarm at the meeting, bluntly telling him that it was not right for the president of Syria to insult the prime minister of Lebanon, whether in the presence of his officers or not. “Rafik Hariri is my friend and was your father’s friend, but he is also the prime minister of a brotherly country and debasing him is just not done by the president of Syria,” he added.

He also said that he had advised Assad to rectify the situation. Assad listened and “told me to tackle it with the best of my ability. You can apologize and do what you deem fit,” he remarked.



Iran Risks Severe Economic Downturn, Unrest as Renewed UN Sanctions Bite 

Iranian women shop in a store at the Tehran Bazaar after the approval of the bill to remove four zeros from the national currency, in Tehran, Iran, October 5, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
Iranian women shop in a store at the Tehran Bazaar after the approval of the bill to remove four zeros from the national currency, in Tehran, Iran, October 5, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
TT
20

Iran Risks Severe Economic Downturn, Unrest as Renewed UN Sanctions Bite 

Iranian women shop in a store at the Tehran Bazaar after the approval of the bill to remove four zeros from the national currency, in Tehran, Iran, October 5, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
Iranian women shop in a store at the Tehran Bazaar after the approval of the bill to remove four zeros from the national currency, in Tehran, Iran, October 5, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters

Iran's economy is at risk of simultaneous hyperinflation and severe recession, officials and analysts say, as clerical rulers scramble to preserve stability with limited room to maneuver after a snapback of UN sanctions. They followed a breakdown in talks to curb Iran's disputed nuclear activity and its ballistic missile program.

Diplomacy to resolve the deadlock remains possible, both sides say, though Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has rebuffed US President Donald Trump's offer to forge a new deal.

Three senior Iranian officials, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity, said Tehran believes the US, its Western allies and Israel are intensifying sanctions to fuel unrest in Iran and jeopardize the very existence of the republic.

Since the reimposition of UN sanctions on September 28, multiple high-level meetings have been held in Tehran on how to avert economic collapse, circumvent sanctions and manage simmering public anger, the officials told Reuters.

Deepening economic disparities between ordinary Iranians and a privileged clerical and security elite, economic mismanagement, galloping inflation and state corruption - reported even by state media - have fanned discontent.

"The establishment knows protests are inevitable, it is only a matter of time ... The problem is growing, while our options are shrinking," said one of the officials. Iran's leadership is leaning heavily on its "resistance economy" - a strategy of self-sufficiency and closer trade with China, Russia and some regional states. Moscow and Beijing back Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy and condemned US and Israeli strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites in June.

But analysts warn that such workarounds may not be enough to shield the sprawling country of 92 million people from the renewed economic blow.

"The impact of the UN sanctions will be severe and multifaceted, deepening the country’s longstanding structural and financial vulnerabilities,” said Umud Shokri, an energy strategist and senior visiting fellow at George Mason University near Washington.

"The government is struggling to maintain economic stability as sanctions disrupt banking networks, restrict trade and constrain oil exports - the country’s main revenue source, resulting in escalating social and economic pressure."

OIL LIFELINE UNDER THREAT AS UN SANCTIONS RETURN

Iran has avoided wholesale economic meltdown since 2018 when, during his first term, Trump withdrew the US from Tehran’s 2015 nuclear deal with six world powers and reimposed US sanctions.

But the revival of wider UN sanctions is inflicting shocks that will stymie economic growth, accelerate inflation and the collapse of the rial currency, pushing the economy toward a recessionary spiral, one of the Iranian officials said.

Iran’s economy contracted sharply after 2018 due to renewed US sanctions. It rebounded in 2020 to grow modestly at times, largely due to oil trade with China. But the World Bank this month forecast a shrinkage of 1.7% in 2025 and 2.8% in 2026 - sharply down from the 0.7% growth it had projected in April for next year.

While Tehran still relies heavily on oil exports to China - its biggest customer and one of the few countries still doing business with it despite Trump's "maximum pressure" policy, doubts reign over the sustainability of that trade.

Although sold at a discount, crude remains a vital source of income for Tehran, with oil and petrochemicals making up about a quarter of GDP in 2024. Despite public assurances that oil sales to China will continue, one Iranian official said the reimposed global sanctions could stifle that flow.

Shokri said that if China seeks to ease tensions with the Trump administration, it may tighten its stance on Iranian oil - demanding steeper discounts or cutting imports altogether.

For Tehran, the costs could be devastating. Every dollar shaved off the price of oil translates into roughly half a billion dollars in lost annual revenue, he said. The rial has shriveled to 1,115,000 per dollar from 920,000 in August, stoking inflation to at least 40% and gutting purchasing power. Persistent currency depreciation and trade sanctions are driving up prices and sapping investor confidence.

HARDSHIP SPREADS, PUBLIC ANGER SIMMERS

Few Iranians can escape the attendant hardships. A sense of desperation is rippling through society, affecting urban professionals, bazaar traders and rural farmers alike.

"How much more pressure are we supposed to endure? Until when? I’m a government employee, and I earn just 34 million tomans (around $300) a month," said Alireza, 43, speaking by phone from the capital Tehran. Like others, he asked not to be further identified for fear of retribution from authorities.

"My wife is jobless. The import-export company she worked for shut down last month. With just my salary and two kids, we’re struggling to even pay rent and school expenses. What are we supposed to do?”

Iran’s official inflation rate is around 40% though some estimates exceed 50%. Official data in September showed prices for 10 staple goods, including meat, rice and chicken, rose 51% in one year. Housing and utility costs have also surged. Beef now costs $12 a kilo - too expensive for many families.

The clerical elite increasingly worry that mounting public distress could reignite mass protests that have erupted periodically since 2017 among lower- and middle-income Iranians, the second Iranian official said.

Many Iranians like Sima, 32, a factory worker in the central city of Shiraz worn down by years of economic strain, worry that the expanded sanctions will push them past the breaking point.

"Now they say we’re facing new sanctions again, but we’re already struggling to provide for our three children. Prices go up every single day and we can’t even afford to buy meat for them once a month,” said Sima.

Many business owners fear deeper international isolation and further Israeli airstrikes if diplomacy fails to resolve the nuclear standoff.

"With the constant fear of a possible attack and not knowing whether I’ll even be able to export this month or next, how am I supposed to keep my business running?” said Mehdi, who ships fruit to neighboring countries.


Lebanon at Political, Security Crossroads as Risks of Escalation with Israel Rise 

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets US envoy Tom Barrack at the Baabda presidential palace, July 2025. (AP)
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets US envoy Tom Barrack at the Baabda presidential palace, July 2025. (AP)
TT
20

Lebanon at Political, Security Crossroads as Risks of Escalation with Israel Rise 

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets US envoy Tom Barrack at the Baabda presidential palace, July 2025. (AP)
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets US envoy Tom Barrack at the Baabda presidential palace, July 2025. (AP)

Lebanon stands at a political and security crossroads amid mounting external pressure, a deadlocked political landscape, and escalating military tensions marked by Israel’s continuing daily violations of the November ceasefire.

The stalemate was laid bare by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who told Asharq Al-Awsat on Monday that the proposed negotiation track between Lebanon and Israel - known as the “US paper” - had collapsed.

His remarks came just hours after US envoy Tom Barrack warned that if Beirut continues to hesitate over disarmament, Israel may act unilaterally, and the consequences will be "grave", adding that it is time for Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah as it had said it would.

“Should Beirut continue to hesitate, Israel may act unilaterally and the consequences would be grave,” cautioned Barrack in an opinion piece posted on his account on the X platform.

Berri said Barrack had informed Beirut that Israel rejected a US proposal to launch a negotiation process starting with a two-month halt to Israeli operations and culminating in an Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory, alongside border demarcation and security arrangements.

Barrack also revealed that an offer the US made to Lebanon earlier this year, part of a plan called “One More Try,” included a framework for phased disarmament, verified compliance, and economic incentives under American and French supervision.

However, Lebanon “refused to adopt it due to Hezbollah's representation and influence in the Lebanese cabinet,” he claimed.

Fears of escalation

What lies ahead remains uncertain with many watching how the political deadlock might affect Lebanon’s fragile security. Beirut’s insistence on upholding the ceasefire agreement, which Berri described as “the only current path” despite obstacles related to Hezbollah’s disarmament, does not necessarily mean Israel will abide by it.

Ministerial sources close to the presidency said the prospect of military escalation “cannot be ruled out,” adding: “There is no doubt this is a critical stage, and escalation could happen at any moment, especially since Israeli violations have not ceased.”

The sources noted that “Israeli drones have been flying constantly over Baabda - the location of the presidential palace - in recent days.”

While the sources rejected talk of a complete breakdown in negotiations, they stressed that “Israel is not committed to the ceasefire agreement” and that “Washington is not applying the necessary pressure to enforce it.”

“How can the Lebanese Army complete its deployment along the southern border when the Israeli occupation persists?” they asked.

The sources reiterated that the president opened the door to negotiations based on the maritime border demarcation experience, which both Israel and Hezbollah respected, in addition to Lebanon’s adherence to the ceasefire.

“The problem,” they said, “is that the other side is neither responsive nor committed to what has been agreed upon, while the US remains completely silent.”

Successive setbacks

In this tense atmosphere, retired Major General and political science scholar Abdul Rahman Chehaitli said the “November agreement has collapsed, leaving Lebanon in a grim reality.”

Political science and international relations professor Imad Salamey likewise said Lebanon “is going through a clear escalation phase, especially as political forces shy away from pursuing a negotiated settlement with Israel amid the absence of serious guarantees from Washington or Tel Aviv.”

He recalled Barrack’s repeated warnings of a potential new military confrontation “under the pretext of enforcing Hezbollah’s disarmament,” adding that “in reality, the situation points to a series of successive setbacks in the security understandings.”

A Gaza-style approach

A year after the November deal, Salamey said “confidence in the diplomatic process is eroding by the day,” noting that there are “no signs that any disarmament effort will be met with an Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese land or a permanent halt to violations.”

This, he argued, “deepens Lebanese suspicions that US pressure aims to impose a security arrangement serving Israel’s interests.”

According to Salamey, any future Lebanese deal “would need an approach similar to the one adopted in Gaza - under regional sponsorship and with Iran’s cooperation as a guarantor - to consolidate the ceasefire and lay the groundwork for a broader settlement.”

Without such balanced regional and international guarantees, he warned, “the risk of escalation will remain, if not grow, as the circle of military and political confrontation widens in the South.”

Pressure for direct talks

Chehaitli said Israel’s ongoing pressure, backed by Washington, aims to force Lebanon into direct negotiations. “All the rounds of shuttle diplomacy by Barrack were merely time-wasting exercises, while Israel was busy in Gaza,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Now it seems Tel Aviv is shifting its focus toward Lebanon, using military pressure to push for direct talks.”

“In the coming phase, we may witness significant escalation targeting Hezbollah’s areas of influence to make any ceasefire conditional on a political deal,” he added. “Israel believes it has won the war and now wants to impose its terms.”


Israel Still Fires on Lebanon Almost a Year After a Ceasefire. Some Predict the Same for Gaza

 Smoke billows over the village of Aaichiyeh after Israeli strikes, as seen from Marjeyoun in southern Lebanon, October 20, 2025. (Reuters)
Smoke billows over the village of Aaichiyeh after Israeli strikes, as seen from Marjeyoun in southern Lebanon, October 20, 2025. (Reuters)
TT
20

Israel Still Fires on Lebanon Almost a Year After a Ceasefire. Some Predict the Same for Gaza

 Smoke billows over the village of Aaichiyeh after Israeli strikes, as seen from Marjeyoun in southern Lebanon, October 20, 2025. (Reuters)
Smoke billows over the village of Aaichiyeh after Israeli strikes, as seen from Marjeyoun in southern Lebanon, October 20, 2025. (Reuters)

As a tenuous ceasefire took hold in Gaza this month, Israel launched more airstrikes on southern Lebanon — 11 months into a ceasefire there.

The bombardment of a construction equipment business killed a Syrian passerby, wounded seven people including two women, and destroyed millions of dollars worth of bulldozers and excavators.

The Oct. 11 strikes would be an anomaly in most countries not at war. But near-daily Israeli attacks have become the new normal in Lebanon, nearly a year after a US-brokered truce halted the latest conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.

Some see a likely blueprint for the Gaza ceasefire, with ongoing but lower-intensity conflicts. On Sunday, Israel struck Gaza after it said Hamas fired at its troops, in the first major test of the US-brokered truce.

Mona Yacoubian, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, described the Lebanon scenario as a "lessfire" rather than a ceasefire.

Lebanon "could well serve as the model for Gaza, essentially giving leeway to Israeli forces to strike whenever they deem a threat without a full resumption of conflict," she said.

A ceasefire with no clear enforcement

The latest Israel-Hezbollah conflict began the day after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel triggered the war in Gaza. The Iran-backed Hezbollah, largely based in southern Lebanon, began firing rockets into Israel in support of Hamas and the Palestinians.

Israel responded with airstrikes and shelling. The low-level conflict escalated into full-scale war in September 2024.

The ceasefire on Nov. 27, 2024, required Lebanon to stop armed groups from attacking Israel and Israel to halt "offensive" military actions in Lebanon. It said Israel and Lebanon can act in "self-defense," without elaborating.

Both sides can report alleged violations to a monitoring committee of the US, France, Israel, Lebanon and the UN peacekeeping force known as UNIFIL, but the deal is vague on enforcement.

In practice, Israel has largely taken enforcement into its own hands, asserting that its strikes in Lebanon target Hezbollah members, facilities and weapons.

Israel says it aims to stop the badly weakened group from rebuilding. Lebanese officials say the attacks obstruct its efforts to get Hezbollah to disarm by giving the group a pretext to hold onto its weapons.

Lebanon also says Israel's strikes, including the Oct. 11 one, often harm civilians and destroy infrastructure unrelated to Hezbollah.

Lebanon’s health ministry has reported more than 270 people killed and around 850 wounded by Israeli military actions since the ceasefire. As of Oct. 9, the UN human rights office had verified that 107 of those killed were civilians or noncombatants, said spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan.

No Israelis have been killed by fire from Lebanon since the ceasefire.

From Nov. 27, 2024, to mid-October, UNIFIL detected around 950 projectiles fired from Israel into Lebanon and 100 Israeli airstrikes, spokesperson Kandice Ardiel said. During the same period, it reported 21 projectiles fired from Lebanon toward Israel. Hezbollah has claimed one attack since the ceasefire.

Conflicting narratives

After the Oct. 11 strikes in Msayleh, Israel's army said it hit "engineering equipment intended for the reconstruction of terrorist infrastructure in southern Lebanon."

Lebanese authorities, Hezbollah and the equipment’s owner disputed that.

"Everyone in Lebanon, from all different sects, comes to buy from us," owner Ahmad Tabaja told journalists. "What have we done wrong?"

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun called the strikes "blatant aggression against civilian facilities." Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri accused Israel of seeking to prevent communities' reconstruction. Lebanon complained to the UN Security Council.

A few days later, Israel struck a cement factory and a quarry, claiming Hezbollah planned to use it to rebuild its infrastructure.

Last month, an Israeli strike hit a motorcycle and a car carrying a family in Bint Jbeil. It killed Shadi Charara, a car salesman, three of his children — including 18-month-old twins — and the motorcyclist, and badly wounded Charara’s wife and oldest daughter. It was among the highest death tolls since the ceasefire, sparking particular outrage because of the children.

"My brother was a civilian and his children and wife are civilians, and they have nothing to do with politics," said sister Amina Charara.

Israel’s military said it was targeting a Hezbollah militant, whom it did not name, but acknowledged that civilians were killed.

Even when the target is a known Hezbollah member, the military necessity can be disputed.

Earlier this month, an Israeli drone strike killed a Hezbollah member who was blinded last year in Israel’s exploding pagers attack, along with his wife. Israel's army said Hassan Atwi was a key official in Hezbollah’s Aerial Defense Unit. Hezbollah officials said he had played no military role since losing his eyesight.

The end of ‘mutual deterrence’

Hezbollah was formed in 1982, with Iranian backing, to fight Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon at the time. Israeli forces withdrew in 2000, and Hezbollah grew into one of the region's most powerful non-state armed groups.

In 2006, Hezbollah and Israel fought a month-long war that ended in a draw. For the next 17 years, "there was a tense calm ... that was largely due to mutual deterrence," said Nicholas Blanford, a senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Middle East program.

Strikes in Lebanon were generally understood to be off limits. Both sides wanted to avoid another damaging war. Now that equation has changed.

Though Blanford said Hezbollah could still deliver blows to Israel, the group's "deterrence has been shattered by the recent war," he said.

In an interview with The Associated Press last month, Hezbollah political official Mohammad Fneish said the prospect of coexisting with daily Israeli attacks is "not acceptable."

But the group has largely limited itself to calling on Lebanon's government to pressure Israel with what Fneish called "its political, diplomatic or other capabilities."

He added: "If things develop further, then the resistance leadership is studying matters, and all options are open."

Yacoubian, the analyst, said she didn't see the situation in Lebanon changing any time soon, "barring a breakthrough in behind-the-scenes negotiations brokered by the US."

With the Gaza ceasefire, she said, the difference could be the "significant role" of fellow mediators Qatar, Egypt and Türkiye.