AstraZeneca’s CEO on Covid: ‘We Just Have to Adjust to it’

AstraZeneca’s Chief Executive Officer, Sir Pascal Soriot
AstraZeneca’s Chief Executive Officer, Sir Pascal Soriot
TT

AstraZeneca’s CEO on Covid: ‘We Just Have to Adjust to it’

AstraZeneca’s Chief Executive Officer, Sir Pascal Soriot
AstraZeneca’s Chief Executive Officer, Sir Pascal Soriot

AstraZeneca’s Chief Executive Officer, Sir Pascal Soriot, told Asharq Al-Awsat in an interview that Covid-19 is not over “and we just have to adjust to it like we live with the flu.”

“Most people who get it basically get sick for a few days and do not need to be hospitalized because vaccines are providing a baseline immunity,” he said.

He stressed the importance of tackling long Covid and protecting the immune compromised people.

Asked about how he felt once he heard the good news from his company’s laboratories that he got the vaccine, he said: “I was very involved in the discussions with Oxford and the development of the vaccine. When we learned that we had a vaccine that works and our team said that we can manufacture it, I was incredibly happy because we thought we can make a difference.”

He also advised people to listen to science and not to social media.

On China’s zero-Covid policy, he said: “I understand the policy in the initial phase … I must say today they will have to transition at some point, China cannot be closed to the rest of the world for ever. They need to reopen to facilitate communication and trade with the rest of the world, people meeting each other.”

Here is the full text of the interview:

- We appreciate that AstraZeneca’s investments and interests go far beyond Covid-19, but is Covid-19 over?

I don’t think Covid-19 is over unfortunately, I think Covid will stay with us for a little while and we just have to adjust to it like we live with the flu. I think this year the biggest problem actually is flu and Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection (RSV). Covid-19 is still there but most people who get it basically get sick for a few days and do not need to be hospitalized because vaccines are providing a baseline immunity.

With Covid, I think the two key things we now have to tackle are:
1- Long Covid, there are quite a substantial proportion of patients who get Covid and do not recover easily, long Covid can be mild or can be serious and goes all the way up to not being able to work for months.
2- Protecting the immune compromised people, for example people who underwent transplants or have blood cancer have zero immunity and do not respond to vaccine. Those who have multiple sclerosis and solid tumor cancers have some immunity and some limited response to the vaccine. Some people need a different level of different protection and we have developed a long acting antibodies combination called Evusheld to protect them for 6 months. Covid will still be there with us and we need to tackle it but it is mostly long Covid and the immune compromised that should attract our attention.

- As you mentioned, we now have to learn to live with Covid. Thanks to some pioneers, some leaders, CEOs and companies, who helped us to get some immunity and to live with Covid, and definitely AstraZeneca is one of them, as well as yourself. How did you feel when you first heard about Covid and once you heard the good news from Oxford and your laboratories that you got the vaccine? How did you feel personally and as CEO of AstraZeneca?

It was an evolution at the time because we basically heard about Covid-19 just like everybody around January 2020. We have a large presence in China, we are based in Shanghai and we have about 20,000 employees in China. So, as you can imagine, we heard about Covid and the impact on people in China very early on. We were tracking what was happening and we thought: how can we help?

Initially we helped with simply buying masks, where we could and deliver them to hospitals that did not have any. Then we thought: what else can we do? We started looking at some of our medicines and repurposing them to see whether they could be used to treat Covid. After that we started the development of our long acting antibody combination Evusheld and then sometime around April 2020 as we were looking at what more we could do, we came across the vaccine at Oxford and we agreed with Oxford that we could collaborate with them. It was a very successful collaboration and we are very happy we were able to jump in and help.

It has not been a very simple journey because as you can image we took a vaccine that had been created by a great team of scientists but in an academic lab and they had started to develop it but they were developing it doing trials the way an academic center would do it, not the way industry would do it. It was challenging at times, for instance the US asked all sorts of questions because the way the initial trials run by Oxford were not run the way industry does them so we had to catch up and do all sorts of work to bring the program to an industry standard and FDA (Food and Drug Administration) standard.

There were weeks and months of intense work, it was very challenging of course but very rewarding because we made a huge difference. As you know we delivered more than 3 billion doses of vaccine and it has been independently estimated that the vaccine saved 6.3 million lives globally.

- On a personal level, how did you feel when you heard the news from your team that AstraZeneca developed the vaccine and it was approved?

I was very involved in the discussions with Oxford and the development of the vaccine. When we learned that we had a vaccine that works and our team said that we can manufacture it, I was incredibly happy because we thought we can make a difference.

We had set up supply chains around the world to supply different geographies through different supply chains so we can supply everybody. One problem we faced was that we had agreed to partner with the Serum Institute of India (SII) who have a large capacity to manufacture extensively and we had agreed with SII and the Indian government that half of the production of SII would be kept in India and the other half would be exported to a number of countries around the world. But when Covid cases exploded in India, the government had to prioritize their population and decided to keep everything for India. This created a supply issue in many countries.

We faced many challenges no doubt, but everybody at AZ was very happy to deliver this vaccine.

- You succeeded in this while working with scientists and different people. What lessons were learned through that process? Are we more ready now to face any potential pandemic in the future?

As a society, probably we are more ready, it is not perfect but we are more ready mainly because people have the challenge created by pandemics in mind. But the question is: What about in 10 years time if there are no other pandemics, which I hope there would not be, then people might focus on other priorities and reduce their attention to pandemic preparedness.

Today two things exist:
1- There are centers around the world monitoring the emergence of new viruses and working together
2- With Covid, initially people thought it was only a Chinese issue. I can tell you I was in Europe at the time and it came to Italy and many people and many countries around Europe thought it was only an Italian issue, as if there was a border between Italy and the rest of Europe that can stop Covid. There was denial at the time in many places. I don’t think there will be a denial again.

Now there are centers monitoring the emergence of new viruses. Governments are more likely to potentially even overreact to some new viruses instead of ignoring them. We will have new technologies that can bring new vaccines to patients much faster. The world has learned that for vaccines on that scale you need collaborations between the private and public sectors, we have to have governments working with private industry and with academics to bring vaccines to the world much faster.

It is worth mentioning that without the US government investment, I do not think we would have had those vaccines at that scale so fast. The US government funded the development of several vaccines because it is a risky proposition. You have a new virus, a new vaccine and you do not know if it is going to work. It cost hundreds of millions of dollars to develop, you have to set up a manufacturing network which cost a lot of money and you need to have all this money spent in advance of knowing if the vaccine works. The US government placed advanced orders and put money at risk in those developments. Without the U.S. I do not think the world would have reacted as well as we did.

- Different people have different views on how they deal with vaccine, how they deal with Covid and how they deal with the pandemic. As CEO of one of the largest companies what is your advice to the public?

I am leading a scientific organization so of course I believe in science and believe in looking at data. My advice is for people to look at data. Society reacted incredibly fast to this virus and there was a lot we did not know about the virus and a lot that we did not know about the vaccines. Some people said that the vaccines were not made available fast enough, that poor countries did not get the vaccines fast enough. If we look back, the response was incredibly fast, not fast enough for some countries of course but overall very fast. There were a lot of unknowns, we did not know how to use the vaccines, we did not know the consequences of vaccinations, we were not so sure who to vaccinate. When you have this, different people come up with their own ‘realities’ and own ‘truths’.

Today a lot more data is available and people can look at the data, it is clear now from the data that the vaccination for Covid is really very useful for people over 50-55 years old and those who suffer from severe chronic diseases. For younger people, vaccination is probably less critical and two doses might be sufficient and we might not need so many boosters because they have baseline immunity provided by the vaccine and which probably lasts a long time.

There is a lot more data that has emerged and everybody has to make their own decision for themselves. It is a personal healthcare issue and you have to decide how to treat yourself and everybody has to make their own choice. Fundamentally people should look at the data and not look at social media. They should ask scientists and not look at the media.

A problem is that, because there were many unknowns and we were moving so fast, some experts said things that proved to be wrong and this created an environment where some people could say: look at that expert, he said a,b,c and it was totally wrong so why should we listen to experts? But today we have a large amount of data and the scientific view is becoming more coherent.

My advice is for people to listen to science and to not listen to social media.

- One reason that people like you helped us to face this pandemic was working together: the private sectors, governments, scientists and companies as it was cross border crisis which is very similar to the climate change. What lessons to bring from tackling the pandemic to tackle the climate? You with other companies made this great initiative on the eve of COP27 in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt? How to copy the success in facing climate change?

I think the recipe is very similar in many ways:
1- We have to look at science and technology to help us find solutions because there are many solutions to climate change.
2- Partnerships between public and private sectors are critical.

During Covid vaccine, we had great partnerships with the Saudi government and talked with Saudi officials many times via video, we also worked with the Moroccan government, and I was very impressed by how very organized they were early on. We also partnered with Egypt. Those collaborations were very successful and we even shipped the vaccine to Palestine. There were so many countries that we did not necessarily think about but during the course of various discussions we were asked if we can ship vaccines to Palestine because they did not have vaccines, so we did that.

Collaboration across public and private was very successful and the same can apply to the COP27.

While attending COP27 I met with the Egyptian prime minister and the health minister and we have a program in Egypt called ‘Green Hospitals’. This initiative is a partnership between the private and public sectors as well as with academic organizations like hospitals. Collaboration is really a key solution.

- Do you sense that the same urgency in dealing with climate change?

It is human nature to react to a big threat very fast with great intensity but with climate change some people realize it is urgent and some other people do not realize it is urgent. The reality is right now people across geographies and countries are still arguing with one another about various other issues. If tomorrow we are threatened as a human species by a massive natural catastrophe then everybody will quickly realize we are all in the same boat. We are all sharing the same planet and we all have to work together. But today the urgency is not as high as it should be unfortunately. However, the realization that something has to be done is growing. When you see what happened in Pakistan and the floods that affected more than 10 million children. I am French and also Australian and I lived through the great fires in Australia and then the floods, you see the impact of climate change. More and more people are realizing that something needs to be done.

- There is another element I think may link the Covid 19 and climate change which is justice. AstraZeneca actually played a big role in establishing justice by providing the vaccine to poor people almost free of charge without any profit. But there is this feeling that poor countries and poor people are paying a higher price for the pandemic and for climate change.

Absolutely, and that is true. I met with the Secretary General of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is made of 56 countries with the biggest one is India which has 1.4 billion people and the smallest is an island with a population of 11,000. Within the Commonwealth you see countries that are starting to suffer. Some islands are saying soon enough there will be no country for us, we will be submerged. When you realize that a big part of the Antarctic is starting to break off and if it melts, that may lead to an increase of 63cm in the water level everywhere round the world. Some parts of the world will disappear under water. Typically, the poorest parts of the world will suffer first, as always unfortunately.

If you look at climate change, people are talking about an average of 1.5 degrees or 2 degrees in the increase of temperature, but some parts of the world will suffer a lot more than this. In the northern part of Africa the increase in temperature will be much more, and they will suffer draughts and it will be terrible for people there and we will witness mass migration.

At COP27 it was agreed to create a fund to help poor countries and I think this is a good thing but it is not sufficient. The answer is to really stop carbon emissions. Otherwise, we are on a road to massive catastrophe for everybody.

- Are you more optimistic now than you were few years ago in terms of tackling the climate change?

I am, because the realization is growing, private industries and private organizations are jumping in and the US government now is also taking the lead. Many governments have that in their agendas. I realize that some companies and some governments are talking green but don’t take much action but there are more and more countries and companies that are taking real measures.

There is a growing trend for industries to disclose what they are doing about climate change and people can monitor, track and criticize what the companies are doing. I believe we are moving in the right direction but the problem is are we going to be moving fast enough? Actually the scientists tell you that their predictions of 10-15 years ago are happening much faster than they thought and we are in this vicious circle where things are getting worse than expected and accelerating even more.

- Living in Europe, we noticed the past few months did not bring good news because once again because of the war in Ukraine, we heard that some European countries and some European entities are talking about using the old sources of energy, like coal and oil. There was this perception that there is a bit of retraction from the policies of giving more priority for green energy?

Absolutely. The reality is that we have to be pragmatic and practical about it. The reality of life is that governments are elected, at least in democracies, and they are going to focus on their own countries and are going to think about what they need to do for their own electorate, for their own people. Covid 19 is a good example again of what happens in these situations. Some countries were producing lots of vaccines and the world was saying you need to share. They did not share. They started sharing when they had enough for themselves. As soon as they had enough to cover their own population, they started sharing but before that they never shared much. You may criticize this but at the end of the day that is a reality of life. Elected people will look after their own people, it is a bit unfortunate and you would hope they would share more and faster but they really cannot. It is indeed the same in this energy situation, countries say they have to make sure that people have electricity and heating for the winter, otherwise as politicians they will be removed at the next elections. We have to consider this in how we plan for the climate change.

On the other hand, the silver lining in this war and the sanctions is that people realize that we need to move to renewable sources of energy to become independent. Scotland aims to become totally self-sufficient with renewable energy. I met the prime minister of Ireland recently and they have the same goal. You see countries really progressively setting up an agenda that will give them energy independence through green sources.

- On November 10 AstraZeneca announced its third quarter financial results with revenues higher than forecasted, noting that those profits were not a result of the Covid vaccine, but rather from other sources. How were these revenues achieved?

Our focus as a company is on medications for cancer, cardiovascular diseases, kidney diseases, diabetes, diseases related to metabolism, as well as respiratory diseases, asthma and rare diseases. We have a very strong portfolio of new products which we are launching everywhere. Our growth is driven by all those new products. During the 3rd quarter we obtained 19 approvals for new products and new indications. We are growing because our core business is growing. Covid vaccines did not make any profit. Still this year we are still delivering but the vaccine sales do not generate much profit as we sell more or less at cost.

- There was an 11-12% growth?

Actually a bit more than 11% for the quarter, coming from all sorts of products, we have an expensive product for kidney disease, heart disease, diabetes, several products for cancer are also growing a lot, we invest in R&D, year-to-date for end of September revenue grew by 36% driven by R&D and delivering new products.

The 3rd quarter saw an increase of 19% with the 11% you referred to was for core business, excluding all the additions. If we include the additions like rare diseases business that we acquired and all the new products launches, the year-to-date is 37% and 19% in the quarter.

- You are not producing much of the Covid vaccine. Is that right?

We are producing Covid vaccine through our network. Some was manufactured by our partner in India. We have manufactured vaccine in Thailand for South Asia, in Brazil for Brazil and in Mexico for Latin America. We have a whole network of manufacturers in many geographies around the world. Also we manufactured in Europe, UK, in Japan and in China. We have a partnership in China but the Chinese government decided to focus on their locally developed vaccines which they supplied to some countries and I know the United Arab Emirates also sourced a lot of Chinese vaccines.

- What do you think of Chinese policy of zero-Covid from science point of view?

From a science point of view, I understand the policy in the initial phase because in the initial period they really protected their population very well. I must say today they will have to transition at some point, China cannot be closed to the rest of the world for ever. They need to reopen to facilitate communication and trade with the rest of the world, people meeting each other.

When you go back to this carbon threat and climate change threat I really think collaboration around the world is key and also people realizing that we are all the same and share the same planet. At the end of the day, we all have the same hopes, same concerns and same fears. We are the same people wherever we are in the world. You only realize this if you meet people. If you live in a country and you never leave your country, and you never meet people from another country, it is very easy to think that these people are different. Then you meet them and you realize that they are like you, with the same hopes and concerns. I hope China will re-open fully very soon so people can meet and collaborate again.

I am really delighted because next week in Dubai we will meet our Chinese team who will be joining us, Middle East and the rest of the international region. Our team is coming together again and this is very exciting.

- What is AstraZeneca's future outlook globally and in the MENA region?

Our outlook is very strong. We told the market that we expect to grow by low double digit which is 10-12% year-on-year up to 2025. Post 2025 we typically do not give guidance but we told the market we expect to grow at industry leading growth, which many analysts have translated into high single digit figure and we expect to achieve this by launching new products.

In the Middle East and Africa region, in the whole international region, in Latin America and South Asia, China, we will grow because this is where the large number of people is and we have a portfolio of products that cover diseases that are common that may be treated with low cost products all the way to expensive products to treat cancer and rare diseases.

In Middle East and Africa, diabetes, kidney diseases and heart diseases are very common, asthma diseases are common and we have products that are not so expensive that address those diseases and we expect to grow a lot in all those regions.



El-Mahboub Abdul Salam to Asharq Al-Awsat: Al-Turabi Was Shocked by Deputy’s Role in Mubarak Assassination Plot

Dr. El-Mahboub Abdul Salam speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Dr. El-Mahboub Abdul Salam speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT

El-Mahboub Abdul Salam to Asharq Al-Awsat: Al-Turabi Was Shocked by Deputy’s Role in Mubarak Assassination Plot

Dr. El-Mahboub Abdul Salam speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Dr. El-Mahboub Abdul Salam speaks to Asharq Al-Awsat. (Asharq Al-Awsat)

This happens only in thrillers. A religious leader summons an obscure army officer and meets him for the first time two days before a planned coup. He appoints him president with an unprecedented line, “You will go to the palace as president, and I will go to prison as a detainee.”

That is what happened on June 30, 1989. The officer, Omar al-Bashir, went to the presidential palace while security forces took Dr. Hassan Al-Turabi to the notorious Kober Prison along with other political leaders.

Al-Turabi’s “ruse” aimed to conceal the Islamic nature of the coup so that near and distant governments would not rush to isolate it. Intelligence agencies in neighboring states, including Egypt, fell for the deception and assumed that Bashir had seized power at the head of a group of nationalist officers. Cairo recognized the new regime and encouraged others to follow.

This happens only in stories. A young man landed at Khartoum airport carrying a passport that said his name was Abdullah Barakat. He arrived from Amman. One day he would knock on Al-Turabi’s office door, though Al-Turabi refused to see him.

Soon after, Sudanese security discovered that the visitor was a “poisoned gift,” in Al-Turabi’s words. He was the Venezuelan militant known as Carlos the Jackal, a “revolutionary” to some and a “notorious terrorist” to others.

He led the 1975 kidnapping of OPEC ministers in Vienna under instructions from Palestinian militant Dr. Wadie Haddad, an architect of aircraft hijackings. One night, and with the approval of Al-Turabi and Bashir, French intelligence agents arrived in Khartoum. Carlos awoke from sedatives aboard the plane taking him to France, where he remains imprisoned for life.

Bashir’s government was playing with explosives. In the early 1990s, it also hosted a prickly young man named Osama bin Laden, who after Afghanistan was seeking a base for training and preparation. He arrived under the banner of investment and relief work. Mounting pressure left bin Laden with no option but to leave.

This happens only in thrillers. The leadership of the National Islamic Front gathered with its top figures, Bashir, and security chiefs. The occasion was the assassination attempt against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa.

Ali Osman Taha, Al-Turabi’s deputy, stunned attendees by admitting that Sudanese security services were linked to the attempt. Those present understood that he had been one of its sponsors. Neither the sheikh nor the president had prior knowledge.

After the attempt, some proposed killing the operatives who had returned from the Ethiopian capital to eliminate any trail that could incriminate the Sudanese regime. Al-Turabi opposed the assassinations. The impression spread that Bashir supported the killings and signs of a rift between him and Al-Turabi began to appear.

The split later became formal in what came to be known as the “separation” among Islamists. Power is a feast that cannot accommodate two guests. Bashir did not hesitate to send to prison the man who had placed him in the palace. Al-Turabi did not hesitate to back Bashir’s handover to the International Criminal Court. Al-Turabi tasted the betrayal of his own disciples. Disciples, after all, are known to betray.

This happens only in thrillers. Through Al-Turabi’s mediation, Osama bin Laden agreed to meet an intelligence officer from Saddam Hussein’s regime named Farouk Hijazi. The meeting produced no cooperation, but it became one of the early arguments George W. Bush used in 2003 to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Hijazi also met senior Sudanese security officials who later visited Baghdad and were warmly received, and it became clear that Ali Osman Taha was among Saddam’s most enthusiastic admirers.

Sudanese blood now flows like the waters of the Nile. Bodies scattered on the streets of el-Fasher are almost making the world forget the bodies buried under the rubble of Gaza. Hard men are pouring fire onto the oil of ethnic and regional hatreds. Making corpses is far easier than making a settlement, a state, or institutions.

Since independence, Sudan has been a sprawling tragedy. Because the present is the child of the recent past, searching for a witness who knows the game and the players, and journalism leads to meeting and interviewing the experienced politician and researcher Dr. El-Mahboub Abdul Salam.

For a decade he served as Al-Turabi’s office director. For another decade, he wrote some of Bashir’s speeches.

In recent years, his bold conclusions stood out, including that Sudan’s Islamic movement has exhausted its purposes, that it shares responsibility with other elites for the country’s condition, and that it erred in dealing with others just as it erred when it chose the path of coups, violence, ghost houses, and contributed to pushing the South outside Sudan’s map.

Abdul Salam does not hesitate to scrutinize Al-Turabi’s own mistakes and his passion for wielding power. I sat down for an interview with him, and this is the first installment.

Abdul Salam was a first-year university student when Al-Turabi’s ideas caught his attention. Al-Turabi then appeared different, moving outside Sudan’s traditional social divides. He also knew the West, having studied in Paris and London. In 1990, Abdul Salam became Al-Turabi’s office director until the end of that decade.

Abdul Salam recalled: “I am often asked this question, are you a disciple of Al-Turabi? I have told them more than once, yes, I am a disciple of Al-Turabi, a devoted one. But I graduated from this school and became an independent person with my own ideas and experiences, perhaps broader than those of the Islamic movement’s earlier leaders.”

Asked about when he discovered Al-Turabi’s mistakes and developed a critical sense toward his experience Abdul Salam said that it was “perhaps in 2011, with the ‘Arab Spring’, and the Egyptian revolution in particular and the change that took place in Egypt.”

A tense beginning

Abdul Salam said Al-Turabi’s relationship with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak began on polite terms when they met in 1986 during an Al-Azhar conference on the Prophet’s biography. At the time, he recalled, Cairo was hostile or deeply wary of the Sudanese government under Sadiq al-Mahdi. The meeting, in his words, “was more courtesy than substance.”

According to Abdul Salam, relations later deteriorated sharply because of the deception surrounding the 1989 coup, then worsened further after the 1995 assassination attempt against Mubarak in Addis Ababa.

The Addis Ababa shock

Abdul Salam recounted that a major political meeting was convened after the failed attempt, held at the home of Ali Osman Mohammed Taha and attended by Al-Turabi, Bashir and all senior leaders. He said that during this gathering, both Bashir and Al-Turabi learned “for the first time” that Sudanese security services and Al-Turabi’s own deputy had been involved in the operation without informing them, describing the moment as a “huge shock” to the leadership.

He said Taha admitted at the meeting that the security services were involved and that it later became clear he himself was implicated. When a proposal emerged to kill the operatives returning from Ethiopia to erase evidence, Abdul Salam said Al-Turabi “rose in fierce opposition,” calling the idea outside both politics and Sharia. He cited Dr. Ali al-Haj as saying this moment “marked the beginning of the split.”

Egyptian intelligence reassesses Sudan

Abdul Salam describes how the Sudanese and Egyptian intelligence services eventually moved toward reconciliation. He said Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence chief, sent a message through French intelligence stating that the attack had been carried out by Egyptian Islamist groups.

According to Abdul Salam, Suleiman maintained that Sudan had only provided what he described as logistical support including money, shelter and weapons, rather than planning or executing the attack. This understanding, he says, prevented Egypt from responding harshly.

The communication opened a door for “major repair” of relations, Abdul Salam added, as Sudan began presenting itself as a pragmatic government after distancing itself from Al-Turabi.

After 1999: Rapprochement with Cairo

The reconciliation with Egypt and the region, Abdul Salam noted, took shape after 1999. He recalled that Taha’s visit to Cairo came after that date, followed by a visit from intelligence chief Salah Gosh. Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman regularly traveled to Egypt and maintained a friendship with his Egyptian counterpart, further improving ties.

The memorandum that shifted power

Abdul Salam described the turning point in relations between Bashir and Al-Turabi as the “Memorandum of Ten” in October 1998. During a major Shura gathering attended by hundreds of party, state and tribal leaders, ten members presented a document calling for the removal of Al-Turabi and the installation of Bashir as both head of state and leader of the movement.

He said the memorandum included reform language, but its essence was ending dual leadership. Bashir, according to Abdul Salam, “conspired with the ten” and accepted the proposal, calling the conspiracy “clear and very public.”

Abdul Salam recounted that Bashir wanted to confine Al-Turabi to a symbolic role and that some officers close to Bashir even asked Al-Turabi to remain as a spiritual figure who would bless decisions made elsewhere. “Al-Turabi would not accept this,” he stressed.

Al-Turabi’s influence and gradual reemergence

Reflecting on the early years of the Salvation regime, Abdul Salam said Al-Turabi authored all strategic decisions while the government handled daily business independently. He avoided public appearances during the first five years, he recalls.

Abdul Salam added that Al-Turabi gradually reemerged and became speaker of the National Assembly in 1996. He said Al-Turabi’s influence “never truly faded” because of his charisma, knowledge and strong presence, and diminished only when he was imprisoned after the split.

The 2001 Memorandum and South Sudan

Abdul Salam said Al-Turabi was arrested after the signing of a memorandum of understanding with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement in February 2001. He confirmed he personally signed the document.

Asked whether he felt responsible for South Sudan’s independence, Abdul Salam rejected the suggestion. He said his position was clear and aligned with Sheikh Rached Ghannouchi, who argued that unity required suspending the hudud laws introduced under President Jaafar Nimeiri. Abdul Salam told southern leaders that unity should take precedence over maintaining those laws, adding that Islamic legislation, like all legal systems, is shaped by its psychological and historical context.

Complicated relationship

Abdul Salam described the relationship between Al-Turabi and his deputy Ali Osman Taha as complex and shaped by long-standing philosophical differences. He recalled a sharp split within the Islamist movement in 1968 when Taha aligned with figures who believed Al-Turabi had grown too dominant.

He cited Taha’s personal doctrine as follows: if an individual disagrees with the organization he sides with the organization, if the organization disagrees with the state he sides with the state, and if the state disagrees with Islam he sides with Islam. Al-Turabi, Abdul Salam said, did not operate that way and pursued his own ideas regardless of circumstance.

Abdul Salam recalled that during the Salvation regime, Ahmed Osman Maki had originally been prepared to succeed Al-Turabi but later moved to the United States. He stated that Maki’s strong charisma may have made him unsuitable as number two, while Taha excelled at concealing his emotions and functioning as deputy. He said the two leaders worked in outward harmony during the early years of the regime before deep differences surfaced later.

Abdul Salam added that Taha admired Saddam Hussein’s model of governance and believed Sudanese society was not ready for liberalism or pluralism.

The Arab Spring and the Islamic movement’s decline

According to Abdul Salam, the Arab Spring was “harsh on the Islamic movement.” Although the regional wave ended around 2012, Sudan’s version of it erupted in 2019. He said the uprising struck Islamists hard and reflected the real sentiment of the Sudanese street.

He argued that during its years in power, the Islamic movement held a barely concealed hostility toward civil society, youth, women and the arts. Sudanese intellectual and cultural life, he said, naturally opposed the regime’s long authoritarian rule. The revolution’s slogans of peace, freedom and justice were not part of the movement’s vocabulary, and over time the movement evolved into a posture “contrary to Sudanese society.”

The Communist Party’s influence

Abdul Salam said the Sudanese Communist Party helped shape opposition to the Salvation regime. After the execution of its leaders in 1971, the party underwent major transformation, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union it fully embraced liberalism. He remarked that many young Sudanese seeking freedom, justice and an expanded role for women found the Communist Party closer to their aspirations than the conservative Islamist movement.

Responsibility for Sudan’s political impasse

Abdul Salam rejected the narrative that Sudan’s decades of military rule make the military solely responsible for the country’s crises. He stressed that responsibility also lies with the civilian elite. Officers were part of this elite, and civilians who supported them in government shared responsibility. Sudan’s civilian parties, he argued, lacked clear programs to address longstanding distortions inherited from the colonial era.

One of Abdul Salam’s most sensitive moments with Al-Turabi occurred on the eve of the Islamist split. He said he personally succeeded in arranging a meeting between Al-Turabi and Bashir after months of estrangement, trying to avoid complete rupture. Bashir proposed turning the party conference into a political showcase while setting aside differences. Al-Turabi agreed, but according to Abdul Salam, disagreements reappeared by the end of the day.

Writing Bashir's speeches and choosing a side

Abdul Salam described his relationship with Bashir as very good and said he wrote the president’s speeches from early 1990 until the late 1990s. The speeches reflected the movement’s overall positions.

When the split occurred, Abdul Salam aligned with Al-Turabi not on personal grounds, but because he shared his positions on democracy, public freedoms, federal governance and adherence to agreements with the South.

Abdul Salam said the relationship between Al-Turabi and Bashir resembles other regional cases involving a sheikh and a president only to a limited extent. Bashir was originally a member of the Islamist movement led by Al-Turabi and obeyed him even after becoming president.

The split emerged naturally once the visible authority of the presidency clashed with the hidden authority of the movement, “which was the one truly governing,” he said.


UK Chancellor to Asharq Al-Awsat: Strengthening Partnership with Saudi Arabia a Top Priority

Reeves speaks during the Future Investment Initiative Conference in Riyadh (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Reeves speaks during the Future Investment Initiative Conference in Riyadh (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT

UK Chancellor to Asharq Al-Awsat: Strengthening Partnership with Saudi Arabia a Top Priority

Reeves speaks during the Future Investment Initiative Conference in Riyadh (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Reeves speaks during the Future Investment Initiative Conference in Riyadh (Asharq Al-Awsat)

UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves affirmed that strengthening relations and economic partnership with Saudi Arabia represents a top priority for her government, noting that under the ambitious Vision 2030, Saudi Arabia finds in the United Kingdom an ideal partner thanks to Britain’s stability, regulatory flexibility, and global expertise.

She revealed her government’s plan to support major projects that unleash growth, starting with the expansion of Heathrow Airport and extending to infrastructure spending exceeding £725 billion ($958.7 billion) over the next decade.

In an exclusive interview with Asharq Al-Awsat from Riyadh, Reeves said her participation in the Future Investment Initiative (FII) Conference stems from a key goal: deepening mutual investment and trade. She confirmed that this visit, the first by a UK Chancellor to the Gulf in six years, reflects London’s seriousness in strengthening regional relations.

“This visit marks the first time a UK Chancellor has travelled to the Gulf in six years, which reflects just how seriously this government takes our relationship with Saudi Arabia and the wider region,” Reeves said.

“I’m here with one of the largest UK business delegations to the Gulf in recent years, and our participation is driven by our number one priority: growth.”

“At a time of global uncertainty, the UK offers stability, regulatory agility and world-class expertise – qualities that make us an ideal partner for Saudi Arabia's ambitious Vision 2030 transformation,” she added.

Reeves emphasized the economic complementarity between the two nations, noting that her delegation includes UK business leaders in key sectors such as financial services, life sciences, AI, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing.

She pointed out that Britain’s expertise in these fields uniquely positions London to support Saudi Arabia’s economic diversification, while Gulf investment helps drive growth and create jobs across the UK. According to her, joint trade and investment deals exceeded £10 billion over the past 18 months alone, creating more than 4,100 jobs in the United Kingdom.

Reeves and her accompanying delegation meet with Saudi Minister of Commerce Majid Al-Qasabi at the National Competitiveness Center in Riyadh (Ministry)

Deepening Mutual Investment and Trade

The Chancellor said: “My discussions are focused on deepening the two-way investment and trade that benefits families and businesses in both our countries. The £6.4 billion ($8.4 billion) package we've announced this week demonstrates the tangible results of this approach.”

According to Reeves, the package includes £5 billion in Saudi-backed exports supporting British manufacturing, alongside major investments by Barclays, HSBC and others, strengthening their presence in Saudi Arabia.

Key Priorities

Reeves said that one of her top priorities is accelerating progress on a UK–GCC Free Trade Agreement, noting that such a deal could boost bilateral trade by 16 percent and represents the kind of forward-looking partnership that creates prosperity for both sides.

“My vision is straightforward: I want Britain and Saudi Arabia to be partners of choice for each other. We regulate for growth, not just risk. We're backing key infrastructure projects like Heathrow expansion – where the Saudi Public Investment Fund holds a 15 percent stake,” she said.

She added: “We’re creating opportunities for co-investment, particularly through our National Wealth Fund and pension reforms that will unlock tens of billions for infrastructure and innovation.”

“My message at the FII this week was clear – I'm championing the UK as a stable investment destination,” she stressed, referring to Britain’s “ironclad commitment to fiscal rules and our modern Industrial Strategy focused on the sectors of the future.”

Reeves speaks during the Future Investment Initiative Conference in Riyadh (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Saudi–British Cooperation

On the most prominent areas and nature of cooperation between Riyadh and London, Reeves said: “Our partnership – built on mutual respect and shared ambition – spans multiple high-value sectors and continues to deepen.”

“Over the past 18 months alone, we've secured over £10 billion in two-way trade and investment, creating more than 4,100 UK jobs and many others in Saudi Arabia. Over 1,600 UK companies also now have a presence in the Kingdom – this is a partnership that works to the benefit of families and businesses on both sides,” she added.

“In financial services, London remains a world-leading international financial centre. We’ve launched a new concierge service – the Office for Investment: Financial Services – to help international firms establish and expand in the UK, while banking giants like Barclays and HSBC are expanding their operations in Riyadh,” Reeves explained.

She highlighted that Riyadh Air’s first-ever flight landed in London this past weekend, powered by UK-manufactured wings and Rolls-Royce engines – showing how British engineering is integral to Gulf aviation ambitions.

According to Reeves, UK firms like Quantexa are launching new AI services in the region, while Saudi cybersecurity firm Cipher is investing $50 million to open its European headquarters in London, demonstrating a partnership at the forefront of technology and innovation.

She added: “We are also collaborating closely in areas like sustainable infrastructure, clean energy, education and the life sciences. But I feel we can and must go further – a UK–GCC Free Trade Agreement would unlock huge mutual benefits, including boosting bilateral trade by 16 percent.”

Reeves and the UK business delegation at the British Residence in Riyadh (Ministry)

A British Plan to Contain Financial Challenges

On her government’s plan to address the financial challenges facing the United Kingdom, Reeves said: “After years of decline – from austerity to Brexit to the mini-budget – we inherited significant challenges. But we've moved decisively to address them whilst investing in our future.”

“We have an ironclad commitment to robust fiscal rules. This provides the stability and certainty that investors need. The IMF now projects that, after the US, the UK will be the fastest-growing G7 economy. This didn't happen by accident – it's the result of tough choices and disciplined economic management,” she added.

Reeves emphasized that “growth is our number one priority, because it's how we overcome challenges and put more money in working people's pockets. Our modern Industrial Strategy focuses on key sectors of the future – AI, life sciences, financial services, clean energy – where Britain has genuine competitive advantages, many of which are shared by our partners in the Gulf.”

She continued: “We're catalysing private investment through our National Wealth Fund, which is driving over £70 billion in investment, and pension reforms unlocking up to £50 billion for infrastructure and innovation. This creates opportunities for co-investment with partners like Gulf sovereign wealth funds.”

Reeves confirmed that the United Kingdom offers strength in uncertain times by combining stability with ambition. She referred to her government’s plan to support major projects that unleash growth, from Heathrow Airport expansion to infrastructure spending exceeding £725 billion over the next decade.

“We're open for business, but we're being strategic about building partnerships that create good jobs, boost business and bring investment into communities across the UK – from the North East to the Oxford–Cambridge corridor. That's how we build an economy that works for, and rewards, working people in Britain,” she said.

The minister concluded by stressing that “turning inwards is the wrong response to global challenges.” She affirmed that Britain remains open for business and is taking a strategic approach to building partnerships that create jobs and benefit working people across the United Kingdom.

“After landmark deals with the US, EU and India, we're accelerating progress with the GCC,” she said.


Yemen’s Interior Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: Hezbollah Members Arrested in Aden

Yemeni Interior Minister Major General Ibrahim Haydan. Photo: Turky Alagili
Yemeni Interior Minister Major General Ibrahim Haydan. Photo: Turky Alagili
TT

Yemen’s Interior Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: Hezbollah Members Arrested in Aden

Yemeni Interior Minister Major General Ibrahim Haydan. Photo: Turky Alagili
Yemeni Interior Minister Major General Ibrahim Haydan. Photo: Turky Alagili

Yemeni Interior Minister Major General Ibrahim Haydan said that security forces have arrested members of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, as well as Syrians and Iranians involved in drug trafficking and supporting the Houthi militias.

The detainees are connected to drug smuggling networks that moved to Yemen after the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, he told Asharq Al-Awsat in an interview.

The minister stated that security forces arrested two individuals at Aden International Airport. One is affiliated with Hezbollah and the other is a Syrian national.

The arrests took place after the Houthi-controlled Sanaa airport was bombed by Israel, disrupting flights and prompting the two to try to enter through Aden Airport as tourists. He added that “the suspects remain in custody in Aden.”

In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the minister also said that a Yemeni court has recently sentenced six Iranians to death for smuggling tons of narcotics, after convicting them of taking part in large-scale smuggling operations linked to regional networks that fund the Houthis.

Haydan accused Iran of sending military experts and transferring drug factories and drone production facilities to Yemen after the collapse of some of its traditional proxies in the region.

The minister believes that the Houthi group has reached its “weakest point,” saying that the latest Israeli strikes that targeted militia leaders have created divisions within the movement’s ranks.

Haydan hailed the security partnership between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, saying it has made great achievements in arresting terrorists and criminals.

He described the partnership as a “great example of productive security cooperation.”

The minister said the security cooperation between the two sides has “yielded significant successes on the ground,” most notably the joint security operation in Al-Mahra Governorate, which “resulted in the arrest of a cell affiliated with ISIS and several of its most dangerous members, thanks to direct coordination with Saudi security agencies through special units.”

The minister said that “the exchange of intelligence information between the Yemeni Interior Ministry and the relevant security authorities in the Kingdom has also been a decisive factor in the recent successes in combating drug smuggling.”

“Security forces have managed to thwart several operations and seize large quantities of illegal substances,” he told his interviewer.

He also stressed that Saudi support is not limited to field operations, but also includes training and capacity building of security personnel.

One of the most prominent forms of this support, he said, was the training programs implemented last year to qualify personnel working at land, air, and sea border crossings.

Haydan also described security ties between Yemen and the US as “excellent,” saying it is witnessing a “gradual progress toward restoring the level of partnership that existed before the Houthi coup in 2014.”

He noted that cooperation between the two sides “is gradually returning to its normal course after years of interruption.”

“We have already begun receiving training opportunities for counterterrorism personnel in a number of friendly countries under US sponsorship,” he said, pointing out that his country is “working to develop this cooperation to include equipping the Interior Ministry with advanced specialized devices for counterterrorism efforts.”