عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

PFLP-GC Founder Ahmed Jibril Laid to Rest in Syria

Ahmed Jibril attends the opening of the National Palestinian Meeting in Damascus, Syria January 23, 2008. (Getty Images)
Ahmed Jibril attends the opening of the National Palestinian Meeting in Damascus, Syria January 23, 2008. (Getty Images)
TT
TT

PFLP-GC Founder Ahmed Jibril Laid to Rest in Syria

Ahmed Jibril attends the opening of the National Palestinian Meeting in Damascus, Syria January 23, 2008. (Getty Images)
Ahmed Jibril attends the opening of the National Palestinian Meeting in Damascus, Syria January 23, 2008. (Getty Images)

Hundreds of people attended on Friday the funeral of Ahmed Jibril, the leader of a breakaway Palestinian faction whose group carried out attacks in the 1970s and 1980s against Israeli targets was laid to rest in the Syrian capital of Damascus.

Special funeral prayers were held for Jibril whose coffin was wrapped with a Palestinian flag at Damascus’ Al-Othman Mosque and was later taken for burial in the cemetery of the Palestinian refugee camp of Yarmouk, Syria’s largest.

Jibril was buried next to his son, Jihad, who was killed in an explosion in 2002 in Beirut, for which the group blamed Israel. Jihad Jibril was head of the PFLP-GC military wing at the time.

The funeral was attended by hundreds of Palestinian and Syrian supporters as well as officials of Jibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command and other Damascus-based Palestinian factions.

Jibril, 83, died on Wednesday in a Damascus hospital after being sick for months.

The son of a Palestinian father and a Syrian mother, Jibril was born in Jaffa in 1938, in what was then British-ruled Palestine. His family later moved to Syria, where he became an officer in the Syrian army and acquired Syrian nationality.

“Commander Jibril was one of the founders of the contemporary Palestinian revolution and one of the leaders who made the contemporary Palestinian history,” said Samir Rifai, the Palestinian Authority’s ambassador to Damascus.

Jibril founded the PFLP in the late 1950s but broke away over ideological disputes. In 1968, he founded the pro-Syrian breakaway PFLP-GC, which briefly joined the Palestine Liberation Organization, but left the umbrella group in 1974, amid sharp disagreements with PLO leader Yasser Arafat.

Jibril was a vehement opponent of peace talks with Israel. His group became known for some of the more headline-grabbing attacks against Israel, including the hijacking an El Al jetliner in 1968 and machine gunning another at Zurich airport in 1969. In 1970, it planted a time-bomb on a Swissair jet that blew up on a flight from Zurich to Tel Aviv, killing all 47 on aboard.

The Damascus-based group also carried out attacks against Israel from its bases in Lebanon.

The group is considered a terrorist organization by the United States and other Western countries.

During Syria’s 10-year conflict, Jibril’s group supported Syrian government forces.

Most Viewed

 
 
Arab World

Lebanese Army Chief Faces Labeling Dispute During Washington Visit

Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)
Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)
TT
TT

Lebanese Army Chief Faces Labeling Dispute During Washington Visit

Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)
Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal during his visit to Washington (Lebanese Army Command)

What was meant to be a routine visit by Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal to Washington to discuss military support and aid coordination turned into a political flashpoint, after a brief meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham ignited a dispute over whether the army chief would describe Hezbollah as a “terrorist organization.”

The controversy was sparked by a brief meeting with hardline Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who publicly said he cut the meeting short after Haykal declined to use the designation in what he called the “context of Lebanon.”

What happened in the Graham meeting

In a post on X, Graham said: “I just had a very brief meeting with the Lebanese Chief of Defense General Rodolphe Haykal. I asked him point blank if he believes Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. He said, “No, not in the context of Lebanon.” With that, I ended the meeting.”

“They are clearly a terrorist organization. Hezbollah has American blood on its hands. Just ask the US Marines,” he added.

“They have been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by both Republican and Democrat administrations since 1997 – for good reason.”

“As long as this attitude exists from the Lebanese Armed Forces, I don’t think we have a reliable partner in them.”

“I am tired of the double speak in the Middle East. Too much is at stake,” Graham concluded.

The reaction went beyond expressions of displeasure. Some US coverage suggested Graham effectively raised questions about the “usefulness” of continuing support for the Lebanese army if such a gap persists between the US position and Lebanon’s official language.

Haykal’s answer raises its cost in Washington

Inside Lebanon, the issue is not limited to the stance on Hezbollah. Still, it extends to the army’s role as a unifying institution in a country whose political balance rests on sectarian arrangements and deep sensitivities.

Adopting an external designation, even a US one, in official language by the head of the military could be interpreted domestically as a move that risks triggering political and sectarian division or drawing the army into confrontation with a component that has organized political and popular representation.

That explains why Lebanese voices, including some critics of Hezbollah, defended the logic that “the state does not adopt this classification.” Therefore, the army commander cannot formally do so.

In other words, Haykal sought to avoid two conflicting languages: Washington’s legal and political framing of Hezbollah, and the Lebanese state’s language, which walks a fine line between the demand for exclusive state control over arms and the avoidance of reproducing internal fractures.

US State Department position

Amid the controversy surrounding the Graham meeting, an official US position emerged on Tuesday through the US Embassy in Beirut, welcoming the visit and focusing on the core US message.

The statement said that “the Lebanese Armed Forces’ ongoing work to disarm non-state actors and reinforce national sovereignty as Lebanon’s security guarantor is more important than ever.”

The wording was notable because it separated two levels: continued US reliance on the army as a state institution, and, in practice, linking that reliance to the issue of disarming non-state actors.

The phrase avoids direct naming but, in the Lebanese context, is widely understood to refer primarily to Hezbollah.

The visit’s broader track

Despite the political awkwardness, Haykal’s visit was not reduced to a single meeting. He held senior-level military talks, including meetings with US Central Command chief Admiral Brad Cooper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine.

According to a statement from a Joint Chiefs spokesperson, the meeting “reaffirmed the importance of enduring US defense relationships in the Middle East.”

The visit coincided with broader discussions in Washington on support for the Lebanese army and plans to extend state authority, as international reports spoke of Lebanon entering new phases of a plan to dismantle illegal weapons structures in the south and north.

The army commander’s visit had initially been delayed for reasons that add another layer to understanding Washington’s sensitivity to the military’s language.

In November 2025, sources quoted the US State Department as saying Washington canceled scheduled meetings with the Lebanese army commander after objecting to an army statement on border tensions with Israel, prompting the visit to be postponed to avoid a pre-emptive political failure.

Arab World

Egypt Steps Up Efforts to Support Gaza Administration Committee After Entry Stalled

Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)
Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)
TT
TT

Egypt Steps Up Efforts to Support Gaza Administration Committee After Entry Stalled

Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)
Displaced Palestinians inspect the damage after Israeli aircraft targeted a five floor house last night, in Khan Younis southern Gaza Strip on February 6, 2026. (AFP)

Egypt is intensifying efforts to back the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, hoping it can begin operating inside the enclave to implement commitments under the second phase of the ceasefire agreement, which started about two weeks ago but has yet to take shape on the ground.

Experts told Asharq Al-Awsat that those Egyptian efforts, through phone calls and meetings with international partners, are focused on two main objectives: pushing for the deployment of police forces and an international stabilization force on the one hand, and securing a gradual Israeli withdrawal on the other, increasing pressure on Israel to move the agreement forward.

A member of the administration committee said in a brief phone statement to Asharq Al-Awsat, speaking on condition of anonymity, that there is still no specific date for entering the enclave.

In the Slovenian capital, Ljubljana, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty stressed Cairo’s full support for the work of the committee headed by Dr. Ali Shaath.

He made the remarks during a dialogue session of the Arab-Islamic committee on Gaza with Slovenian Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon.

The foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Bahrain attended the meeting. Abdelatty stressed the importance of the committee’s role in managing the daily affairs of Gaza’s residents and meeting their basic needs during the transitional phase.

He underscored the need to ensure the continued flow of humanitarian and relief aid into the enclave, as well as the formation and deployment of an international stabilization force to monitor the ceasefire.

Abdelatty reiterated his stance during a phone call on Friday with British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper.

The Gaza committee, established under the ceasefire agreement, operates under the supervision of the Board of Peace, chaired by US President Donald Trump. The committee has been holding meetings in Cairo since it was announced last month and has yet to enter Gaza.

Ahmed Fouad Anwar, a member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs and an academic specializing in Israeli affairs, said Egypt is making significant efforts to facilitate the committee’s mission as quickly as possible and enable it to operate.

He said this would limit Israeli obstacles, increase pressure on Israel, and place it under the obligations set out in the plan, particularly withdrawal from Gaza. This would counter intense pressure from Tel Aviv to accelerate the disarmament of Hamas without implementing its Gaza agreement commitments.

Palestinian political analyst Abdel Mahdi Motawea said Israel objected not only to the committee’s work but even to its emblem.

He noted, however, that Israel is not the only party hindering the committee. Hamas and other factions want to impose conditions on the committee’s work.

He warned of serious concerns that the committee could be marginalized, stressing that Egypt’s extensive efforts to support it are crucial at this critical stage of the Gaza agreement.

Hamas announced days ago that it was ready to hand over management of the enclave to the committee, while Israel continues to obstruct it.

Anwar expects the committee to begin operating in the enclave soon if Egypt’s efforts and those of international partners succeed and Washington responds positively.

He warned that the committee's failure would threaten the ceasefire agreement.

Arab World

Gaza Deal Mediators Have Few Options on Hamas Disarmament

Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)
Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)
TT
TT

Gaza Deal Mediators Have Few Options on Hamas Disarmament

Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)
Hamas fighters in Gaza City. (AFP)

Israel’s demand for the disarmament of Hamas has become the top priority since the second phase of the Gaza agreement began 10 days ago.

It exposed deep uncertainty over how such a step could be enforced amid firm resistance from the movement, which says it will not relinquish its weapons unless progress is made toward establishing a Palestinian state.

Analysts speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat said the issue has left mediators with minimal options, ranging from complete disarmament to freezing weapons, either by persuading Hamas or applying pressure.

The demand has become a political pressure tool that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others in Israel are likely to use increasingly in the run-up to elections, they added.

Israeli opposition figure Benny Gantz, who is preparing for elections, called on Thursday in a post on X for the “disarmament of Hamas.”

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that Israel will dismantle Hamas if it does not agree to lay down its arms.

Netanyahu, following a meeting on Tuesday with US envoy Steve Witkoff, said he was insisting on the non-negotiable demand to disarm Hamas before any step toward rebuilding Gaza.

Military and strategic analyst Brig. Gen. Samir Ragheb said mediators have few options other than reaching understandings or exerting pressure, noting that the demand to disarm Hamas has been echoed by Israel, Washington, the EU, and donors, and has become an obstacle to ending the war and launching reconstruction.

He said Netanyahu and others would use the issue electorally and as a pretext to collapse the agreement at any time, adding that the second phase is filled with “landmines,” particularly those related to the Israeli withdrawal, which Netanyahu does not want to address.

Strategic and military expert Maj. Gen. Samir Farag said available options are now limited, suggesting that freezing weapons may be more likely than complete disarmament, mainly since Hamas’ arsenal does not consist of missiles or drones and could be handed over.

He said there is US and Israeli insistence on implementing the weapons clause, but that it must coincide with an Israeli withdrawal and guarantees to prevent a new war.

By contrast, sources in Hamas told Reuters on Wednesday that the group had agreed to discuss disarmament with other Palestinian factions, but that neither Washington nor regional mediators had presented it with any detailed or concrete proposal on disarmament.

Israel’s Channel 13 reported in late January that the US was preparing a document granting Hamas several weeks to hand over its weapons to multinational forces within a set timeframe. Failure to comply would give Israel the green light to “act as it sees fit,” the channel said.

Farag stressed that Hamas’ room for maneuver is extremely limited and that it must quickly reach understandings with mediators, particularly Egypt, Qatar, and Türkiye, to resolve what he described as the most significant obstacle currently being created by Israel.

Ragheb said Hamas has no option but to implement US President Donald Trump’s Gaza plan and the disarmament clause, warning against delaying or circumventing it, as “every day lost poses a threat to the ceasefire agreement.”

He added that police forces in the enclave would be deployed within days or weeks, along with a possible stabilization force, leaving little space for further maneuvering.