عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Amr Moussa: Current Developments in Lebanon Tied to Rafik Hariri’s Assassination

Asharq Al-Awsat releases excerpts of the former Arab League secretary-general’s new biography.

Amr Moussa and Rafik Hariri during one of their meetings. (Getty Images)
Amr Moussa and Rafik Hariri during one of their meetings. (Getty Images)
TT
20
TT

Amr Moussa: Current Developments in Lebanon Tied to Rafik Hariri’s Assassination

Amr Moussa and Rafik Hariri during one of their meetings. (Getty Images)
Amr Moussa and Rafik Hariri during one of their meetings. (Getty Images)

Three years after former Secretary-General of the Arab League Amr Moussa published the first part of his biography, his second book entitled, “The Years of the Arab League”, will soon be released by Dar El-Shorouk.

The 574-page book consists of 19 chapters in which Moussa reveals the secrets of his 10-year tenure at the Arab League (2001-2011), which was marked with major events in the Arab world.

Starting Saturday, Asharq Al-Awsat will publish seven episodes of Moussa’s memoirs. The first part focuses on the political crisis in Lebanon, which began with the call by Hezbollah and its Maronite ally – the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) – for the resignation of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora’s government, leading to the Doha Agreement in 2008.

Moussa recounts: “On February 14, 2005, I was in my office at the Arab League preparing to travel to Aden to attend the first meeting of the Economic and Social Council of the Arab League outside its headquarters, which was to be inaugurated by Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. I was watching Al-Jazeera, which suddenly announced a huge explosion in Beirut, in which Prime Minister Rafik Hariri might have been targeted. I surfed satellite stations until I saw on Al-Arabiya channel the news of Rafik Hariri’s death along with 21 other people.

I asked my office director to arrange my travel to Lebanon immediately, and I called the Yemeni Foreign Minister, Abu Bakr al-Qirbi, and told him that I would not be able to attend because of what happened, and that I would go to Lebanon.

President Ali Abdullah Saleh contacted me shortly after, stressing the need for me to come to Yemen; but I apologized, saying that the assassination of Rafik Hariri was an Arab calamity and a very dangerous development.

On the same day, I traveled to Beirut. At Hariri’s palace, I found his two sons Saadeddine and Bahaa. I offered them condolences, and the place was teeming with mourners. I was the first official to arrive from abroad and I stayed in the palace until late at night. The first Arab foreign minister to land in Beirut was Dr. Abu Bakr al-Qirbi, who also did not attend the Aden meeting!

The funeral took place on the second day. Given the deteriorating security situation in Beirut at this time, my dear friend, Speaker Nabih Berri, placed me under the protection of the Parliament’s security guards. It was clear that some leaders of the Sunni community, some Maronite parties and others were blaming Syria for the assassination.

Some of them pointed at Hezbollah, but basically, all accusations were directed at Damascus. I found that the best thing that the secretary-general of the Arab League could do was to travel to Syria and talk to President Bashar al-Assad.

On the third day, I requested to visit Syria. I went under a very tight protection by the Lebanese government until I reached the Syrian border, where the Syrian guards escorted me directly to the presidential palace. President Bashar received me and we had a very frank conversation.

I told him: Mr. President, I came from Lebanon where feelings are raging after what happened. The death of Rafik Hariri will not pass easily, and the Syrian presence [in Lebanon] has now become under deep scrutiny… Demands are growing for the withdrawal of the Syrian forces…

He told me: I am the first Syrian president to withdraw forces from Lebanon. There were more than 60,000 Syrian soldiers when I came to power. I reduced the number to 35,000, and I am ready to withdraw additional troops… I have no objection to removing all the forces. I asked him: Can I, Mr. President, announce that you have decided to withdraw the Syrian army from Lebanon? He said: Yes, you can announce that, because I told you that I will withdraw the army.

I went out and announced the news, saying that it will be carried out within a specific time frame. My meeting with the president was attended by Foreign Minister Farouk Al-Sharaa, with whom I had lunch. Whenever the withdrawal was raised, Sharaa changed the subject, as if he wanted to ignore the topic. He was not comfortable with the announcement by Syrian journalists that the president had decided to start the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon.

I left Syria by land to Beirut and returned by plane to Cairo. There, I turned on the radio in the car and heard the BBC: “Syrian officials have denied what the secretary-general of the League of Arab States had said about President Bashar al-Assad’s decision to withdraw his troops from Lebanon.”

I got angry, and immediately called Al-Sharaa. He asked me: What do you want us to do?

I told him to confirm my statement as secretary-general of the League after my encounter with the president, and avoid us getting into a war of statements because I will of course insist on what I mentioned following the meeting.

The Syrian side consented and the president started reducing the forces until their complete withdrawal.

Motives of the assassination
In my interpretation of the motives for Hariri’s assassination, I say: He was a leader capable of exercising power, as he was of a special prestige, whether among the Lebanese Sunnis or among the political, economic and societal circles in Lebanon in general. The presence of a man of Hariri’s stature at the top of the Sunni community cannot be ignored in the face of Hezbollah.

The removal of Hariri from the scene was based on long-term regional calculations, and an important part of what we see in Lebanon today is connected to it.

Between March and June 2006, the Lebanese National Dialogue Conference, with the participation of leaders and influential figures, reached consensus on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and diplomatic relations between Lebanon and Syria, the demarcation of the borders and the possession of weapons outside the Palestinian camps. A serious discussion took place over Hezbollah’s arms, but without being completed.

The national dialogue made us believe that things were heading towards a quiet Lebanese summer, especially on the southern borders with Israel. But on June 12, 2006, a force affiliated with Hezbollah attacked an Israeli military post on the border, resulting in the capture of two Israeli soldiers and the killing of eight others. Israel responded by launching an extensive attack.

The Arab views varied over the escalating steps that Hezbollah had taken against Israel. Egypt and Saudi Arabia considered this an adventure by the party. Here, I must say that managing Arab politics, especially when it comes to a crisis that has far-reaching roots, is always linked to global policies and contradictory interests of major countries, such as the Arab-Israeli conflict.

From this standpoint, the Arab League’s stance was formulated at that time without prejudice to the organization’s firm position regarding one of the origins of the problem, namely the Israeli occupation and its practices that can neither be accepted nor tolerated.

War of statements
Immediately after the outbreak of the aggression, Kuwait, in coordination with me, called for an urgent meeting of the Arab foreign ministers at the headquarters of the Arab League in Cairo, which took place on July 15, 2006.

The second closed session of the meeting witnessed severe arguments between Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, and his Syrian counterpart Walid Al-Muallem.

Al-Muallem addressed the participants, saying: “I want to share with you some of my crazy dreams, I say crazy because they don’t match the current Arab or international situations... I dreamed that our meeting would begin with a minute of silence for the souls of the martyrs of Gaza and Lebanon, and that the secretary-general will call for our meeting in Gaza… In all frankness and sincerity... we will not adopt any word that comes out of here that is beneficial to Israel in its aggression against Lebanon, whether in the name of rationality or in the name of emotion…”

Prince Saud asked to respond to Al-Muallem, saying: “I did not know that the policy of brother Walid was driven by dreams… Why is it permitted to use the Lebanese borders to attack Israel and not to use the Golan? Did Israel attack because we issued a statement? Israel attacked because of what Hezbollah had done in the region. What kind of a dream is it when a person believes that rationality and logic were a fatal mistake? These are demonic dreams.”

I observed in silence what was happening, hoping to find an opportunity to interject. At the same time, it was difficult to change the convictions of a large group of Arab League members that Hezbollah’s actions were not motivated by resisting Israeli occupation, but rather part of a political game led by Iran and its regional role that opposes Arabs and their interests.

Arab foreign ministers meeting
During the last week of July 2006, I felt that we needed to block the American-French draft resolution in the Security Council, because it would be unjust to Lebanon.

Hence, I called for a meeting of the Arab foreign ministers at the Grand Serail in Beirut, to be held on August 7. Following speeches in solidarity with Lebanon, the meeting turned into a bitter and long debate between Al-Muallem, who insisted on saluting Hezbollah in the decision of the Arab League Council, and Siniora, who responded by saying: “Arab foreign ministers came here to support a unified Lebanese position.”

The Council reached a set of decisions, including the assignment of the UAE Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Qatari Minister of Foreign Affairs of Qatar to present the Arab viewpoint on the situation in Lebanon.

The meetings in New York ended with the Security Council issuing Resolution 1701 on August 11, 2006. Through a legal reading of the resolution, I say that it is largely biased towards Israel, but it can be considered as better than the previous draft resolutions that were rejected by both Hezbollah and the Lebanese government. According to Hassan Nasrallah, this decision was the least harmful of all the other draft-resolutions.

Published in special agreement with Dar Al Shorouk - all rights reserved.

Most Viewed

 
Features

Sudan War Enters Third Year as Civilians Remain Under Fire

Soldiers arrive in an area recaptured by the Sudanese army south of Khartoum, March 27. (AP)
Soldiers arrive in an area recaptured by the Sudanese army south of Khartoum, March 27. (AP)
TT
20
TT

Sudan War Enters Third Year as Civilians Remain Under Fire

Soldiers arrive in an area recaptured by the Sudanese army south of Khartoum, March 27. (AP)
Soldiers arrive in an area recaptured by the Sudanese army south of Khartoum, March 27. (AP)

Sudan’s civil war entered its third year on Monday, with the conflict growing increasingly brutal by the hour. Images of atrocities, summary executions, and ethnically targeted violence flood social media, underscoring a war that has turned into a relentless assault on civilians.

What began as a power struggle between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has morphed into a nationwide catastrophe engulfing every region — north to south, east to west. Field killings are intensifying, and civilians are frequently shot based on their identity, ethnicity, or origin. For many Sudanese, stepping outside or speaking up can be a death sentence.

The violence has not been confined to military targets. According to the United Nations, the war has unfolded in cities, not battlefields, with both sides deeply entrenched in urban zones, directing shelling and airstrikes toward civilian neighborhoods. It’s a war against the people, UN agencies say.

A nation in ruins

The toll is staggering. UN and media reports estimate the war has caused more than $200 billion in economic losses and damaged nearly 60% of Sudan’s infrastructure. More than 60,000 people have been killed, and hundreds of thousands wounded or permanently disabled.

Smoke is seen rising in Khartoum, Sudan, April 15, 2023. (AP)

One-third of the country’s population — roughly 14 million people — has been displaced internally or fled to neighboring countries. The EU has described Sudan’s humanitarian crisis as the worst of the 21st century.

With no political resolution in sight despite recent advances by the army, the suffering continues to deepen. Nearly half of Sudan’s 42 million people now live below the poverty line, and around 20 million face acute hunger, according to UN figures.

Hospitals, schools, bridges, and essential infrastructure have been decimated, leaving a broken nation struggling to survive amid a conflict that shows no sign of ending.

In a grim reflection of the deepening conflict, two nonagenarian men were executed in cold blood in the town of Tayba Al-Hasanab, south of Khartoum, simply for revealing their ethnic identity.

Local sources said Osman Mohamed and his companion, Hasbullah Abu Taqiyya, both originally from western Sudan, were targeted by armed extremists accusing them of “collaborating with the other side.”

The two men were reportedly slaughtered near their homes by militants who accused them of ethnic affiliation with rival factions in the war.

The town lies close to the Tayba military camp, one of the most strategic RSF bases near Jebel Aulia, established before the 2018 fall of Sudan’s Islamist regime. Now, the very identity of residents can serve as a death sentence in a capital divided and terrorized by ethnic violence.

As Sudan’s war enters its third year, fighters on both sides have increasingly turned their weapons on civilians they perceive as “sympathetic” to the enemy. Extremists often refer to those who have not fled their homes or who belong to certain ethnic groups as “social incubators” for the opposing side.

In some cases, all it takes is a question — “What is your tribe?” — or a glance at someone’s facial features for them to be executed without trial.

Instead of offering safety, militants have overrun Khartoum, unleashing waves of retaliatory violence on already traumatized communities. Bullets aimed at heads and hearts leave no room for mercy — just swift executions under the pretext of “collaboration”.

Supporters of the Sudanese armed popular resistance, which backs the army, ride on trucks in Gedaref in eastern Sudan on March 3, 2024. (AFP)

Industrial sector near collapse

Sudan has lost a quarter of its capital stock and seen the near-total collapse of its industrial sector as war grinds into a third year, a leading economist told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Abdel Azim Al-Amawi, an economic adviser and head of market research at Gulf-based “Aswaq Al-Mal", said the war has caused devastating damage across political, social, and economic fronts. Key infrastructure — including roads, bridges, airports, factories, and development projects — has been severely damaged or destroyed.

“The continued conflict has led to the loss of about 25% of Sudan’s capital reserves,” Al-Amawi said, adding that macroeconomic indicators have sharply deteriorated. Sudan’s economy contracted by 37.5% in the first year of war, the fiscal deficit surged to 9.1% of GDP, and annual inflation soared to 245%, according to his estimates.

Al-Amawi noted that Sudan’s economy is largely dependent on the services sector, which makes up 46.3% of GDP, followed by agriculture at 32.7% and industry at 21%. “The industrial sector is heavily concentrated in Khartoum, accounting for 85% of its activity,” he said.

“With the capital’s factories either damaged or destroyed, the industrial base has effectively collapsed.”

The destruction underscores the broader economic freefall facing Sudan, where businesses are shuttered, investment has evaporated, and millions are displaced with little hope of recovery in sight.

Sudan’s already fragile energy and agriculture sectors have been pushed to the brink by war, with the country now relying entirely on fuel imports and facing a steep drop in food production.

Al-Amawi told Asharq Al-Awsat that Sudan previously met 30% of its fuel needs through domestic production, while importing the remaining 70%.

But since the outbreak of war, repeated airstrikes have destroyed the Al-Jaili refinery north of Khartoum — the country’s largest, which once produced 3,800 tons of diesel, 2,700 tons of petrol, and 800 tons of cooking gas per day.

“With the refinery offline, Sudan now imports 100% of its petroleum needs, putting immense pressure on already strained foreign currency reserves,” Al-Amawi explained.

The war has also taken a heavy toll on agriculture, with grain production falling by 46% compared to pre-war levels and 41% below the five-year average. The 2023/2024 harvest saw sorghum output drop by 42% and millet by 64%, worsening an already dire food security crisis.

According to Al-Amawi, 14 million people have been displaced by the conflict, and around 1.7 million have fled the country — making Sudan home to the world’s largest displacement crisis.

Sudanese Children suffering from malnutrition are treated at an MSF clinic in Metche Camp, Chad, near the Sudanese border, April 6, 2024. (AP)

Currency in freefall, revenues dry up

The Sudanese pound has collapsed under the weight of war. Al-Amawi said the currency lost 74% of its value in the first year of the conflict and continued its slide in 2024, reaching an 81% devaluation. As of 2025, the US dollar is trading at 2,107 Sudanese pounds on the parallel market.

“The war has crippled the economy, wiping out 85% of government revenues,” Al-Amawi said. “Sudan has shifted into a full-scale war economy, with an unregulated shadow economy expanding across much of the country.”

With infrastructure in ruins, state revenues gutted, and basic services collapsing, Sudan’s economic future — like its political one — remains dangerously uncertain.

Agricultural backbone crumbling

Sudan’s once-critical agricultural sector — the backbone of its economy and primary source of employment — has suffered a 65% collapse since war broke out, with supply chains severed, farmers displaced, and two consecutive planting seasons lost, a leading economist has said.

Omer Sid Ahmed, writing in a commentary on the Sudanese news site “Al-Rakoba,” said the sector, which employs around 80% of the workforce and contributes 32.7% to GDP, is facing near-total disruption.

Fuel, seed, and fertilizer shortages have deepened the crisis, and the upcoming agricultural season is already under threat due to continued insecurity and logistical paralysis.

“Farmers have been displaced from their land, supply routes are no longer operational, and inputs are unavailable,” Sid Ahmed wrote. “The sector has been devastated.”

While he estimated agricultural and infrastructure losses could reach $100 billion by the end of 2024, media reports suggest overall war-related losses now exceed $200 billion.

“With war still raging and infrastructure continuing to be destroyed, calculating the true cost is nearly impossible,” Sid Ahmed said. “The damage is not static — it is escalating day by day.”

Sudan’s agricultural collapse has exacerbated an already dire humanitarian crisis, with food insecurity surging and millions relying on aid, much of which is unable to reach conflict-hit regions.

Health system in collapse as hospitals targeted

Sudan’s health system is buckling under the weight of war, with more than two-thirds of hospitals and health centers out of service and medical infrastructure repeatedly targeted by shelling and occupation, according to the country’s acting health minister.

Dr. Haitham Mohamed Ibrahim told Asharq Al-Awsat that 70% of public and private medical facilities in Khartoum, Darfur, Kordofan, Gezira, Sennar and parts of the Nile states are no longer operational. The collapse has created what he described as an “unprecedented health crisis.”

The minister accused the RSF of launching repeated attacks on hospitals. In El Fasher, the main city in North Darfur, hospitals have reportedly been struck more than 15 times.

Ibrahim also said the country’s main public health laboratory in Khartoum was bombed and later converted into a military base in the early days of the conflict. Specialized medical centers have also been destroyed or looted.

He estimated damages to the health sector at more than $11 billion, as doctors flee, medical supplies run dry, and critical services grind to a halt.

Aid agencies have warned that millions are now without access to basic healthcare, while disease outbreaks are spreading rapidly in displacement camps amid poor sanitation and shortages of medicine.

More than 60 doctors and medical staff have been killed since Sudan's civil war erupted, including seven dialysis specialists who were treating patients when they came under attack, said Ibrahim.

He told Asharq Al-Awsat that the RSF was responsible for the deaths, accusing it of targeting healthcare workers in areas under its control. He said the war has triggered a mass exodus of doctors abroad, leaving hospitals critically understaffed.

Students are seen in Port Sudan on December 28. (AFP)

“The shortage of medical personnel is severe,” he warned, noting that many have sought refuge outside the country amid growing insecurity.

Despite the grim toll, Ibrahim said Sudanese doctors had received recognition from the Arab Health Ministers Council, which awarded the “Arab Doctor” prize to a Sudanese physician in honor of the profession’s sacrifices during the war.

The minister also warned that widespread destruction of health facilities and environmental degradation have contributed to the rapid spread of disease. Outbreaks of malaria, dengue fever, and cholera have taken hold in displacement camps and conflict-affected areas, killing tens of thousands, he stressed.

Health experts say Sudan is now facing one of the worst public health crises in its history, with millions lacking access to clean water, vaccines, or emergency care.

Schools turned into barracks as war devastates education

The war has devastated the country’s education system, forcing millions of children out of school, with thousands of facilities either destroyed, occupied by fighters, or repurposed as shelters — and in some cases, even as makeshift cemeteries.

“This war is a catastrophe that has struck at the very foundation of education in Sudan,” said Sami Al-Baqir, spokesperson for the Teachers’ Committee, an independent union, in comments to Asharq Al-Awsat.

He said there are no comprehensive figures on the total damage, but estimates indicate that up to 20,000 schools have been either partially or completely affected by the conflict. Before the war, Sudan had around 12 million school-aged children. Now, between 6 and 7 million have been out of school for the entire duration of the two-year conflict. Fewer than 4 million have managed to continue their studies, he added.

“Some schools have been turned into military barracks, others bombed, and many transformed into shelters for displaced families. Tragically, some have even been used as mass graves,” Al-Baqir said. “This is destruction beyond Sudan’s capacity to recover from in the near future.”

He also warned of a looming educational and social divide, as schools remain operational only in areas controlled by the army. “I fear the fragmentation of the Sudanese national identity,” he said, referring to the 2024 national exams, which were held only in government-controlled zones.

According to Al-Baqir, only 200,000 out of 570,000 students who were expected to sit for the Sudanese certificate exam were able to do so. “The future of those left behind is already slipping away,” he said.