Rifi to Asharq Al-Awsat: Iran, Syria behind Rafik Hariri’s Assassination

Lebanese men mourn at the graveside of Lebanese former PM Rafik Hariri on February 21, 2005 in Beirut, Lebanon. (Getty Images)
Lebanese men mourn at the graveside of Lebanese former PM Rafik Hariri on February 21, 2005 in Beirut, Lebanon. (Getty Images)
TT

Rifi to Asharq Al-Awsat: Iran, Syria behind Rafik Hariri’s Assassination

Lebanese men mourn at the graveside of Lebanese former PM Rafik Hariri on February 21, 2005 in Beirut, Lebanon. (Getty Images)
Lebanese men mourn at the graveside of Lebanese former PM Rafik Hariri on February 21, 2005 in Beirut, Lebanon. (Getty Images)

Lebanon is bracing for the verdict into the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri that will be announced by the UN-backed tribunal in The Hague on Tuesday. The entire country and region are waiting to see whether the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) will convict or acquit four Hezbollah members who have been indicted in the crime.

Former Lebanese Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi said the assassination was not a spur of the moment decision, but it was part of a “plot devised by the Iranian and Syrian regimes and carried out by Hezbollah with the support of Syrian intelligence.”

It is well known that Hariri’s life was threatened months before his murder on February 14, 2005 in a massive bombing in Beirut that killed 21 others. He became a target after he stepped down as premier in 2004.

Rifi, who also served as Internal Security Forces (ISF) chief and was part of the Hariri investigation in collecting evidence, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “The signs that he would be targeted began to emerge when ISF members in his security entourage were withdrawn.”

He added that he had twice personally informed the former PM of threats against his life, but he dismissed them because he had received international guarantees that he would not be harmed.

The Lebanese-Syrian security apparatus that had a complete stifling grip over Lebanon did not anticipate the local, regional and international uproar over the assassination. The reaction “confused” the security regime and prompted the United Nations Security Council to dispatch a fact-finding mission, headed by Peter FitzGerald, to Lebanon. After a one-month investigation, he concluded that the Lebanese judicial-security system was not qualified to look into the crime and he therefore, proposed the formation of an international probe.

Rifi, who acted as a liaison officer between the FitzGerald committee and Lebanese state, realized then that the investigation was in a race against time and that it was walking through a minefield. He spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat of the role of the ISF, which he headed soon after Syria withdrew its troops from Lebanon in April 2005. He highlighted the central role it played in assisting the international probe and protecting investigators and witnesses.

Rifi highlighted how Captain Wissam Eid succeeded, through his genius and high moral and national duty, in grasping the first and primary piece of evidence that led to the perpetrators by analyzing their telephone data. The breakthrough cost him his life as he was killed in a bombing in Beirut in 2008.

Rifi said Eid managed to pinpoint the users of telephone lines who were monitoring Hariri’s each and every move two months before his assassination. The lines were active and followed the former premier’s movement between the Keserouan region and his villa in Faqra. The lines were almost always active near his residence in Qoreitem in Beirut. The lines shut abruptly and permanently all at once just before the assassination.

Rifi said the process of uncovering who was behind those telephone lines took several long months. “We were very patient and operated on the basis that no crime is perfect.”

And then a breakthrough. In April 2006, Wissam al-Hassan, head of the intelligence bureau, came to Rifi’s office with the news that one of the shut telephone lines became active and carried out a single call from the eastern Bekaa region to a line in Beirut’s southern suburbs of Dahieh. “It was through this call that we were able to identify the owner of the line and the remaining conspirators,” recalled Rifi. Like Eid, Hassan was awarded for his feat with a bombing that claimed his life in Beirut in 2012.

Saad Hariri, the slain premier’s son, was informed of the details of the investigation. Saad would follow in his father’s footsteps and enter Lebanon’s fraught political scene. He became head of the Mustaqbal movement, was elected to parliament and headed a number of governments.

Rifi informed Saad that his father’s killers were members of Hezbollah’s security apparatus. At this, Saad telephoned Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah and demanded that a meeting between him and Hassan be arranged immediately, said Rifi.

Indeed, Hassan met with Nasrallah and informed him about the leads in the investigation, demanding an explanation. Twenty-four hours later, Nasrallah arranged a meeting for him with a party security official known as Abou Ali. Hassan again briefed him on the probe and the damning findings. Abou Ali claimed that the Hezbollah security cell was at the scene of the assassination and was following Hariri’s movement because it was monitoring Israeli agents. The weak justifications were not convincing, said Rifi.

Amid negotiations with the party over this issue, the July 2006 war suddenly erupted and contacts with Hezbollah came to a complete halt, he added. Even after the war, contacts remained severed, significantly after Shiite ministers resigned months later from then Prime Minister Fuad Siniora’s government.

Amid the severed communication with Hezbollah, the Lebanese security team presented its findings to the international investigation, which was then led by Belgian Serge Brammertz. Rifi noted that the probe made little progress at the time. Brammertz resigned soon after and was succeeded by Canadian prosecutor Daniel Bellemare, who positively assessed the findings. He said the evidence was objective and scientific and soon after the probe began to zero in on the suspects. The suspects were soon indicted and the STL trials kicked off.

Rifi detailed a significant part of the case. He recounted how one day a secret witness came to his office. A resident of the northern city of Tripoli, he did not disclose his identity, but gave accurate information about a person who had approached Palestinian Ahmed Abou Adas. Abou Adas had famously filmed a video claiming responsibility for the Hariri bombing, but it was soon dismissed.

The secret witness said the unidentified person would meet with Abou Adas at a mosque in Beirut and would ask him to teach him about Islam. Days later, that same person would visit Abou Adas’ house and request that he accompany him somewhere. Two weeks later, Hariri was assassinated and Abou Adas disappeared without a trace. The investigation would later find out that the man who approached Abou Adas at the mosque was Assad Sabra, one of the four Hezbollah members indicted in the assassination. No trace of Abou Adas was found at the blast site.

Rifi stressed to Asharq Al-Awsat that an assassination of such a massive scale and with such major repercussions could not have been decided by Hezbollah alone. It is a product of joint decision taken by the Iranian and Syrian regimes that tasked the party’s security apparatus to carry it out.



Goldrich to Asharq Al-Awsat: No US Withdrawal from Syria

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
TT

Goldrich to Asharq Al-Awsat: No US Withdrawal from Syria

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat
US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich during the interview with Asharq Al-Awsat

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ethan Goldrich has told Asharq Al-Awsat that the US does not plan to withdraw its forces from Syria.

The US is committed to “the partnership that we have with the local forces that we work with,” he said.

Here is the full text of the interview.

Question: Mr. Goldrich, thank you so much for taking the time to sit with us today. I know you are leaving your post soon. How do you assess the accomplishments and challenges remaining?

Answer: Thank you very much for the chance to talk with you today. I've been in this position for three years, and so at the end of three years, I can see that there's a lot that we accomplished and a lot that we have left to do. But at the beginning of a time I was here, we had just completed a review of our Syria policy, and we saw that we needed to focus on reducing suffering for the people in Syria. We needed to reduce violence. We needed to hold the regime accountable for things that are done and most importantly, from the US perspective, we needed to keep ISIS from reemerging as a threat to our country and to other countries. At the same time, we also realized that there wouldn't be a solution to the crisis until there was a political process under resolution 2254, so in each of these areas, we've seen both progress and challenges, but of course, on ISIS, we have prevented the reemergence of the threat from northeast Syria, and we've helped deal with people that needed to be repatriated out of the prisons, and we dealt with displaced people in al-Hol to reduce the numbers there. We helped provide for stabilization in those parts of Syria.

Question: I want to talk a little bit about the ISIS situation now that the US troops are still there, do you envision a timeline where they will be withdrawn? Because there were some reports in the press that there is a plan from the Biden administration to withdraw.

Answer: Yeah. So right now, our focus is on the mission that we have there to keep ISIS from reemerging. So I know there have been reports, but I want to make clear that we remain committed to the role that we play in that part of Syria, to the partnership that we have with the local forces that we work with, and to the need to prevent that threat from reemerging.

Question: So you can assure people who are saying that you might withdraw, that you are remaining for the time being?

Answer: Yes, and that we remain committed to this mission which needs to continue to be pursued.

Question: You also mentioned the importance of humanitarian aid. The US has been leading on this. Are you satisfied with where you are today on the humanitarian front in Syria?

Answer: We remain committed to the role that we play to provide for humanitarian assistance in Syria. Of the money that was pledged in Brussels, we pledged $593 million just this past spring, and we overall, since the beginning of the conflict, have provided $18 billion both to help the Syrians who are inside of Syria and to help the refugees who are in surrounding countries. And so we remain committed to providing that assistance, and we remain keenly aware that 90% of Syrians are living in poverty right now, and that there's been suffering there. We're doing everything we can to reduce the suffering, but I think where we would really like to be is where there's a larger solution to the whole crisis, so Syrian people someday will be able to provide again for themselves and not need this assistance.

Question: And that's a perfect key to my next question. Solution in Syria. you are aware that the countries in the region are opening up to Assad again, and you also have the EU signaling overture to the Syrian regime and Assad. How do you deal with that?

Answer: For the United States, our policy continues to be that we will not normalize with the regime in Syria until there's been authentic and enduring progress on the goals of resolution 2254, until the human rights of the Syrian people are respected and until they have the civil and human rights that they deserve. We know other countries have engaged with the regime. When those engagements happen, we don't support them, but we remind the countries that are engaged that they should be using their engagements to push forward on the shared international goals under 2254, and that whatever it is that they're doing should be for the sake of improving the situation of the Syrian people.

Question: Let's say that all of the countries decided to talk to Assad, aren’t you worried that the US will be alienated in the process?

Answer: The US will remain true to our own principles and our own policies and our own laws, and the path for the regime in Syria to change its relationship with us is very clear, if they change the behaviors that led to the laws that we have and to the policies that we have, if those behaviors change and the circumstances inside of Syria change, then it's possible to have a different kind of relationship, but that's where it has to start.

Question: My last question to you before you leave, if you have to pick one thing that you need to do in Syria today, what is it that you would like to see happening today?

Answer: So there are a number of things, I think that will always be left and that there are things that we will try to do, to try to make them happen. We want to hold people accountable in Syria for things that have happened. So even today, we observed something called the International Day for victims of enforced disappearances, there are people that are missing, and we're trying to draw attention to the need to account for the missing people. So our step today was to sanction a number of officials who were responsible for enforced disappearances, but we also created something called the independent institution for missing persons, and that helps the families, in the non-political way, get information on what's happened. So I'd like to see some peace for the families of the missing people. I'd like to see the beginning of a political process, there hasn't been a meeting of the constitutional committee in two years, and I think that's because the regime has not been cooperating in political process steps. So we need to change that situation. And I would, of course, like it's important to see the continuation of the things that we were talking about, so keeping ISIS from reemerging and maintaining assistance as necessary in the humanitarian sphere. So all these things, some of them are ongoing, and some of them remain to be achieved. But the Syrian people deserve all aspects of our policy to be fulfilled and for them to be able to return to a normal life.