عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Khaddam’s Memoirs: Damascus Received Rafik Hariri Upon Jumblatt’s Request, Hafez al-Assad ‘Tested Him’

Late Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam and Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri (center) sit next to former President Amin Gemayel at the funeral of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in Beirut on February 16, 2005 (Getty Images - AFP)
Late Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam and Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri (center) sit next to former President Amin Gemayel at the funeral of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in Beirut on February 16, 2005 (Getty Images - AFP)
TT
TT

Khaddam’s Memoirs: Damascus Received Rafik Hariri Upon Jumblatt’s Request, Hafez al-Assad ‘Tested Him’

Late Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam and Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri (center) sit next to former President Amin Gemayel at the funeral of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in Beirut on February 16, 2005 (Getty Images - AFP)
Late Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam and Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri (center) sit next to former President Amin Gemayel at the funeral of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in Beirut on February 16, 2005 (Getty Images - AFP)

The third episode of the memoirs of late Syrian Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam - published by Asharq Al-Awsat – talks about the relationship between Damascus and late Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri since its beginning in 1982 and up to the latter’s assassination in February 2005.

Khaddam says that in April 1982, Hariri was introduced to Damascus upon Druze leader Walid Jumblatt’s request.

“In April 1982, I received Mr. Rafik Hariri at the request of Mr. Walid Jumblatt. It was the first time that I met with him. All I knew is that he was a Saudi businessman of Lebanese origin.

“The session focused on knowing his orientation, his aspirations, and his relation with the Lebanese internal arena. Hariri was cautious, speaking vaguely and I felt that he was seeking to understand our approach to the Lebanese issue. At the end of the session, he asked to visit me again, and I welcomed him.

“The second meeting was held two weeks later. We engaged into a lengthy discussion about the Lebanese file that lasted for five hours. We had lunch at my house, where Hariri spoke frankly about his upbringing and the circumstances he went through, his affiliation with the Arab Nationalist Movement, and his participation in the smuggling of George Habash (Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) out of the Syrian prison.

“He also talked about his work in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, starting from his first job to the major projects he undertook. On Lebanon, he said: “Lebanon is my homeland, where I grew up and where my family lives. It is part of my life, so allow me to come to Syria more often in order to reach a solution to the Lebanese crisis.”

“A detailed discussion took place about the Lebanese crisis, its causes and circumstances. In my opinion, the crisis was due to two reasons: The first, Lebanon’s sectarian system, which prevented the unity of the Lebanese components, while the second reason relates to the conditions of the Palestinian resistance, which found itself in conflict with political formations of a Christian character.

“We agreed on the analysis and reviewed the means to reach a solution. Hariri promised to present a written draft for us to discuss.”

Khaddam recounts that Hariri submitted his proposal to Damascus during their following encounter. He notes that he had some objections, as the project maintained the sectarian character of the state’s constitutional institutions and the distribution of seats.

Hariri asserted that these issues would be gradually resolved, so the Syrian vice president replied: “The Lebanese constitution, which was drafted in the 1920s includes a text that stipulates the abolishment of political sectarianism following a certain period; this period has lasted from 1920 until now. Consequently, if there is no specific and decisive time for the transitional phase, sectarianism will remain and the conflict that the Lebanese people have witnessed for many years will persist.”

Khaddam says that an agreement was reached to set a specific period for the transitional phase. When Hariri presented his project to the other Lebanese leaders, he was met with consent by some and objection by others, including those who wanted to adhere to the sectarian formula.

Hariri used to visit Damascus every week, to discuss the Lebanese national issue or to convey messages from the late King Fahd bin Abdulaziz to President Hafez al-Assad.

Following the Lebanese elections of 1992, Khaddam says that Damascus discussed all the names of well-known political figures, who could assume the premiership of the new government.

He recounts how Assad “tested” Hariri before agreeing to assign him to the post.

“Suddenly, the president [Hazez al-Assad] asked him: “If you were the head of the Lebanese government and we disagreed with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, how would you act?” Rafik replied: “Mr. President, I am Lebanese and love my country, and I am also Saudi.... Consequently, I cannot give up on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia because I am not ungrateful. I am an Arab nationalist. I consider Syria the incubator of the Arabs, and I can only be with Syria. Consequently: If there is a disagreement, I will work on solving it and if I fail, I will retire.” President Hafez replied: “If you had said anything other than this, I would not have believed you, and you would have lost my confidence. I will ask Abu Jamal (Khaddam) to inform the Lebanese President that we support Rafik Hariri’s nomination.”

“This is how Rafik Hariri became prime minister of Lebanon. He committed to every word he said to me and to President Hafez, and offered great services to Syria through his foreign relations,” Khaddam says.

He notes, however, that when Bashar al-Assad assumed power following the death of his father, he initiated a campaign against Hariri and was incited by a group of Lebanese, who were previously associated with his brother Bassel and had personal ambitions. This prompted Bashar’s friends in Lebanon to further attack Hariri.

According to Khaddam, these campaigns have increased the Syrian president’s isolation at the Arab and international levels. The man found himself in front of one option: falling into Iran’s arms.

During that period, presidential elections were supposed to be held in Lebanon, but Bashar insisted on the extension of President Emile Lahoud’s tenure. The Muslim circle, some national forces and political currents, stood against the extension.

Signs of a fresh Syrian campaign emerged against Hariri. This was clearly evident in a meeting of the National Progressive Front (a coalition of parties led by the Baath), during which Foreign Minister Farouk Al-Sharaa talked about the political situation and was asked about relations with Hariri. He replied: “He is conspiring against Syria, and he is involved with the United States and France against our country.”

As Syria insisted on extending Lahoud’s term, Hariri announced he would resign from the government. Consequently, the Syrian presidential palace summoned the Lebanese premier to a meeting with Bashar.

Looking for advice, Hariri contacted Khaddam, asking: “What should I do? I do not want to stay in power.” The Syrian official replied: “Keep insisting on your resignation, and if he presses you, present him with the proposal of Lebanese national reconciliation between all parties.”

During the meeting, Rafik hardened his stance. Al-Assad asked him: “What are your conditions for going back on your resignation?”

He replied: “A national reconciliation meeting, a government of national unity in which everyone participates without exception, freedom to decide, and President Lahoud’s non-interference in governance affairs.”

Days and weeks passed, and the government was not formed. In early October, Minister Marwan Hamadeh escaped an assassination attempt, which increased tension in Lebanon.

Khaddam recounts that in mid-January 2005, the regional leadership of the Baath party held a meeting to discuss some partisan issues. Assad said: “I will talk about Lebanon. There is an American-French conspiracy against us, in which Hariri is involved. This poses a danger to Syria.”

The Syrian vice-president says that the next day, he received Mohsen Dalloul, who had a strong relationship with Hariri.

“I briefed him on Bashar’s talk and asked him to inform Rafik that he should leave Lebanon immediately, because the hatred for him is great.

“On February 14, we had a meeting at the Regional Command. After the meeting, I entered the room of Dr. Ahmed Dergham, a member of the leadership and the TV was on. I was shocked at the news of a large bomb explosion in front of Hariri’s convoy, on its way from Parliament. A member of the leadership was next to me and said: “He executed what he talked about in that meeting.

“I returned home sad, because I lost a friend who was serving Syria and Lebanon…I remembered President Hafez’s position on Hariri, and how he protected him from the campaigns of the Syrian security services…

“On the day Hariri was assassinated, I went to Lebanon and found large crowds in front of his house. When I got out of the car, I heard someone say: “What is he doing here?” Then another answered him: “This is Abou Baha’s friend, not from those who hate him.”

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

Report: Europe’s Options in the Strait of Hormuz Are Few and Risky

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
TT
TT

Report: Europe’s Options in the Strait of Hormuz Are Few and Risky

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)

When senior officials from 40 countries met virtually this week to discuss how to bring shipping traffic back to the Strait of Hormuz, Italy’s foreign minister had a proposal. He urged them to establish a “humanitarian corridor” allowing safe passage for fertilizer and other crucial goods headed to impoverished nations.

The plan, described after the meeting by Italian officials, was one of several competing proposals from Europe and beyond that were meant to prevent the Iran war from causing widespread hunger. But it was not endorsed by the envoys on the call, and the meeting ended with no concrete plan to reopen the strait, militarily or otherwise, reported the New York Times.

European leaders are under pressure from US President Donald Trump to commit military assets, immediately, to end Iran’s blockage of the strait and tame a growing global energy and economic crisis. They have refused to meet his demands by sending warships now. Instead, they are hotly debating what to do to help unclog the vital shipping lane once the war ends.

But they are struggling to rally around a plan of action.

That partly reflects the slow gears of diplomacy in Europe and the sheer number of nations, including Gulf states, that are invested in safeguarding the strait once the war ends. Many nations involved in the talks, including Italy and Germany, have insisted that any international effort be blessed by the United Nations, which could slow action further. Military leaders will take up the issue in discussions next week.

More than anything, the struggle reflects how difficult it could be to actually secure the strait under a fragile peace — for Europe or for anyone else. None of the options available to Europe, the Gulf states and other countries look foolproof, even under the assumption that the major fighting will have stopped.

Naval escorts

French officials, including President Emmanuel Macron, have repeatedly raised the possibility that French naval vessels could help escort merchant ships through the strait after the war ends.

American officials have pushed for Europeans and other allies, like Japan, to escort ships sailing under their own countries’ flags.

Naval escorts are expensive. Also, their air defense systems alone might not be sufficient to stop some types of attacks, like drone strikes, should Iran choose to start firing again.

“What does the world expect, what does Donald Trump expect, from let’s say a handful or two handfuls of European frigates there in the Strait of Hormuz,” Defense Minister Boris Pistorius of Germany said last month, “to achieve what the powerful American Navy cannot manage there alone?”

Sweep for mines

German and Belgian officials, among others, say they are prepared to send minesweepers to clear the strait of explosives after the war.

Western military leaders aren’t convinced that Iran has actually mined the strait, in part because some Iranian ships still pass through it. So while minesweepers might be deployed as part of a naval escort, they might not have much to do.

Help from above

Another option is sending fighter jets and drones to intercept any Iranian air assaults on ships. American officials have pushed Europe to do this.

It is quite expensive and still not guaranteed to work. Iran can attack ships with a single soldier in a speedboat, and if just a few attempts succeed, that could be enough to spook insurers and shipowners out of attempting passage.

Diplomacy

Another option are negotiations and economic leverage to pressure Iran to refrain from future attacks, and deploy a variety of military means to enforce that. This effort would go beyond Europe. On Thursday, the German foreign ministry called on China to use its influence with Iran “constructively” to help end the hostilities.

This option is expensive and still not guaranteed. Negotiations seem to have done little to stop the fighting. But this may be Europe’s best bet, for lack of a better one.

What if none of that works?

Iranian officials said this week that they would continue to control traffic through the strait after the war. They have already made plans to make ships pay tolls for passing through the strait, which is supposed to be an unfettered waterway under international law.

A continued blockage risks global economic disaster. Countries around the world rely on shipments through the strait for fuel and fertilizer, among other necessities.

In some regions, shortages loom. In others, like Europe, high oil, gas and fertilizer prices have raised the specter of spiking inflation and cratering economic growth.

“The big threat right now is stagflation,” said Hanns Koenig, a managing director at Aurora Energy Research, a Berlin consultancy. “You’ve got higher prices, and they strangle the tiny growth we would have seen this year.”

*Jim Tankersley for the New York Times

Features

US Military Jets Hit in Iran War Are the First Shot Down by Enemy Fire in Over 20 Years

An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
TT
TT

US Military Jets Hit in Iran War Are the First Shot Down by Enemy Fire in Over 20 Years

An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)

Iran shooting down two American military jets marks an exceedingly rare assault for the US that has not happened in more than 20 years and shows Iran’s continued ability to hit back despite President Donald Trump asserting it has been “completely decimated.”

The attacks came five weeks after US and Israeli strikes first pounded Iran, with Trump saying earlier this week that Tehran's “ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed."

Iran shot down a US F15-E Strike Eagle fighter jet Friday, with one service member getting rescued and the search still underway for a second, US officials say. Iranian state media also said a US A-10 attack aircraft crashed after being hit by Iranian defense forces.

The last time a US warplane was shot down by enemy fire in combat was an A-10 Thunderbolt II during the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, said retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Houston Cantwell, a former F-16 fighter pilot.

But, he said, that’s because the US had largely been fighting insurgents who didn’t have the same anti-aircraft capabilities. The fact that there have not been more fighter jets lost in Iran, Cantwell said, is a testament to the capabilities of US forces.

"The fact that this hasn’t happened until now is an absolute miracle,” said Cantwell, who served four combat tours and is now a senior resident fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “We’re flying combat missions here, they are being shot at every day.”

Shoulder-fired missile likely used, experts say

US Central Command said in a statement Wednesday that American forces have flown more than 13,000 missions in the Iran war while striking more than 12,300 targets.

After more than a month of punishing US-Israeli airstrikes, a degraded Iranian military nonetheless remains a stubborn foe. Its steady stream of strikes against Israel and Gulf Arab neighbors have been causing regional upheaval and global economic shock.

When it comes to American dominance over Iran's airspace, there’s still a distinction between air superiority and air supremacy, said Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran program senior director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank.

“A disabled air defense system is not a destroyed air defense system,” he said. “We shouldn’t be shocked that they’re still fighting.”

American planes have been flying missions at lower altitudes, which makes them more vulnerable to Iran's missiles, Taleblu said. It’s possible that Iran fired at the F-15 with a surface-to-air missile, but it's more likely that a portable, shoulder-fired missile was used, he said. Those are much harder to detect and reflect how Iran is “weak but still lethal.”

“This is a regime that is fighting for its life,” he said.

Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and a senior defense adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed that a shoulder-fired missile was likely used against the fighter jet.

Nonetheless, the American air war against Iran has been a “tremendous success” so far, he said.

To put things in perspective, he said the loss rate for American warplanes flying over Germany during World War II was 3% at one point, which would equal about 350 warplanes in the US war against Iran.

“But then there’s the political side — you have an American public that is accustomed to fighting bloodless wars,” Cancian said. “Then a large part of the country doesn’t support the war. So to them, any loss is unacceptable.”

Pilots are trained on what to do if their plane is hit

The last US jet shot down in combat was struck by an Iraqi surface-to-air missile over Baghdad on April 8, 2003. The pilot safely ejected and was rescued, according to the Air Force.

In high-threat environments like missions over Iran, Cantwell, the retired general, said an aviator's blood pressure goes up and they become highly alert to incoming missiles. Those are typically either infrared- or radar-guided missiles, he said, requiring different evasive tactics.

If they are hit and need to eject from their aircraft, they are trained on what to do next, he said.

Pilots learn to check for wounds after a violent ejection and the shock of a missile explosion and, most crucially, how they are going to communicate their location so rescuers can find them.

At the same time, he said, the enemy is likely working to intercept the communications or even spoof the location.

Helicopters are more at risk than other aircraft

The planes that went down Friday were not the first crewed American aircraft to be lost overall in Iran.

A military helicopter and airplane exploded in 1980 during an aborted mission to rescue several dozen American hostages at the US embassy in Tehran, according to the Air Force Historical Support Division.

After a series of setbacks, including severe dust storms and mechanical failures, the mission was called off. As the aircraft took off, the rotor blades of one of the RH-53 helicopters collided with an EC-130 aircraft full of fuel and both exploded, killing eight.

More US helicopters have been shot down in recent decades, including a MH-47 Army Chinook helicopter that was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan in 2005, killing 16. Helicopters are more dangerous because “the lower and the slower, the more susceptible you are,” Cantwell said.

That’s why those who went out on this week's rescue missions, likely in helicopters, he said, did “such a brave and honorable act.”

Features

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
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.