Episode 1: Hafez al-Assad Cautiously Receives 1st Letter from Saddam, Tests him Before Replying

Asharq Al-Awsat Publishes Secret Letters between the Syrian, Iraqi Presidents in the mid-1990s

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (C) is pictured at the opening session of an emergency Arab summit in Amman, Nov. 8, 1987. (Reuters)
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (C) is pictured at the opening session of an emergency Arab summit in Amman, Nov. 8, 1987. (Reuters)
TT

Episode 1: Hafez al-Assad Cautiously Receives 1st Letter from Saddam, Tests him Before Replying

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (C) is pictured at the opening session of an emergency Arab summit in Amman, Nov. 8, 1987. (Reuters)
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (C) is pictured at the opening session of an emergency Arab summit in Amman, Nov. 8, 1987. (Reuters)

In the mid-1990s, then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein initiated two secret communication channels with his Syrian counterpart, Hafez al-Assad. But the latter had “doubts” about Saddam’s intentions, based on past experiences and his role in thwarting the implementation of the “Joint National Action Charter” between Syria and Iraq in 1979.

Thus, he subjected Saddam to several tests to prepare the ground with the Arab countries and the Iraqi opposition, before making public steps to end the hostility between the Baathist regime in Baghdad and Damascus, by exchanging secret messages, which Asharq Al-Awsat is revealing for the first time.

Those letters are part of the many documents that late Syrian Vice President Abdel Halim Khaddam carried from his office to Paris, when he left Syria in 2005 and announced his defection from the regime at the end of that year. Asharq Al-Awsat contacted the Iraqi envoy, Ambassador Anwar Sabri Abdul Razzaq Al-Qaisi, who confirmed the authenticity of the documents.

In his first letters in August 1995, Saddam was rushing to reopen the two embassies that were closed in 1982, hold high-profile and public political meetings and open the borders. But Assad decided to hold Arab consultations before responding concretely to the Iraqi president’s proposals, in order to ensure “the achievement of the interests of the Arab nation and the two brotherly countries,” according to Khaddam.

In August 1995, Iraqi ambassador, Rafeh al-Tikriti, requested a meeting with Syrian Ambassador Abdulaziz al-Masri, whom he met on the same day and informed that he had received a personal message from his leader, Saddam, to be conveyed to Assad.

The letter read: “I affirm that the step we are taking towards Syria with the aim of building trust and rapprochement between the two countries is very serious, and that any past sensitivity shall not be repeated. The experiences of the past have their own circumstances. We must forget them and start again with open hearts during this dangerous stage.”

In late August 1995, Anwar Sabri Abdul Razzaq Al-Qaisi, the Iraqi ambassador to Qatar, contacted the Director General of the Arab Organization for Agricultural Development, Yahya Bakour, asking him to inform Damascus of his desire to pay a visit with another message from Saddam.

Khaddam recounted: “Assad discussed the two letters with me and Foreign Minister Farouk Al-Sharaa, and decided to agree to the secret presence of the Iraqi ambassador and limit his contacts with me. The concern was to ensure that contacts take place with the Iraqi ambassador in Qatar and not in Ankara, for many reasons, including information security, due to the possibility that the (Syrian and Iraqi) embassies in Ankara were infiltrated by several intelligence services…”

“On September 5, 1995, I received Anwar Sabri Abdul Razzaq in the evening. It was a cordial meeting during which we reviewed the relations between the two countries and the role of Baghdad in disrupting these relations, including the alleged plot in July 1979.”

Khaddam quoted the Iraqi ambassador as telling him: “Warm greetings from the Iraqi president to President Hafez and to you. Saddam stresses that Iraq’s desire to restore normal relations with Syria was not due to the American pressure and an intentional insistence on continuing the siege. Rather, this desire stems from considerations related to Arab national security and fateful interests.”

The ambassador added that Saddam believed that the US-Zionist scheme was evident, and that Jordan had become a part of it.

The scheme aims to harm not only Iraq, but also Syria and all Arab interests, and the goal is not to weaken and divide Iraq, but rather to invade the Arab region politically, militarily and economically, the Iraqi ambassador told Khaddam.

Saddam was also quoted as saying that Iraq seeks, with an open mind and sincere intentions, to hold dialogue with all Arab parties, without exception, in order to clear the air and conclude Arab reconciliation on definite objectives.

Khaddam said: “I presented the letter to President Hafez, and he discussed it with me at length in light of the dark past in the relations between the two countries. Nevertheless, he saw that the answer should be positive and friendly, in which he would ask for a meeting to test the seriousness of the Iraqi position.”

On Sept. 13, 1995, the Syrian vice president received the Iraqi ambassador and told him the following: “President Hafez affirms that the situation the Arab nation is going through and the threats facing Iraq and Syria require the two sides to take the initiative, without delay, to overcome obstacles and differences and stop the deterioration...”

“The main danger is the Jordanian role, which, as we said earlier, has become a major part of the US-Zionist strategy… Therefore, it is important to reinstate normal relations at this particular time between the two brotherly countries - Iraq and Syria - which are capable of building a unified and effective Arab stance to face challenges...”

According to Khaddam, the Iraqi ambassador received the letter with great satisfaction, and seemed very excited for his immediate return to Iraq.

On September 19, the Iraqi ambassador in Ankara met his Syrian counterpart, and informed him that Baghdad had received the Syrian leadership’s response with satisfaction, and that it was up to the Syrian president to determine the nature, level and extent of dialogue and cooperation.

Khaddam recounted: “For us, the situation was worrisome because of the American and Jordanian action on the one hand, and the past experiences with the Iraqi leadership and the bitterness and pain we experienced… Moreover, the rapid rapprochement, without any Arab preparation, will lead to confusion in our Arab relations and tension with the nationalist movement within the Iraqi opposition…”

On Feb. 2, 1996, he received Anwar Sabri, who conveyed a message from Saddam, saying: “The continuation of the siege on Iraq, under the pretext of the country’s non-compliance with international resolutions, is posing more than a challenge… The situation that the Arab nation is currently going through does not constitute a threat to the Arab national security only, but rather to the positions and future of the Arab identity, through the proposals of the Middle Eastern concept, which has become adopted and worked for by more than one Arab country.”

The ambassador added: “President Saddam stresses that what is required of Iraq and Syria, the two pillars of the Arab nation at this stage, is to move quickly and before it is too late, to stop the state of Arab deterioration, through the return of fraternal relations, no matter how deep the differences are… The Arab world is threatened by disintegration, especially if we monitor the recent American statements, which found support from an Arab party that has become part of the American-Zionist scheme, i.e. Jordan. The latter has adopted the idea of establishing a military alliance led by America, in which Israel, Jordan and Turkey assume a role, under the pretext of protecting peace gains…”

According to the minutes of the meeting, the ambassador said: “Despite the positive points achieved in the recent Iraqi-Syrian meetings, President Saddam believes that they are not up to the level of challenges we are facing at this stage. These challengers are represented by the suspicious Jordanian role and the nature of the alliance with the Zionist entity in redrawing the map of alliances in the region.”

Therefore, Saddam, according to the message conveyed by the Iraqi ambassador in Doha, “suggests the need to open the oil pipeline that passes through Syria, and to make technical steps to turn this pipeline into one of the five outlets that Iraq will rely on to export oil during the implementation of the United Nations proposal, or after the lifting of the blockade, as well as for the Syrian ports to be the commercial port of Iraq.”

The Iraqi ambassador continued: “President Saddam urgently suggests the following: Restoring diplomatic relations between the two brotherly countries; initiating political contacts at the highest levels, to determine priorities for the building of relations; launching security talks between the two countries at the level of the chiefs of the security; and opening the borders according to procedures agreed upon by both sides.”

Khaddam said that he conveyed the message to Hafez al-Assad, who was confident that the Iraqi leadership’s proposal was of great benefit to Syria, but at the same time he feared an Iraqi retreat.

He recalled: “I agreed with President Assad to prepare a draft response that would keep the path of dialogue open in order to explore the possibility of reaching a serious agreement on the one hand, and to create a suitable atmosphere, especially with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, which were the most affected by the invasion of Kuwait and the most sensitive among the Gulf states to this issue, on the other.”

“On Feb. 4, 1996, I submitted the draft letter to the president, who approved it, then summoned the Iraqi ambassador to inform him that Mr. President presents his greetings to his brother President Saddam, expresses his satisfaction with his initiative, and shares his concern about the situation in the region and the conspiracy aimed at dismantling the Arabs and abolishing the Arab identity (...) After King Hussein announced his project, we reached a conclusion that it was in the interest of the Arab nation to make contacts with a number of Arab countries (…) and then we received your initiative. Therefore, in the coming days, contacts will be made with these countries at a high level, with the aim of convincing them of our aforementioned directions.”

In the second episode: Saddam proposed a “secret summit” with Assad in 1996 to confront “Israel’s aggression” against Lebanon.



What Lies Ahead for Ukraine’s Contested Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant?

A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant before the arrival of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) expert mission in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)
A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant before the arrival of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) expert mission in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

What Lies Ahead for Ukraine’s Contested Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant?

A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant before the arrival of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) expert mission in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)
A Russian service member stands guard at a checkpoint near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant before the arrival of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) expert mission in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict outside Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Russian-controlled Ukraine, June 15, 2023. (Reuters)

The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Europe's largest, is one of the main sticking points in US President Donald Trump's peace plan to end the nearly four-year war between Russia and Ukraine. The issue is one of 20 points laid out by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in a framework peace proposal.

Here are some of the issues regarding the facility:

WHAT ROLE MAY THE US PLAY?

Russia took control of the plant in March 2022 and announced plans to connect it to its power grid. Almost all countries consider that it belongs to Ukraine but Russia says it is owned by Russia and a unit of Russia's state-owned Rosatom nuclear corporation runs the plant.

Zelenskiy stated at the end of December that the US side had proposed joint trilateral operation of the nuclear power plant with an American chief manager.

Zelenskiy said the Ukrainian proposal envisages Ukrainian-American use of the plant, with the US itself determining how to use 50% of the energy produced.

Russia has considered joint Russian-US use of the plant, according to the Kommersant newspaper.

WHAT IS ITS CURRENT STATUS?

The plant is located in Enerhodar on the banks ‌of the Dnipro River and ‌the Kakhovka Reservoir, 550 km (342 miles) southeast of the capital Kyiv.

The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has ‌six ⁠Soviet-designed reactors. They were ‌all built in the 1980s, although the sixth only came online in the mid-1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It has a total capacity of 5.7 gigawatts, according to an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) database.

Four of the six reactors no longer use Russian nuclear fuel, having switched to fuel produced by then-US nuclear equipment supplier Westinghouse.

After Russia took control of the station, it shut down five of its six reactors and the last reactor ceased to produce electricity in September 2022. Rosatom said in 2025 that it was ready to return the US fuel to the United States.

According to the Russian management of the plant, all six reactors are in "cold shutdown."

Both Russia and Ukraine have accused each other of striking the nuclear plant and of severing power lines to the plant.

The plant's equipment is powered by ⁠electricity supplied from Ukraine. Over the past four years these supplies have been interrupted at least eleven times due to breaks in power lines, forcing the plant to switch to emergency diesel generators.

Emergency generators ‌on site can supply electricity to keep the reactors cool if external power lines are cut.

IAEA ‍Director General Rafael Grossi says that fighting a war around a nuclear ‍plant has put nuclear safety and security in constant jeopardy.

WHY DOES RUSSIA WANT ZAPORIZHZHIA PLANT?

Russia has been preparing to restart the station but ‍says that doing so will depend on the situation in the area. Rosatom chief Alexei Likhachev has not ruled out the supply of electricity produced there to parts of Ukraine.

Oleksandr Kharchenko, director of the Energy Research Center in Kyiv, said Moscow intended to use the plant to cover a significant energy deficit in Russia's south.

"That's why they are fighting so hard for this station," he said.

In December 2025, Russia's Federal Service for Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Supervision issued a license for the operation of reactor No. 1, a key step towards restarting the reactor.

Ukraine's energy ministry called the move illegal and irresponsible, risking a nuclear accident.

WHY DOES UKRAINE NEED THE PLANT?

Russia has been pummeling Ukraine's energy infrastructure for months and some areas have had blackouts during winter.

In recent ⁠months, Russia has sharply increased both the scale and intensity of its attacks on Ukraine's energy sector, plunging entire regions into darkness.

Analysts say Ukraine's generation capacity deficit is about 4 gigawatts, or the equivalent of four Zaporizhzhia reactors.

Kharchenko says it would take Ukraine five to seven years to build the generating capacity to compensate for the loss of the Zaporizhzhia plant.

Kharchenko said that if Kyiv regained control of the plant, it would take at least two to three years to understand what condition it was in and another three years to restore the equipment and return it to full operations.

Both Ukrainian state nuclear operator Energoatom and Kharchenko said that Ukraine did not know the real condition of the nuclear power plant today.

WHAT ABOUT COOLING FUEL AT THE PLANT?

In the long term, there is the unresolved problem of the lack of water resources to cool the reactors after the vast Kakhovka hydro-electric dam was blown up in 2023, destroying the reservoir that supplied water to the plant.

Besides the reactors, there are also spent fuel pools at each reactor site used to cool down used nuclear fuel. Without water supply to the pools, the water evaporates and the temperatures increase, risking fire.

An emission of hydrogen from a spent fuel pool caused an explosion in Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster in ‌2011.

Energoatom said the level of the Zaporizhzhia power plant cooling pond had dropped by more than 15%, or 3 meters, since the destruction of the dam, and continued to fall.

Ukrainian officials previously said the available water reserves may be sufficient to operate one or, at most, two nuclear reactors.


Egypt, Trump Reaffirm Strategic Alliance in 2025 amid Regional Turmoil

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi meets President Donald Trump ahead of a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. (Reuters)
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi meets President Donald Trump ahead of a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Egypt, Trump Reaffirm Strategic Alliance in 2025 amid Regional Turmoil

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi meets President Donald Trump ahead of a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. (Reuters)
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi meets President Donald Trump ahead of a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. (Reuters)

After months of speculation over the trajectory of Egyptian-US relations, fueled by persistent talk of strain and an impending rift, a high-level meeting between President Donald Trump and President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in Sharm el-Sheikh reaffirmed the resilience of the strategic alliance between Cairo and Washington, even as the region remains in turmoil.

The meeting followed a turbulent period marked by Trump’s adoption of a proposal to relocate Gaza’s population, an idea firmly rejected by Sisi and one that prompted warnings of a diplomatic crisis between the two longtime allies.

The subsequent signing of a Gaza peace agreement in Sharm el-Sheikh sent a clear signal that, despite sharp disagreements over policy, the foundations of the bilateral relationship remain intact.

Early in Trump’s second term, media reports said Sisi had scrapped plans to visit Washington. As the year draws to a close, speculation has said that the visit may happen. Trump has acknowledged Sisi as a friend and said he would be happy to meet him as well.

Trump’s election victory late last year raised Egyptian hopes of strengthening the strategic partnership. Sisi voiced that expectation in a congratulatory post on X, stating that he looked forward to working together with Trump to achieve peace, preserve regional peace and stability, and strengthen the strategic partnership.

Those hopes were tested when Trump floated a plan to “clean out Gaza” and relocate its residents to Egypt and Jordan. Cairo rejected the idea outright, mobilized international opposition, unveiled an alternative plan for Gaza’s reconstruction and hosted an emergency summit on the issue in March.

Limited public engagement

David Butter, a research fellow in the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House, noted that the striking feature of Egypt-US ties over the past year has been their low public profile.

Aside from Trump’s appearance in Sharm el-Sheikh, there was not much happening in the open, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Amr Hamzawy, an Egyptian political scientist and director of the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, described the first year of Trump’s second term as difficult for bilateral relations.

He said it began with talk of displacement and a “Middle East Riviera” in Gaza, but Egyptian diplomacy succeeded in shifting the trajectory.

Trump’s peace plan, he said, ultimately signaled rejection of displacement and spoke of security and political tracks for Gaza and a broader political process for the Palestinian issue, though details remain unclear.

Hamzawy added that the year opened from a tough starting point that followed what he called President Joe Biden’s hesitant stance on Gaza, when displacement was first discussed.

After nearly a year of Egyptian political and diplomatic effort, he said, displacement dropped from Washington’s agenda, even if it remains a risk that cannot be ignored.

Historically, Egypt has been a pivotal state for US national security, given its geography, demographic weight and diplomatic role, according to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service.

Gaza, the main test

The Gaza war shaped Egyptian-US relations during Trump’s first year back in office. Washington backed Egyptian-Qatari mediation to halt the war. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio thanked Cairo after a truce was reached between Israel and Hamas in January.

When hostilities resumed, however, Egypt faced complex diplomatic choices with both Washington and Israel. It rejected Trump’s call to resettle Gaza’s population, while its reconstruction plan failed to gain US or Israeli acceptance.

Cairo also drew criticism from Trump for declining to join US strikes against Yemen’s Houthis, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) revealed.

Butter noted that ties with the Trump administration were strained over Gaza after Sisi canceled a Washington visit early in the year, following Trump’s “Middle East Riviera” remarks, which left contacts at a minimum.

He said Trump’s Sharm el-Sheikh visit, the signing of the Gaza agreement and the celebration of his plan’s success offered a chance to reset relations. Egypt, he added, has become indispensable to Trump’s administration in Gaza.

Hamzawy said Gaza dominated the first year of Trump’s term, giving Egypt a chance to restore its standing with US and European decision-makers as a key mediator. Cairo put its vision on the table, he said, shifting US thinking toward parallel security and political tracks and from talk of disarmament to limiting weapons.

Throughout the year, Egypt publicly counted on Trump to end the Gaza war. In July, Sisi urged him in a televised address to press for a halt, saying Trump was capable of doing so.

Analysts Daniel Byman and Jon Alterman wrote in Foreign Policy that Egypt is indispensable to international responses to the Gaza war, even if it remains a difficult partner for Washington and Israel. The conflict, they said, restored diplomatic focus on Egypt and strengthened its leverage.

Sara Kira, director of the European North African Center for Research, said relations in Trump’s second term differ from his first. The earlier term saw broad alignment and personal warmth from Trump, particularly on counterterrorism, she said. The second term has been marked by divergence.

That surfaced in April when Trump called for free passage for US commercial and military vessels through the Suez Canal in exchange for US efforts to protect the waterway.

Positive signals despite differences

Despite disagreements over Gaza, there were positive signs elsewhere. Early in the year, the US State Department froze new funding for most aid programs worldwide, exempting humanitarian food programs and military aid to Israel and Egypt.

Washington did not include Egypt on a travel ban list issued in June. Trump said Egypt was a country with which the United States dealt closely and that things there were under control. Egypt was also spared higher US tariffs. Cairo has repeatedly stressed the depth and resilience of the strategic relationship.

Kira said Egypt exerted maximum pressure to achieve peace and stop the Gaza war, eventually convincing Washington of its approach and reaching a peace agreement in Sharm el-Sheikh. She said Egypt acted pragmatically and astutely, reading Trump’s personality and US interests.

As talks on the second phase of the Gaza agreement stall, Egypt continues to rely on the Trump administration to advance its plan. Cairo remains in contact with Washington and is working with it to prepare a donor conference for Gaza’s reconstruction, which has yet to receive sufficient momentum from the Trump administration.

The dialogue extends beyond Gaza to Libya, Sudan, Lebanon and Iran, as well as water security, led by Ethiopia’s Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), which Egypt fears could affect its Nile water share.

GERD

In mid-June, Trump stirred controversy in Egypt when he wrote on Truth Social that the United States had “stupidly” funded the dam Ethiopia built on the Blue Nile, triggering a severe diplomatic crisis with Egypt.

In August, the White House released a list of Trump’s foreign policy achievements, which included a purported agreement between Egypt and Ethiopia over the dam.

Trump has repeatedly spoken of his administration’s efforts to resolve the dispute, but those claims have yet to translate into concrete action.

Hamzawy said there is an opportunity for Washington to mediate and revive an agreement reached near the end of Trump’s first term.

Charles Dunne of the Arab Center Washington DC wrote recently that Trump’s stance may please Cairo but could also produce adverse outcomes if Washington does not assume a mediation role.

The United States hosted talks with the World Bank in 2020 during Trump’s first term, but they failed after Ethiopia refused to sign the draft agreement.

Military ties endure

Military cooperation continued largely as usual. Since 1946, the United States has provided Egypt with about $90 billion in aid, with a sharp increase after 1979, which successive administrations have framed as an investment in regional stability, according to the CRS.

For more than a decade, Congress has imposed human rights conditions on part of Egypt’s aid.

Between fiscal years 2020 and 2023, the Biden administration and Congress withheld approximately $750 million in military funding. Trump’s technical annex to the proposed fiscal 2026 budget seeks $1.3 billion in military assistance for Egypt without conditions, the CRS said.

Hamzawy said the administration is far from imposing conditionality, noting that relations rest on mutual interests between a major power and a positively influential middle power.

Since the Gaza war, the Biden and Trump administrations have accelerated US arms sales to Egypt. The State Department notified Congress of military sales totaling $7.3 billion. In July, the Pentagon announced that the State Department had approved the sale of an advanced air defense missile system to Egypt, valued at approximately $4.67 billion. Egypt also hosted the Bright Star military exercises in September.

Kira said ties with Washington are driven by interests and that Cairo has positioned itself as a core regional player.

Hamzawy said Egypt occupies a central place in US Middle East thinking, as Washington needs a spectrum of allies, with Egypt at the heart of that network.


Why Metal Prices are Soaring to Record Highs

A salesman displays gold chains at an Indian jewelry store in September. Idrees MOHAMMED / AFP
A salesman displays gold chains at an Indian jewelry store in September. Idrees MOHAMMED / AFP
TT

Why Metal Prices are Soaring to Record Highs

A salesman displays gold chains at an Indian jewelry store in September. Idrees MOHAMMED / AFP
A salesman displays gold chains at an Indian jewelry store in September. Idrees MOHAMMED / AFP

Precious and industrial metals are surging to record highs as the year ends, driven by economic and geopolitical uncertainty, robust industrial demand and, in some cases, tight supply.

Below AFP examines the reasons for the surge in demand.

- Safe havens -

Gold and silver are traditionally seen as safe-haven assets, and demand has soared amid mounting geopolitical tensions, from US President Donald Trump's tariffs onslaught to wars in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as recent pressure by Washington on Caracas.

Investors are also uneasy about rising public debt in major economies and the risk of a bubble in the artificial intelligence sector.

These uncertainties are driving up gold and silver, with other metals now starting to see the impact as investors seek to diversify their portfolios, explained John Plassard, an analyst at Cite Gestion Private Bank.

"Metal is once again becoming insurance rather than just a speculative asset," he told AFP.

- A weak dollar -

Traditional safe havens like the dollar and US Treasuries have become less attractive this year.

Uncertainty around Trump's presidency and the prospect of further Federal Reserve interest rate cuts, have weakened the dollar, reducing its appeal to investors.

As a result, many investors are turning to gold and silver.

Gold has climbed more than 70 percent this year and passed $4,500 an ounce for the first time on Wednesday, while silver reached a record high of $72 an ounce, with prices up about 2.5 times since January.

A weak dollar is also boosting industrial metals, since commodities priced in dollars become cheaper for buyers when the currency falls.

- Fresh demand -

Industrial demand has surged in recent months, driven by the rise of artificial intelligence and the energy transition.

Copper, used for solar panels, wind turbines, electric vehicle batteries and data centers, has seen strong gains as a result.

Prices hit a record on Wednesday, topping $12,000 a ton, helped further by China, the world's largest copper consumer, announcing new measures to boost demand.

Aluminium, a cheaper alternative to copper, and silver are also benefiting from the AI boom and the shift to renewable energy.

Platinum and palladium, used in car catalytic converters, have also risen, reaching a record high and a three-year high respectively, after the European Union decided to allow sales of new internal combustion vehicles beyond 2035.

- Tight supply -

Copper prices have been lifted this year by fears of US tariffs, prompting companies to stockpile ahead of their introduction, with duties imposed on semi-finished products and potentially extending to refined copper.

Supply risks from disruptions at mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Chile and Indonesia have added to the price surge.

Physical markets for silver, platinum, and aluminium are also tight.

According to Ole Hansen, an analyst at Saxo Bank, thin holiday trading, which increases volatility, and investor fear of missing out have further amplified the rise at the end of the year.