عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

Memoirs of Late Prime Minister Saeb Salam (Part 2): The Americans Secured Arafat’s Protection as He Left Beirut

Saeb Salam with Yasser Arafat.
Saeb Salam with Yasser Arafat.
TT
20
TT

Memoirs of Late Prime Minister Saeb Salam (Part 2): The Americans Secured Arafat’s Protection as He Left Beirut

Saeb Salam with Yasser Arafat.
Saeb Salam with Yasser Arafat.

The second episode of the memoirs of late Lebanese Prime Minister Saeb Salam talks about the Israeli invasion in the summer of 1982, where Salam says that under the bombardment and raids, he felt as if “the gates of hell were wide open.”

Salam reviewed the contacts he made with the late Palestinian President Yasser Arafat and Palestinian resistance officials, who used to live in Beirut, most notably: Abu Iyad, Abu Jihad, and Hani al-Hassan, as well as the Lebanese figures who played a role at that stage, especially President Elias Sarkis and Bashir Gemayel, who was leading the Lebanese Forces, then elected President of the Republic and assassinated before taking office.

The memoirs are issued in three parts by Hachette Antoine publishing house, and will be available in Lebanon starting June 28 and on the Antoine Online website.

The Israeli bombing of Beirut

Salam recounted that on the night of June 22, 1982, as Israel was intensely bombarding the capital, he decided to meet with the “Palestinian resistance.”

The next day, “Abu Ammar (Yasser Arafat), who had come to my house when the Islamic Gathering was in session, spoke to me in an irrational way. He said: “I am encircled, I will strike in all directions… In the north, the south, the elderly, the children, the women, Jounieh, the whole country, everyone, the Israelis. ... We will not die like this, we will not die.”

Salam continued: “I tried so hard to talk to him, to calm him down; but he wouldn’t listen. Then I tried again, saying: “[Then-US Envoy to Lebanon] Ambassador Philippe Habib is seriously seeking to stop the Israeli advancement.” He replied: “They will take the airport, they will transport the tanks by helicopter, they will crawl on us and we will not die, we will fight!””

Salam said that several days passed while he repeated, even to foreign newspapers and correspondents who flocked to Beirut, that the Palestinians fought gloriously and that they had the right to die only as fighters…

The late premier said that he insisted with Habib that the Lebanese army should go to Beirut, after agreeing with the Palestinians.

“Without an agreement with the Palestinians, the army cannot go down and ensure that there will not be a clash with the militants, especially the Palestinians. Abu Ammar refused this, and demanded that the Israeli army withdraw beyond 7 kilometers” from Beirut, he explained.

Salam recounted that one evening, he received a phone call from Habib, who said that he had obtained US confirmation that [then-Israeli Defense Minister Ariel] Sharon had agreed not to enter the Beirut airport, provided that the Palestinians stop their attacks.

“I was making these endeavors out of my concern for the Palestinian cause… I have taken from Habib guarantees that they will not allow attacking the Palestinians if the Lebanese army was in Beirut, nor would accept their humiliation or slaughter as he said, and I, in turn, conveyed these assurances as requested by America,” he wrote.

The threats of Yasser Arafat

Salam recounted in his memoirs that Yasser Arafat insisted on his stance, after having “emptied all his crazy and meaningless words… that he would destroy and strike east, south and north...”

He said that thousands of Beirut residents were forced to leave the city towards the north and the east, while others remained “at the mercy of Sharon’s bombs.”

“The month of Ramadan began while we were still under this situation… I was constantly imploring the world, news agencies and newspapers... I strived every hour with the ministers, with the ambassadors, with the ‘Islamic Gathering’… shouted that the Israelis wanted to eliminate the ‘Palestinian resistance’ once and for all…”

Salam continued: “I had to call the President of the Republic twice, and I spoke to him in a harsh tone, saying: “You are sitting in Baabda, but your capital is at the mercy of the Israelis every hour, and they may destroy it… I also spoke to the Grand Mufti and asked him to broadcast a statement on television, to the peoples of the world and the heads of friendly and brotherly countries...”

Talks with Bashir Gemayel

The late prime minister recounted in his memoirs: “I received the foreign correspondents at the Commodore Hotel… Germans, Italians, English, Americans and French, from BBC, AP, UP, New York Times, Le Monde and Der Spiegel... I was explaining to them the situation and developments... I believed that I was fulfilling my patriotic and national duty… as the Palestinian resistance could not be crushed under the feet of the Israeli invader.”

He stressed that he was repeating this stance “to our Maronite brothers, and to Bashir Gemayel in particular.”

Salam noted that while he maintained a good relationship with Bashir Gemayel, the latter’s attitude changed when the Israelis entered Lebanon.

Addressing Gemayel, Salam said: “Bashir, you know that my heart is open to you and my hands are outstretched… For the sake of Lebanon, we must cooperate… But today, I feel that you are shortsighted. If the Israelis achieve their goal and humiliate the resistance, you will be inflicted with great harm. And if they gain all of that and destroy Beirut and the Muslims… you will be at the mercy of the Israelis, and you will be the biggest losers.”

As for Arafat, Salam said that he would always come to him a few minutes after the Iftar, to sit for hours, arguing with him, without changing his stance.

The late premier pointed to an article by Michel Abou Jaoudeh, published in An-Nahar newspaper, which described Saeb Salam as the “president of the Republic of Beirut.”

The article emphasized that any solution to the Beirut issue should begin with solving the Lebanese problem, then the whole Middle East file.

“But if Beirut is destroyed or besieged, all of Lebanon will be gone, and there will be no peace in the region,” the article read, as translated from Arabic.

“Abou Jaoudeh’s view converged with mine,” Salam wrote.

He added: “In this context, I maintained continuous contacts with Habib and the resistance, especially after the leaders of the resistance wrote and signed a report that they were going to leave Beirut.”

The day the Palestinians left

“I remember that it was Monday, August 30, 1982, when Abu Ammar visited the Prime Minister, and from there went to the port…

“We entered the ship, where a meeting took place, attended by President Al-Wazzan, representing His Excellency the President of the Republic, and Rene Moawad. Abu Ammar gave a moving speech, then presented a message to Al-Wazzan, and a medal to Beirut in the name of the General Commander of the Organization... He called it, ‘the Beirut Resilience Medal.’

“I was quite satisfied with this farewell; because in fact, it allowed Abu Ammar and the Palestinian resistance, to leave with dignity. What caught everyone’s attention was that the Americans, although they refused to recognize the Palestinian organization, were guarding the roads from the commercial center to the port, on both sides, just as they guarded Abu Ammar with their battleships in the sea. So, this is an indirect acknowledgment, as the Greek ship was under the protection of the American and French fleet,” Salam wrote in his memoirs.

Most Viewed

 
Arab World

Damascus Gov’t on Alert to Prevent ISIS Resurgence

Emergency services work at the scene of a suicide bombing at Mar Elias Church on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria, 22 June 2025. EPA/MOHAMMED AL RIFAI
Emergency services work at the scene of a suicide bombing at Mar Elias Church on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria, 22 June 2025. EPA/MOHAMMED AL RIFAI
TT
20
TT

Damascus Gov’t on Alert to Prevent ISIS Resurgence

Emergency services work at the scene of a suicide bombing at Mar Elias Church on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria, 22 June 2025. EPA/MOHAMMED AL RIFAI
Emergency services work at the scene of a suicide bombing at Mar Elias Church on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria, 22 June 2025. EPA/MOHAMMED AL RIFAI

A suicide bombing that targeted the Mar Elias church in the Dweila district of Damascus has reignited debate over ISIS’s activity inside Syria, amid growing concerns that extremist groups are intensifying efforts to destabilize the government of President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Although a lesser-known faction, Saraya Ansar al-Sunna, claimed responsibility for the attack, multiple sources say various radical groups, despite differing ideologies, are now pursuing parallel strategies to undermine the Syrian state.

A senior commander in the New Syrian Army warned of a looming ISIS plan to stage a large-scale, surprise assault on Damascus. They said the group was seeking to infiltrate cities by moving militants from the vast Syrian desert into urban areas, while other factions were launching attacks driven by resentment and anger towards the authorities.

“ISIS’s current strategy is based on relocating from the desert into cities, embedding itself within civilian populations, and forming new sleeper cells,” the commander, who spoke under the condition of anonymity, told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“We have the capabilities to confront the threat and dismantle their networks. We know them better than anyone else,” they added.

According to the commander, the new Syrian army has disclosed sensitive intelligence on ISIS’s renewed push to infiltrate urban centers, warning that the extremist group is adapting its tactics as it regroups across Syria.

The commander also said the army uncovered key details of ISIS’s plans after dismantling a sleeper cell in Homs several months ago.

The militants had reportedly travelled from the Syrian desert, or al-Badiya, highlighting what the commander described as “a clear strategy” by ISIS to move from remote regions into population centers.

“The cell was part of a broader effort to penetrate cities from the desert,” the commander said, adding that the group appeared to be shifting its operational base closer to Damascus and other strategic urban areas.

The revelations come in the wake of the suicide bombing that struck the Mar Elias church.

One day after the June 22 attack, Syria’s Interior Ministry announced it had carried out a “precision operation” in coordination with the General Intelligence Directorate to track and dismantle ISIS hideouts in and around Damascus, including those believed to be directly linked to the church bombing.

ISIS was preparing to launch a wide-scale, coordinated assault on several Syrian cities, starting from Homs, revealed the commander, adding that the terror group’s strategy involved seizing control of multiple neighborhoods in key urban centers simultaneously, in a surprise offensive designed to destabilize the country.

“Dismantling the sleeper cells was crucial,” the commander told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“We reinforced our military presence in Homs and its surrounding areas. It was a major preemptive blow that disrupted ISIS’s plans and helped bolster stability in Syria.”

The group's tactical goals also included targeting religious sites belonging to Alawites, Murshidis, and Christians in an attempt to embarrass the Syrian government and project a sense of insecurity across the country.

“It’s a familiar ISIS tactic used in both Syria and Iraq to inflame sectarian tensions, undermine state authority, and recruit new followers through chaos,” the commander added.

The June 22 bombing of the Orthodox Saint Mar Elias church in Damascus, which killed and injured many civilians, appears to fit this pattern. Syria’s Interior Ministry quickly blamed ISIS for the attack and later announced the arrest of several individuals it said were affiliated with the group.

While local media have reported that ISIS is stepping up efforts to rebuild its networks after a period of dormancy, independent verification of these claims remains limited.

However, intelligence gathered by the Syrian army suggests that ISIS is prioritizing urban operations and symbolic attacks on religious sites, a strategy consistent with the government’s swift attribution of the church bombing to the group.

The bombing of the Mar Elias church, the first attack of its kind targeting worshippers inside a church in the capital since 1860, has triggered both shock and competing interpretations about who was behind the deadly blast.

While many Syrians and analysts have aligned with the government’s accusation that ISIS was responsible, citing the group’s enduring threat, some well-informed sources remain skeptical. They argue that despite similarities in method, the operation does not fully align with ISIS’s known tactics or ideological playbook in Syria, particularly at this stage of its insurgency.

“ISIS has never targeted churches in this manner within its areas of influence in Syria,” a source familiar with the group’s activity told Asharq Al-Awsat. “Such attacks do not serve its goals while it's engaged in a broader war against al-Sharaa’s government.

Historically, ISIS has defiled and desecrated churches, destroying crosses, smashing altars, and raising its black flags above Christian sites. These acts were documented in parts of Deir Ezzor, rural Homs, and Idlib over the past decade.

However, the group typically targeted religious symbols in already-conquered territory, rather than staging suicide bombings in government-controlled urban centers.

Further complicating the narrative is the fact that churches have also been struck by shelling or airstrikes carried out by the previous Syrian regime, undermining the notion that religious sanctuaries were ever fully protected during the war.

Syrian authorities are stepping up efforts to sever ISIS from its former support networks, using a mix of security operations and reconciliation initiatives aimed at individuals who once backed or belonged to the group.

Mediators involved in government-led reconciliation efforts told Asharq Al-Awsat that more than 150 former ISIS affiliates who were not found to have committed crimes against civilians have renounced the group and been granted amnesty.

“These individuals chose to walk away from ISIS, and the state responded by offering a path back through forgiveness,” one mediator said, describing the initiative as part of a broader strategy to drain the group’s residual influence in previously sympathetic communities.

Another mediator, a respected tribal elder who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat on condition of anonymity, revealed that many of those pardoned had joined the state’s reconciliation efforts after receiving endorsements from local religious and tribal figures.

Observers say the policy signals a strategic shift aimed at rehabilitating former ISIS affiliates who played no direct role in civilian bloodshed. The goal, they argue, is to detach these individuals from the group’s ideological grip, strip ISIS of its remaining support base, and stem future recruitment.

“We asked the government to settle the status of former ISIS members who had no blood on their hands, to encourage others to walk away from the group,” the mediator said. “The authorities understand that continued pursuit of these individuals could push them back into ISIS’s arms.”

However, he clarified that the state remains resolute in pursuing key ISIS operatives responsible for violence against civilians and rival factions such as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. “There is no clemency for those who’ve committed acts of terror,” he said.

The reconciliation initiative runs parallel to ongoing military and intelligence operations targeting ISIS cells, as Damascus attempts to contain the group’s underground resurgence and prevent a return to widespread insurgency.