Who Marginalized Role of Premiership in Lebanon after Rafik Hariri’s Assassination?

The killing of Hariri triggered huge anti-government protests in Beirut. (Getty Images)
The killing of Hariri triggered huge anti-government protests in Beirut. (Getty Images)
TT

Who Marginalized Role of Premiership in Lebanon after Rafik Hariri’s Assassination?

The killing of Hariri triggered huge anti-government protests in Beirut. (Getty Images)
The killing of Hariri triggered huge anti-government protests in Beirut. (Getty Images)

The 1989 Taif Accord that ended the Lebanese civil war (1975-90) transformed the position of prime minister into an effective partner in power.

The position was consolidated with the arrival of Rafik Hariri to the post in late 1992. The businessman managed to invest his extensive Arab and international relations in rebuilding a country that was destroyed by 15 years of war.

His shock assassination on February 14, 2005 re-created the imbalance in constitutional institutions, effectively marginalizing the role of the premiership and diminishing its role in the national equation.

No one argues that Hariri was an extraordinary phenomenon in Lebanon’s history. His legacy has weighed heavily on his successors, who have weakened the top Sunni post in the country.

Former MP Mustafa Alloush said Hariri was a unique figure.

“He had an Arab and international vision and his role was part of that Arab and international role, as demonstrated in his strong ties to the Arab Gulf, starting with Saudi Arabia, and global decision-makers, as well as Egypt, Türkiye, Pakistan, Morocco and others,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

He recalled Hariri’s famed statement, “no one is greater than their country,” adding that the slain PM was actually “bigger than Lebanon.”

“He did not covet power, but his vision was based on diversity, democracy and culture. This project protects Lebanon from the creed of leftist groups that don’t believe in the idea of the state,” he explained.

“It also protects Lebanon from Sunni fundamentalism and Shiite extremism represented in Iran’s Vilayet al-Faqih. He strived to achieve this project, which ultimately cost him his life,” lamented Alloush

No one denies that Lebanon began to rapidly decline soon after Hariri’s assassination. It floundered in crises for years before now reaching total collapse.

Alloush remarked that Hariri’s successors “lacked experience and charisma. Successive Sunni leaders agreed to compromises over power and its rewards, which led us to catastrophe.”

Former MP Fares Soaid said the marginalization of the premiership can also be attributed to regional factors, namely Iran’s hegemony over Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

This situation marginalized the role of Sunnis throughout the region and brought the rise of minorities that have largely succeeded in winning over Christians and Druze, he explained to Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Hariri’s assassination removed a large Sunni barrier that was standing in the way of the Iranian drive in the region,” he noted.

Saddam Hussein’s execution in 2003 and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s death in 2004 all played in Iran’s favor, he went on to say.

Soaid highlighted one successful premiership in Lebanon after Hariri’s murder.

He recalled how Fouad Siniora succeeded in withstanding all sorts of pressure from Hezbollah and its allies during his term in office from 2005 to 2009.

At the time, the anti-Syria March 14 camp was still active and Siniora could rely on its support in taking decisive decisions in government.

Soaid highlighted Hezbollah’s invasion of Beirut on May 7, 2008 and the Doha agreement that resolved the ensuing crisis, granting the party a blocking third power in government. This was the beginning of the marginalization of state institutions.

Hariri employed his vast network of international relations to serve Lebanon’s interests. His assassination upended political life and changed the equation.

Lebanese political analyst Khaldoun al-Sharif told Asharq Al-Awsat: “The assassination undermined the presidency and other political positions.”

Political rivals started to abuse their positions, rather than carrying out their duties in serving the people, they began to purse their own interests at the expense of the population and their future, he explained.

The system of rule that ensued after Hariri’s murder has undermined the presidency, premiership and the parliament speakership, he added.

Sharif said the situation came to a head during the 2015 and 2019 protests against the ruling class.

Soaid agreed with the assessment.

The marginalization not only applies to the premiership, but to the presidency and speakership, he remarked. Any decision taken by the holders of these positions are now ineffective without Hezbollah’s seal of approval, he added.

He predicted that this situation will persist until Iran’s regional role in contained and until Lebanese officials take an adamant stand in defending their country’s identity, Arabism, existence and state.

There are several factors that transformed Lebanon from a progressive and pioneering state under Hariri to a failed state after his assassination.

Sharif said one of the factors is that officials no longer seek the interests of the people, but are rather embroiled in corruption or protecting the corrupt.

Confronting the possession of arms outside state authority (Hezbollah’s arsenal) is no longer the sole goal of political battles, he stated.

Lebanon has to now tackle its devastating economic crisis that erupted in 2019.

Sharif noted how Sri Lanka recently succeeded in reaching an agreement with the International Monetary Fund within ten days while Lebanon has yet to approve a single reform or a state budget since 2019.

“How are the people expected to trust in their such rulers?” he wondered.

“The Lebanese sense that all presidencies in their country are ineffective. They are no longer concerned with the disputes between the rival parties after realizing that these forces only disagree with each other over their own personal gains,” he added.



Jamal Mustafa: Saddam Said ‘Qassim Was Honest, But the Party Ordered His Assassination’

Jamal Mustafa Sultan.
Jamal Mustafa Sultan.
TT

Jamal Mustafa: Saddam Said ‘Qassim Was Honest, But the Party Ordered His Assassination’

Jamal Mustafa Sultan.
Jamal Mustafa Sultan.

Jamal Mustafa Sultan, Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law and former deputy secretary, recalled how the late Iraqi president viewed former Prime Minister Abdul Karim Qassim as an honorable and brave man even though he was involved on an attempt on his life.

In the third installment of his interview to Asharq Al-Awsat, Mustafa said: “In 1959, a fateful decision by Iraq’s Baath Party, led by Fuad al-Rikabi, changed the course of a young man’s life. The party planned a bold attempt to assassinate Iraqi leader Abdul Karim Qassim on Oct. 7.”

When a team member dropped out shortly before the operation, Saddam, then a little-known young man, was brought in. During the ambush on Al-Rashid Street in Baghdad, Qassim was slightly injured, and Saddam was wounded by shrapnel in his leg, said Mustafa.

After the failed attempt, al-Rikabi and other senior Baath members, including Hazem Jawad and Ali Saleh al-Saadi, fled to Syria. There, al-Rikabi kept asking about Saddam until he learned that Saddam had also escaped, organizing his secret journey to Syria on his own.

Hazem Jawad, a key Baath Party leader, recalled the moment Saddam Hussein became a full party member. In a small underground apartment in Damascus, Fuad al-Rikabi led a meeting with several party members, including himself, Ali Saleh al-Saadi, and Medhat Ibrahim Juma. “Fuad praised Saddam, calling him courageous and loyal, and proposed accepting him as a full member. We all agreed,” said Jawad, according to Mustafa.

“Saddam, a tall young man with piercing eyes and dark skin, stood before us. Fuad recited the party oath, and Saddam repeated it, officially joining the Baath Party,” he continued.

“We spent the next two hours talking over tea and cake. Before leaving, Fuad announced his trip to Cairo. Saddam also asked for permission to go to Egypt to continue his law studies. We approved, as it wasn’t safe to return him to Iraq after his involvement in the assassination attempt on Abdul Karim Qassim,” recounted Mustafa.

Saddam’s respect for Qassim

It’s uncommon for a leader to praise a predecessor who survived an assassination attempt against them, but Saddam did just that. Mustafa shared the story during a meeting.

“President Qassim, may God have mercy on him, was brave and honest,” Saddam said, according to Mustafa. “I respect him for serving Iraq with integrity.”

“We were young and impulsive. We didn’t think about the reasons behind the operation or what might happen afterward. We didn’t even consider who could replace Qassim if he were gone.”

When told that Qassim’s sister was his only surviving family member, Saddam instructed that she be given a car and financial support.

Saddam also treated former President Abdul Rahman Arif with respect, despite efforts to tarnish his legacy. Mustafa noted that campaigns to smear Arif were part of a broader attempt to justify Iraq’s invasion and undermine its independence. He urged historians to seek the truth and challenge false narratives.

Abdul Karim Qassim. (Getty Images)

Mustafa's reflection on Saddam

When asked if Saddam had made mistakes, Mustafa replied: “Mr. President worked for Iraq’s progress. Like anyone, he sometimes got things right and sometimes wrong, but his goal was always to elevate the country.”

“He had no interest in wealth. Over 20 years, investigators searched for assets linked to him—land, money, anything—but found nothing. Even his political opponent, Iyad Allawi, confirmed this. Saddam was strict about protecting public funds, and this extended to his children as well,” he added.

He also criticized the current government, accusing it of seizing land and displacing Iraqis.

“They’ve taken properties from displaced residents and given them to foreigners, including Iranians, Pakistanis, and Afghans. Areas like Jurf al-Sakhar and Al-Awja have been emptied, with residents banned from returning. Some lands are controlled by foreign military intelligence, impacting not just Iraq but the region. Christians have also lost properties to militias,” noted Sultan.

He shared his own losses: “My family’s land, passed down for generations, was confiscated. An orchard over 250 years old and another property from my great-grandfather, over 200 years old, were taken simply because we’re linked to the former regime. Even if a child in our family registers property now, it’s immediately seized.”

He added: “My family and others have lost everything. While some managed to sell or keep a few properties, all of ours were taken.”

Criticism of Moqtada al-Sadr, Iraq's sectarian divide

Mustafa expressed disappointment in Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr after the fall of Saddam’s regime.

“Moqtada knows the truth about who killed his father. He attended investigation meetings and knows the details. His father, Mohammad al-Sadr, had influence and even criticized the regime in Friday sermons. Despite warnings, he refused official protection before his assassination,” he said.

On claims that Saddam’s government was Sunni-dominated, Mustafa disagreed.

“At that time, we were all Iraqis. There was no emphasis on Sunni, Shiite, or Christian identities. Our shared Iraqi identity came first, and positions in the government, military, or party were based on merit. For example, Tariq Aziz, a Christian, held top roles, including foreign minister and deputy prime minister. Sectarianism wasn’t a factor,” he said.

He criticized the current leadership, accusing it of destroying Iraq’s unity.

“Today’s politics aim to change Iraq’s demographics and weaken the country. Millions of Iraqis have been displaced, not just one group but people from all regions. Over 10 million now live abroad. This isn’t a coincidence—it’s a deliberate effort to break Iraq’s unity and control its future,” noted Mustafa.

Returning to Iraq

When asked if he hopes to return to Iraq, Mustafa said: “Since 2003, all the governments in Iraq have been installed by the US occupation and are aligned with Iran to further its agenda in the region, even through militias in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. After the occupation began, Iran-backed militias targeted Iraq’s scientists, doctors and pilots, which led to over 10 million Iraqis fleeing the country. The human cost of this is immense and unacceptable.”

He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Of course, I want to return to Iraq. Every patriotic Iraqi who loves their country wants to return. It’s just a matter of time. We hope, God willing, that Iraq will be liberated and strong again, and when that happens, my family and I will be among the first to return.”

Mustafa also criticized Iran’s growing influence in the region: “People here are talking about Iran’s control over four Arab capitals: Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad and Sanaa. These countries are falling apart, with militias making the decisions, not governments. The policies being followed harm these nations’ interests and their Arab identity.”

He said Saddam quickly recognized a broader plot to destabilize Iraq and the region.

“Saddam saw Iraq as a barrier to a project aimed not only at Iraq, but at the entire Arab world, threatening their existence and role,” he said.

Mustafa also blamed Iran for starting the Iraq-Iran war, citing Tehran’s clear policy of exporting its revolution, as stated in its constitution.

When asked about reports that Iraqi intelligence proposed assassinating Iran's Supreme Leader Khomeini during his stay in Baghdad, Mustafa confirmed it but explained why Saddam rejected the idea.

“Saddam was a noble and honorable man. He would never allow harm to come to a guest, especially through betrayal. He would never consider or permit such a thing.”