Abdel Halim Khaddam’s Memoirs: Bashar Assad, Khamenei, Khatami Agreed to Prolong War in Iraq

Asharq Al-Awsat publishes excerpts from the late Syrian vice president’s memoirs.

Bashar Assad (C) seen standing between his father Hafez and Abdel Halim Khaddam in 1994. (Getty Images)
Bashar Assad (C) seen standing between his father Hafez and Abdel Halim Khaddam in 1994. (Getty Images)
TT

Abdel Halim Khaddam’s Memoirs: Bashar Assad, Khamenei, Khatami Agreed to Prolong War in Iraq

Bashar Assad (C) seen standing between his father Hafez and Abdel Halim Khaddam in 1994. (Getty Images)
Bashar Assad (C) seen standing between his father Hafez and Abdel Halim Khaddam in 1994. (Getty Images)

Abdel Halim Khaddam’s political career witnessed a major part of the story of Syria in recent decades.

The late Khaddam, who was known as Abu Jamal, occupied several positions and witnessed major events in Syria and the region, since the Baath Party took over power in 1963 until he left the country and announced his defection from the regime in 2005.

During decades of political work, Abu Jamal assumed different responsibilities. He was governor of Hama at the moment of the conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1960s and governor of Quneitra when it fell at the end of that decade.

He was minister of Foreign Affairs, then Vice President during Syria’s expansion in its neighboring country, to the extent that he was called “the ruler of Lebanon.” The Lebanese file remained in Khaddam’s custody until 1998, when Assad transferred it to his son, Dr. Bashar, who had returned from London after the death of Bassel, his older brother, in 1994. Neither Khaddam, nor his allies in Lebanon, were comfortable with the new decision.

With the decline of his political role in Damascus, Khaddam resigned from his position as vice president but remained member of the Baath Party’s central leadership. After that, he went to Lebanon on his way to exile in Paris, where he lived until his death last year.

Following the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, Damascus was subjected to a regional and international isolation. On Sept. 30, Khaddam announced his defection, accusing the Syrian regime of “killing a friend, the Lebanese prime minister.”

In his exile, he formed with the Muslim Brotherhood led by Sadreddine al-Bayanouni, the Salvation Front coalition to oppose the regime. In Damascus, he was accused of high treason and his property was confiscated.

Khaddam did not play a prominent political role after the 2011 uprising, as he devoted his time to writing his memoirs. In 2003, he published a book on his political views and position on democracy and freedom, entitled: “The Contemporary Arab System.”

Asharq Al-Awsat went through Khaddam’s papers and documents and will begin on Monday publishing chapters from his memoirs, in a series of episodes on key stages of Syria’s history.

Khaddam recounts that after the death of President Hafez al-Assad, his son, Bashar, assumed power and focused on relations with Iraq. Syria exerted efforts on the Arab and international scenes to defend the Iraqi regime against the aggressive acts committed by the United States.

During that period, Bashar received a number of Iraqi leaders, including those who were the most hostile to the regime in Syria and Iran, mainly Ali Hassan al-Majid and Taha Yassin Ramadan. Thus, Syria moved from working to topple the Iraqi regime, to defending it in Arab and international forums, at a time when Iran, through its allies in the Iraqi opposition, sought to get rid of Saddam Hussein.

An Iraqi opposition conference was held in London under Iranian and US sponsorship. The Iranian side was represented by a senior intelligence official with an accompanying delegation, and the US side comprised three members of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The two delegations worked for the success of the conference, which took a set of decisions that America used to cover its war.

With the intensification of the US campaign, the mobilization of forces in the region, and the inability of Washington to persuade the Security Council to adopt a resolution supporting its action against Iraq, it became clear that war was inevitable, which raised concern in Syria about the conflict spreading to its territories. Consequently, Bashar went to Tehran, accompanied by Khaddam, to discuss the situation with the Iranian leadership and work to unify the stance in the face of the mounting tension.

“We went to Tehran on March 16, 2003. Upon our arrival, we held talks with President Muhammad Khatami, and then the Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei,” Khaddam says.

The following are excerpts from the minutes of meetings in Tehran:

“What can we do shortly before the war? And what will we do in the event of a war that will last for a long time, and perhaps for years?” Bashar asked.

Khatami replied: “These are correct and timely questions… Let me explain it to you. I held two meetings: the first was with Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, and the second was with French President Jacques Chirac. Mr. Chirac initiated, and the call lasted for half an hour. The two men are worried that Iraq will be attacked, but their concern was greater than that, and both of them expressed that the war would break out soon.”

The Iranian president continued: “The decisive victory that America can get is to shorten the period of war and claim victory in a short time. However, if the period is prolonged, America will lose. It is sufficient for the bodies of American soldiers to return to America for the US public opinion to turn against President George W. Bush. So I don’t think America will be able to end this war.”

Khatami told the Syrian officials that the other issue he raised with Chirac was that the war would increase the wave of violence in the world.

“America in Afghanistan did not achieve its goal of eliminating the former (al-Qaeda) leader Osama bin Laden, rather it made him a hero. Now, it is producing another hero named Saddam, and the wave of extremism will increase. Chirac agreed with me, but he said that the Americans were not people from this region,” Khaddam quoted Khatami as saying.

Bashar returned to the conversation, saying: “We are the country that stands the most with Saddam, but he merely coordinates with us. It is a strange system that lives in another world.”

“As Syrians and Iranians, how can we deal with the Iraqi opposition? The opposition abroad must be absorbed, but it cannot have a role. We need a wider relationship inside Iraq. For us in Syria, the relationship is weak due to lack of trust between our two regimes,” he remarked.

Kamal Kharrazi interjected in the conversation: “President Khatami proposed the national reconciliation.” Khatami replied: “The problem is that no one liked this idea.”

Bashar noted: “We can give it [the opposition] fake promises, according to the American way. Nevertheless, the issue can be raised with the Iraqi foreign minister. The first problem in the war is Saddam himself.”

The Iranian president added: “All the opposition today is against the US. We must try to push the Shiites and Sunnis to overcome their differences… Turkey has a big role at this stage. Despite Turkey’s commitments to America, I note that the governing group tends to work with us and with the Islamic world. We must be wary of the establishment of a Kurdish state, and the idea that the Kurds of Iran are Iranians, the Iraqi Kurds are Iraqi, and the Turkish Kurds are Turkish. In this regard, the Turks must be reassured and their fears dispelled.”

Following the meeting with Khatami, the two Syrian officials met with supreme leader Khamenei, “who started the conversation, welcoming us, hoping that the visit would be beneficial to both countries.”

Bashar replied: “Our conversation today reflected the similarity of views between our two countries. We discussed the issue of Iraq extensively, and there are many analyses. The vision is dark, but the light side is our alliance, our stance and our history.”

“The truth is we are two brotherly countries, facing common dangers. This should encourage us to increase full cooperation between us. The region faces a dangerous situation,” Khamenei was quoted by Khaddam as saying.



Iran Leaders Join Crowds on Tehran’s Streets to Project Control in Wartime

An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Iran Leaders Join Crowds on Tehran’s Streets to Project Control in Wartime

An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)

After more than a month of being stalked by targeted assassinations, Iran's leadership has adopted a new tactic to show it is still in control - with senior officials walking openly in the streets among small crowds who have gathered in support of the regime.

In recent days, Iran's president and foreign minister have separately mixed with groups of several hundred people in central Tehran. On Tuesday, state television aired footage of the two posing for selfies, talking to members of the public and shaking hands with supporters who had gathered in public areas.

According to insiders and analysts, the appearances are part of a calculated effort by Iran's theocratic leadership to project resilience and authority — not only over the vital Strait of Hormuz but also over the population — despite a sustained US-Israeli campaign aimed at "obliterating" it.

One insider close to the hardline establishment said such public outings are intended to show that the regime is "unshaken by strikes and that it remains in control and vigilant" as the war grinds on.

The US-Israeli war ‌on Iran began on ‌February 28 with the killing of veteran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several senior military ‌commanders ⁠in waves of ⁠strikes that have since continued to target top officials.

Iran's new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has not been seen in public since taking over on March 8 from his father. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, meanwhile, was removed from Israel's hit list amid mediation efforts last month, including by Pakistan, to bring Tehran and Washington together for talks to end the war.

Talks aimed at ending the war have since appeared to have petered out, as Tehran brands US peace proposals "unrealistic". Against that backdrop, recent public appearances by President Masoud Pezeshkian and Araqchi appear designed to project defiance, if not a convincing display of public support.

A senior Iranian source said officials' public presence demonstrates that "the establishment is not intimidated by Israel's targeted killing of top Iranian ⁠figures".

Asked whether Iran's foreign minister or president were on any sort of kill list, an Israeli ‌military spokesperson, Nadav Shoshani, said on Friday he would not "speak about specific personnel."

NIGHTLY RALLIES TO ‌SHOW RESILIENCE

Despite widespread destruction, Tehran appears emboldened by surviving weeks of intense US-Israeli attacks, firing on Gulf countries hosting US troops and demonstrating its ability ‌to effectively block the Strait of Hormuz.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump vowed more aggressive strikes on Iran, without offering a timeline ‌for ending hostilities. Tehran responded by warning the United States and Israel that "more crushing, broader and more destructive" attacks were in store.

Encouraged by clerical rulers, supporters of the regime take to the streets each night, filling public squares to show loyalty even as bombs rain down across the country.

Analysts say the establishment is also seeking to raise the "political and reputational" cost of the strikes at a time when civilian casualties are deeply disturbing for Iranians.

Omid Memarian, ‌a senior Iran analyst at DAWN, a Washington-based think tank, said the decision to send officials into gatherings reflects a layered strategy, including an effort to sustain the morale of core supporters ⁠at a moment of acute pressure.

"The system ⁠relies heavily on this base; if its supporters withdraw from public space, its ability to project control and authority weakens significantly," Memarian said.

Speaking to state television, some in the crowds voice unwavering loyalty to Iran's leadership; others oppose the bombing of their country regardless of politics; and some have a stake in the system, including government employees, students and others whose livelihoods are tied to it.

Hadi Ghaemi, head of the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran, said the establishment is using such loyal crowds as human shields to raise the cost of any assassination attempts.

"By being in the middle of large crowds they have protections that would make Israeli-American attacks against them very bloody and generate sympathy worldwide," he said.

POTENTIAL PROTESTERS STAY OFF STREETS AT NIGHT

The Islamic republic emerged from a 1979 revolution backed by millions of Iranians. But decades of rule marked by corruption, repression and mismanagement have thinned that support, alienating many ordinary people.

While there has been little sign so far of anti-government protests that erupted in January and abated after a deadly crackdown, the establishment has adopted harsh measures, such as arrests, executions and large-scale deployment of security forces, to prevent any sparks of dissent.

Rights groups have warned about "rushed executions" during wartime after Iran hanged at least seven political prisoners during the war.

"Many potential protesters are frightened by the continuing presence of armed men and violent crowds in the streets and largely stay at home once darkness falls," Ghaemi said.


'Metals of the Future': Copper and Silver Flow Beneath Poland's Surface

Smelter workers process copper at the Glogow plant in southwestern Poland, owned by KGHM. Wojtek RADWANSKI / AFP
Smelter workers process copper at the Glogow plant in southwestern Poland, owned by KGHM. Wojtek RADWANSKI / AFP
TT

'Metals of the Future': Copper and Silver Flow Beneath Poland's Surface

Smelter workers process copper at the Glogow plant in southwestern Poland, owned by KGHM. Wojtek RADWANSKI / AFP
Smelter workers process copper at the Glogow plant in southwestern Poland, owned by KGHM. Wojtek RADWANSKI / AFP

Thousands of meters beneath the ground, amid suffocating heat, lies one of the keys to Poland's rumbling mining sector -- and the world economy.

Whitish ore, rich in copper and silver, is extracted from the country's depths and exported around the world to fuel technological and energy transitions.

"These are the metals of the future," Ariel Wojciuszkiewicz, a geologist at the Polkowice-Sieroszowice mine in the west of the country, tells AFP, noting that copper and silver are "indispensable for electronic equipment, electric cars, and renewable energy installations".

Driven by the rise of artificial intelligence, renewable energies, and global defense needs, demand for these metals is expected to keep increasing in the future, with copper even being referred to as "red gold" and a "barometer" for world economic development.

Poland, responsible for as much as half of Europe's supply, is one of the industry's key players.

Equipped with a helmet and an emergency breathing device, Wojciuszkiewicz leads AFP journalists through the Polkowice-Sieroszowice mine -- one of three sites operated by KGHM, the Polish metals giant, which also owns local smelters and companies in the Americas.

The 24-hour operation runs at a constant roar as machines grind rock at deafening volumes, its tunnels stretching for hundreds of kilometers beneath Poland's surface.

The world's second-largest silver producer, the KGHM group also supplies between 40 percent and 50 percent of the copper produced in Europe.

Last year, it ranked eighth worldwide in terms of copper extraction volume, behind global giants such as BHP Group, Glencore Plc and Rio Tinto, according to industry statistics.

Global copper demand, already high, is expected to climb by over 40 percent by 2040, according to a 2025 UN Report.

To meet this demand, "it might take 80 new mines and 250 billion dollars in investments by 2030," the organization estimates.

The International Energy Agency (IEA), however, predicts that supply will lag 30 percent behind demand by as early as 2035.

- 1,200 degrees Celsius -

Dependence on copper is growing exponentially across the world economy's most innovative sectors.

"We don't realize how much we are surrounded by copper on all sides," Piotr Krzyzewski, KGHM vice president in charge of finance, explains to AFP.

"An electric car contains 80 kg of copper, compared with 20 kg in a conventional one," he notes, while "a wind turbine contains between four and ten tons of copper per megawatt."

Farther away, at the Glogow smelter, two workers in protective suits, armed with long lances, open huge furnaces where the ore is melted.

They work diligently as sparks fly from metal heated to 1,200C.

Several processing stages later, 99.99 percent pure copper plates, each weighing more than a hundred kilos, are shipped all over the world.

Last year, the KGHM group as a whole generated more than 36 billion zlotys ($9.7 billion) in revenue. Copper production reached 710,000 tons and silver production 1,347 tons, according to the group's annual report, published at the end of March.

No less than half of the silver is used in industry, mainly for electronics, solar panels, and medical applications. The rest goes to jewelery or serves as a safety net and financial asset.

But it is copper, now an irreplaceable metal for the economy, that has become the object of global strategic contention.

"Copper is on the strategic list of critical metals in Europe, the United States, and China," Krzyzewski tells AFP.

The metal's impact on geopolitics is already being noted in real time.

In July, US President Donald Trump announced a 50 percent tariff on copper, eventually limiting the measure to products made with the metal.

To justify his decision, he invoked the need to "defend national security".

"Copper is the second most used material by the Department of Defense!" he said.

- Record prices -

In 2025, copper prices jumped 41.7 percent, before hitting a record high of $14,527.50 a ton in January of this year.

Even in the face of the war in the Middle East and the slowdown of the global economy, the price remains high at about 12,000 dollars per ton.

In this uncertain context, Poland's subsoil appears to be a major asset for the energy sovereignty of the Old Continent.

"It's no longer about the security of our country alone, but the security of all of Europe," Krzyzewski says, adding that KGHM's resources "are still estimated to last for at least 40 years," not counting new exploration and concessions.

But mining consumes enormous amounts of water, making it subject to the effects of global warming and drought.


Trump’s Anger Over Iran Thrusts NATO into Fresh Crisis

A NATO flag flutters at the Tapa military base, Estonia April 30, 2023. (Reuters)
A NATO flag flutters at the Tapa military base, Estonia April 30, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

Trump’s Anger Over Iran Thrusts NATO into Fresh Crisis

A NATO flag flutters at the Tapa military base, Estonia April 30, 2023. (Reuters)
A NATO flag flutters at the Tapa military base, Estonia April 30, 2023. (Reuters)

The NATO alliance has in recent years survived existential challenges - ranging from the war in Ukraine to multiple bouts of pressure and insults from US President Donald Trump, who has questioned its core mission and threatened to seize Greenland.

But it is the US-Israeli war with Iran, thousands of miles from Europe, that has nearly broken the 76-year-old bloc and threatens to leave it in its weakest state since its creation, say analysts and diplomats.

Trump, enraged that European countries have declined to send their navies to open up the Strait of Hormuz to global shipping following the start of the air war on Feb 28, has declared he is considering withdrawing from the alliance.

"Wouldn't you if you were me?" Trump asked Reuters in a Wednesday interview.

In a speech on Wednesday night, Trump criticized US allies but stopped short of condemning NATO, as many experts thought he might.

But combined with other barbs aimed at Europeans in recent weeks, Trump's comments have provoked unprecedented concern that the US will not come to the aid of European allies should they be attacked, whether or not Washington formally walks away.

The result, say analysts and diplomats, is that the alliance created in the Cold War that has long served as the basic fabric of European security is fraying and the mutual defense agreement at its core is no longer taken as a given.

"This is the worst place (NATO) has been since it was founded," said Max Bergmann, a former State Department official who now leads the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

"It's really hard to ‌think of anything that ‌even comes close."

That reality is sinking in for Europeans, who have counted on NATO as a bulwark against an increasingly assertive Russia.

As recently ‌as February, ⁠NATO Secretary-General Mark ⁠Rutte had dismissed the idea of Europe defending itself without the US as a "silly thought." Now, many officials and diplomats consider it the default expectation.

"NATO remains necessary, but we must be capable of thinking of NATO without the Americans," said General Francois Lecointre, who served as France's armed forces chief from 2017 to 2021.

"Whether it should even continue to be called NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organization - is a valid question."

White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said: “President Trump has made his disappointment with NATO and other allies clear, and as the President emphasized, ‘the United States will remember.’”

A NATO representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

THIS TIME IT'S DIFFERENT

NATO has been challenged before, not least during Trump's first term from 2017 to 2021, when he also considered withdrawing from the alliance.

But while many European officials until recently believed that Trump could be kept on board with pomp and flattery, fewer now hold that belief, according to conversations with dozens of former and current US and European officials.

Trump and his officials have expressed frustration over what they see as NATO's unwillingness to help the United ⁠States in a time of need, including by not directly assisting with the Strait of Hormuz and by restricting US use of some airfields and ‌airspace. US officials have declared NATO cannot be a "one-way street".

European officials counter that they have not received US requests for specific ‌assets for a mission to open the strait and complain that Washington has been inconsistent about whether such a mission would operate during or after the war.

"It's a terrible situation for NATO to be in," said ‌Jamie Shea, a former senior NATO official who is now a senior fellow at the Friends of Europe think tank.

"It is a blow to the allies who, since Trump returned to ‌the White House, have worked hard to show that they are willing and able to take more responsibility (for their own defense)."

Trump's latest comments follow other signs of an increasingly unsteady alliance.

Those include his stepped-up threats in January to wrest Greenland away from Denmark and recent moves by the US that Europeans see as particularly accommodating toward Russia, which NATO defines as its principal security threat.

The administration has remained essentially mum amid reports that Moscow has provided targeting data for Iran to attack US assets in the Middle East and has lifted sanctions on Russian oil in a bid to ease global energy prices that have spiked during the war.

At a meeting of G7 foreign ministers ‌near Paris last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Kaja Kallas, the foreign policy chief of the European Union, had a tense exchange, according to five people familiar with the matter, underlining the increasingly fraught transatlantic relationship.

Kallas asked when US patience with Russian President Vladimir ⁠Putin would run out over Ukraine peace negotiations, prompting Rubio ⁠to respond with irritation that the US was trying to end the war while also providing support to Ukraine, but the EU was welcome to mediate if it wanted to.

NO GOING BACK

Legally, Trump may lack the authority to withdraw from NATO. Under a law passed in 2023, a US president cannot exit the alliance without the consent of two-thirds of the US Senate, a nearly impossible threshold.

But analysts say that, as commander-in-chief, Trump can decide whether the US military will defend NATO members. Declining to do so could imperil the alliance without a formal withdrawal.

To be sure, not everyone sees the current crisis as existential. One French diplomat described the president's rhetoric as a passing temper tantrum.

Trump has changed his position on NATO before.

In 2024, he said on the campaign trail that he would encourage Putin to attack NATO members that do not pay their fair share on defense. By the last annual NATO summit, in June 2025, the alliance was in his good graces, with Trump delivering a speech effusively praising European leaders as people who "love their countries."

Next week, Rutte, the NATO secretary-general, who has a strong relationship with Trump, is set to visit Washington in an effort to change Trump's view once again.

Analysts say European nations have good reason to keep the US engaged in NATO despite doubts over whether Trump would come to their defense. Among other reasons, the US military provides a range of capabilities NATO can't easily replace, such as satellite intelligence.

Even if Trump and the Europeans find a way to stay together in NATO, diplomats, analysts and officials say, the transatlantic alliance that has been central to the global order since World War Two may never be the same.

"I do think we're turning the page of 80 years of working together," said Julianne Smith, the US ambassador to NATO under Democratic President Joe Biden.

"I don't think it means the end of the transatlantic relationship, but we're on the cusp of something that's going to have a different look and feel to it."