US ‘Conditional Proposal’ to Assad and Netanyahu 2011: Abandon Iran in Exchange for Restoring Golan

Asharq Al-Awsat reveals details of last chapter in negotiations between Syria and Israel

President Bashar Assad meets with John Kerry when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Nov, 8, 2010. AP file photo
President Bashar Assad meets with John Kerry when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Nov, 8, 2010. AP file photo
TT

US ‘Conditional Proposal’ to Assad and Netanyahu 2011: Abandon Iran in Exchange for Restoring Golan

President Bashar Assad meets with John Kerry when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Nov, 8, 2010. AP file photo
President Bashar Assad meets with John Kerry when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Nov, 8, 2010. AP file photo

Syria and Israel, through American mediation, were on the verge of signing a peace agreement in February 2011, just before the “Arab Spring” protests broke out. The American mediator drafted an agreement that “went further than any previous document.” It included Damascus’ pledge to sever “military ties” with Iran and the Hezbollah party in Lebanon and “neutralizing” any Israeli threat, in exchange for its reclaiming of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, based on the June 4, 1967 border.

This was confirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat by officials who were involved in the negotiations, which were held by Syrian President Bashar Assad and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and mediated by American envoy Frederic Hof. The negotiations also included at least two meetings with the participation of late Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem, legal advisor Riad Daoudi and former US Ambassador to Damascus Robert Ford. Then US President Barack Obama and his Vice President Joe Biden, the current president, were aware of these secret negotiations, which ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was also heavily involved in. No official statement over these negotiations was made by Damascus, which has long expressed its commitment to restoring all Golan territories and maintaining the “strategic relationship with Iran”.

Enticing offer

Former US Secretary of State John Kerry shed light on the secret talks. In his book “Every Day Is Extra”, he revealed that Assad had sent Obama a proposal to establish peace with Israel. When informed of the proposal, Netanyahu was very surprised with it. Kerry revealed that when he served as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he visited Damascus in 2009 where he met with Assad to tackle a number of issues including a peace deal with Israel given that previous attempts by the governments of Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak and Netanyahu (1996-1999) ended in failure.

Kerry wrote: “Assad asked me what it would take to enter into serious peace negotiations [with Israel], in the hope of securing return of the Golan Heights, which Syria had lost to Israel in 1967. I told him that if he were serious, he should make a private proposal.”

“He asked what it would look like. I shared my thoughts. He instructed his top aide to draft a letter from Assad to President Obama,” he added. Assad, in his letter, had asked Obama to sponsor a fresh round of Syria-Israel peace talks, expressing his readiness “to take a number of steps in exchange for the return of the Golan from Israel”.

The next day, Kerry flew to Israel where he met with Netanyahu, who had returned to power. Netanyahu, recalled Kerry “was surprised that Assad was willing to go that far, significantly further than he’d been willing to go [previously].”

Kerry said that after meeting with Netanyahu, he returned to Washington with the “Assad offer”. The Obama administration tried to test the extent of the Syrian president’s seriousness by demanding “confidence-building measures” towards the US and Israel, including stopping some arms shipments to Hezbollah, which did not happen.

“I remember hearing that Assad was continuing with exactly the kind of behavior on Hezbollah that we told him needed to stop. It was disappointing but unsurprising,” wrote Kerry.

Iranian strikes

With the launch of peace negotiations in wake of the 1991 Madrid peace conference, overtures between Syria and Israel were made and peaked when Rabin held the so-called “four-legged table” negotiations. They focused on the withdrawal, peace relations, security arrangements and the timetable. Meetings included the Syrian and Israeli chiefs of staff, as well as secret and open negotiations that covered a commitment towards a “complete withdrawal” from the Golan and studying the possibility of “establishing normal peace relations”, security arrangements and opening embassies and border gates along the June 4, 1967 border.

After Rabin was assassinated in November 1995, Peres tried to “soar in the sky with a peace deal with Syria”, rushing to hold negotiations to reach a treaty. Indeed, in early 1996 bilateral negotiations were held but they collapsed after a series of suicide attacks in Tel Aviv, Ashkelon and Jerusalem.

At the time, the Israeli delegation informed its Syrian counterpart during talks in the US that “Iran is behind the attacks because it wants the negotiations to fail” and that “Syria must condemn the terrorist operations,” revealed an informed source. The negotiations ultimately collapsed and Peres launched Operation Grapes of Wrath in Lebanon, which marked the end of his time in government.

Netanyahu then came to power in 1996. Late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad “negotiated” with him through an American mediator, businessman Ronald Lauder, over a “very advanced” detailed agreement in 1998. Netanyahu was succeeded by Ehud Barak, who resumed the negotiations and held a meeting with former Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa. The talks were sponsored by former US President Bill Clinton. Barak offered an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan towards the June 4 border in exchange for peace and security arrangements. Intense work meetings were held in Shepherdstown near Washington, with attention focused on the thorny water file. The Israelis said that the issue was a “red line” and the Americans offered a “working paper” equivalent to a draft peace treaty.

In early 2000, Barak informed the Americans at the conclusion of another round of negotiations that he could not strike a peace deal because of the “complicated internal situation” that demanded he head back to Israel. He pledged to return to Shepherdstown, but never did.

The final shot at negotiations by a then ailing Hafez Assad was made in March 2000 when he met with Clinton in Geneva. Those talks also collapsed after 20 minutes due to a dispute over Syria’s access to the shores of Lake Tiberias and Clinton’s proposal of a map, which was previously rejected by Assad, of the June 4 border and Tiberias shore.

President Bashar Assad came to power in mid-2000. When Syria was confronted with international isolation following the assassination of Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, Damascus started to show some flexibility in its desire to hold negotiations with Tel Aviv. It sought to “end the isolation imposed by Washington by holding negotiations with Tel Aviv.” Turkey sponsored the talks, which were held in 2008. The discussions were advanced enough to begin considering the possibility of arranging direct telephone negotiations between Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Assad and then Israeli PM Ehud Olmert in late 2008. The efforts collapsed when Israel launched an operation against the Gaza Strip in December of that year.

The European and American isolation eventually ended. Robert Ford was then appointed ambassador to Damascus in 2010. Washington built on previous efforts, including those exerted by Ankara, and on the Obama administration’s desire to activate the peace path. To that end, it had appointed envoy George Mitchell to test the waters in the Syrian-Israeli negotiations, which remained secret and whom very few figures in each of the involved countries knew about.

On the American side, everyone from Obama, Biden, Clinton, national security advisor Tom Donilon, American Ambassador to Tel Aviv Dan Shapiro and Ford in Damascus knew of the talks. On the Syrian side, the officials who were informed of the talks, in varying degrees, included Assad, Muallem and Daoudi. The latter two had held rounds of talks with Hof and Ford. In Israel, Hof’s meetings were limited to Netanyahu at the official residence of the prime minister. The meetings were attended by then Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

Assad-Hof

The final meeting held as part of this mediation took place between Assad and Hof on February 28, 2011, at the height of the “Arab Spring” that had ousted regimes in Libya and Egypt and whose protests had started to break out in Damascus. Hof, who had worked on drafting the agreement, recalled that some proposals included Damascus’ abandoning of “military relations” with Tehran and Hezbollah in exchange for the Israeli withdrawal from the Golan towards the June 4 border.

Hof is a former US military commander and expert in the demarcation of borders of disputed areas. Back in the early 1990s, he was the first official to draw the June 4 border on the ground. Ford told Asharq Al-Awsat that upon his arrival in Damascus, Hof requested that the ambassador not attend his meeting with Assad. Ford agreed on condition that “that Hof sleep at the ambassador's residence”.

“I telephoned him on an open line so that Syrian intelligence could overhear our conversation. I said, ‘I agree on condition that you and your aide sleep at the ambassador’s residence, so that the Syrians know that we are a single team.’ And this is indeed what happened. Hof later informed me of the details of the meeting, I leave it to him to disclose” what took place during talks with Assad and with the negotiations as a whole.

According to Israeli reports in 2012, Hof’s documents revealed that the negotiations were based on Netanyahu’s readiness to return to the June 4 border, allowing Damascus complete control over the Golan, in exchange for a comprehensive peace deal that includes an Israeli “expectation” that Syria would sever ties with Iran.

Officials who were informed of the talks said Hof was “confident that peace was possible, whereby Assad would end his relations with Iran and Hezbollah and shift his alliances towards America and moderate Arab countries.”

One official told Asharq Al-Awsat: “I did not see the peace agreement draft. It was the beginning of negotiations, not the end.” Another official said: “It was not clear whether the two sides had agreed on a specific timetable or a resolution to the water issue in the Golan. Syria was saying that Israel had no claim over waters beyond the June 4 border. Israel, however, said that even if it could not deploy its military beyond that border, it wanted to maintain logistic presence that would allow it access to the water.”

The water dispute and shore of Tiberias Lake were one of the reasons of the collapse of the Assad-Clinton summit in 2000. Assad at the time had insisted that he wanted to “dip his feet” in the lake, which Barak rejected at the time. In fact, the Israelis paved a road around the shore, making it virtually impossible for the Syrians to access it without a clear agreement.

Some said that the Hof mediation was “conditional-hypothetical”, similar to what had taken place in the mid-1990s when then US Secretary of State Warren Christopher led negotiations by posing “hypothetical” questions to Hafez Assad. “What if Rabin pledged to withdraw fully from the Golan? Are you ready to forge peace (normalize) ties?” At the time, Rabin had placed a “deposit” with Christopher that included the readiness to pullout completely from the Golan if Assad agreed to demands that included peace relations and security arrangements.

One of the officials informed of the Hof mediation said that Netanyahu was “prepared to withdraw completely from the Golan if the Syrians agreed to a peace agreement that includes changing regional approaches and severing ties with Iran.”

A former American official, who is informed of the file, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “There can be no doubt on the seriousness. The negotiations were conditional. The Israelis wanted strategic change in the Syrian approach. Syria wanted to reclaim all territories until the June 4 border. A lot of progress had taken place between both sides.”

“America had no doubt over the seriousness of the negotiations. Assad and Netanyahu were serious in finding out how far the other would go,” he added. “Moreover, great progress, more than ever before, was achieved with Netanyahu over the issue of territories. Hof’s meeting with Assad on February 28 gave a clear signal of what Assad could offer.”

The Americans are keen on stressing that the written draft of the agreement was American. “This is important because envoy George Mitchel did not draft any paper between Netanyahu and [Palestinian] President Mahmoud Abbas (Abou Mazen).” The Americans are also keen to stress that no direct Syrian-Israeli meeting had taken place, but the negotiations had been held through Hof.

Confidence-building

The last attempt at negotiations gains importance on the eve of the tenth anniversary of the eruption of the Syrian protests, especially for Moscow, the main player in Syria that is leading a “confidence-building” mediation between Damascus and Tel Aviv. This meditation includes a prisoner swap, repatriating the remains of Israeli soldiers, sponsoring a return to working with the “disengagement agreement” in the Golan of 2018 and keeping Iran and its militias away from southern Syria.

Another area of significance is word that some Arab countries are interested in opening channels between Damascus and Israel or holding secret meetings to test the possibility of striking a peace agreement and keeping Iran away in exchange for financial “incentives” related to reconstructing Syria and resolving its economic problems.

Tel Aviv did not openly express interest in the political negotiations, especially after President Donald Trump announced in 2019 his support for “Israeli sovereignty” over the Golan and as it has continued to carry out raids against “Iranian positions” in Syria. Damascus, for its part, has not openly expressed interest in peace that does not include a “complete withdrawal” from the Golan and that may “jeopardize its strategic relations with Iran.”

Ford, meanwhile, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “It will be difficult for Assad to presently sign a peace deal with Israel unless he receives a lot in return, because he currently needs the support provided by Iran, its militias and Hezbollah. If they pull out from Syria, who will help the regime control the Syrian Badia, Homs, Sweida and parts of Daraa?”

“Will Damascus obtain western financial aid even if Assad were to sign a peace agreement and open an Israeli embassy in Damascus? It is difficult for the money to flow and for the sanctions to be removed after all the crimes that have taken place in Syria,” he remarked. “Some American sanctions may be removed, such as those related to the blacklisting of terrorist organizations, meddling in Lebanon or the arrival of Arab or European aid. However, the Caesar Act (which came into effect in mid-2020) cannot be simply undone.”

“Assad will not receive any sympathy in America even if a peace agreement is signed. There are limits to what can be offered in exchange to any peace deal,” he added.

Meanwhile, an Arab official, who is informed of Damascus’ position, said: “It is difficult for the regime to agree to sign a peace agreement without receiving a clear guarantee that it will reclaim the whole of the Golan. It is also difficult for the regime to completely disassociate itself from Iran.”

Between these two stances, a senior official, who is informed of the position in Syria, Israel, the region and the US, said: “Perhaps this was the final chapter in efforts to reach a peace agreement between Syria and Israel in the form we have been familiar with in past decades. At best, a new agreement or understanding may be reached, but it will be different than what we have read about and negotiated over for decades.”



US-led Troops Exit Iraq: What's Next for Pro-Iran Groups?

A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country.  (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country. (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
TT

US-led Troops Exit Iraq: What's Next for Pro-Iran Groups?

A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country.  (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country. (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)

With the US-led anti-extremist coalition leaving Iraq, Baghdad faces mounting pressure to rein in Tehran-backed armed groups, a difficult task in a country long caught between its allies, the US and Iran.

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, who assumed power earlier this year with the United States' blessing, has pledged that after the coalition exits on Wednesday, pro-Iran groups would hand over their weapons to the state.

But the issue has proven far more complicated than simple announcements, said AFP.

Iraq has long been a proxy battleground for the US and Iran, with each interfering in major political decisions and government formation.

The ongoing Middle East war, during which Iran-backed groups in Iraq targeted US facilities there and around the region hundreds of times, has deepened Iraq's entanglement.

- 'Tricky' -

Several senior Iraqi officials told AFP that Iran will not accept that the factions hand over their weapons, especially amid the regional war, and its officials have clearly relayed the message.

"If there's a deal between the US and Iran, I think that this whole issue becomes very easy to deal with," Iraqi political analyst Sajad Jiyad said.

But Jiyad said "Iran has been very clear that while there is a conflict going on, they cannot give up their strategic capabilities", including the Iraqi groups and "their ability to attack US interests in Iraq and the region".

It is, however, a "tricky situation", because Iran doesn't want an "unstable Iraq", he added.

"Iran's agenda is to reach a deal with the US, so that these groups will naturally reduce their visibility and activity," without giving up capabilities.

The factions also want assurances that the US won't target them before they consider surrendering their weapons.

But if no progress is forthcoming in terms of disarming these groups, then "the US is not going to make a longer-term commitment of not targeting them", he said.

It will continue on its usual paths: diplomatic and economic pressure through sanctions, and occasional strikes.

- 'Liability' -

The US-led coalition deployed to Iraq and Syria in 2014 to fight the ISIS group, which seized large swathes of both countries and committed atrocities.

Both the coalition and Tehran-backed groups fought ISIS, their common enemy.

After ISIS's defeat in Iraq in 2017, those groups demanded the withdrawal of US troops and began targeting them with drones and missiles, triggering US retaliatory strikes that killed several of their commanders over the years.

US pressure on successive Iraqi governments to disarm the factions mounted, especially after they intervened in support of Palestinians during the Gaza war in 2023, and later backed Tehran in the Middle East war.

Political analyst Jiyad said little should be expected after the coalition's pullout.

"We are not going to get disarmament... but there has to be some sort of progress and some plan," he said.

"What is probably going to happen is the process begins" towards a solution, but it will require time and "trust-building measures".

The Tehran-backed groups feel the government is unable to protect them from the US, and the government sees them as a "liability," he added.

- No plan -

While some groups said they would disarm, other powerful factions refuse to do so.

But the government "does not even have a plan" for how it is going to disarm them, a diplomatic source in Baghdad said.

Two senior politicians told AFP that Zaidi, a newcomer to politics, had repeatedly said he was ready to "confront" the groups if they don't disarm.

For weeks, tensions grew until an unannounced truce was reached, with the intervention of senior politicians who are now hoping to work out a deal.

An Iraqi official said that "the issue needs time to reassure the factions, and prevent any confrontation between Iraqi forces and the armed groups".

Kazem al-Fartoussi, spokesperson for the Kataeb Sayyid al-Shuhada armed group, said the factions don't want a confrontation with the state because "there will be no winners".

But "our weapons are precious, so we have said these weapons are in exchange for sovereignty," including the withdrawal of foreign troops and an end to American political and economic interference.

Fartoussi said the factions are in talks with the government about "regulating" their weapons, as well as their relationship with the state, but he doesn't trust the US.

For the Americans and Israelis, their objective is "nothing other than eliminating the factions, not the weapons," Fartoussi said.

If the issue is the factions' "existence", then "we reject any discussion".


Israel Obliterates South Lebanon's Architectural Heritage

The residence of Said Shahine, father of Ghaleb and Fahmi Shahine, which was completely destroyed in the city of Nabatieh (Kamel Jaber archive)
The residence of Said Shahine, father of Ghaleb and Fahmi Shahine, which was completely destroyed in the city of Nabatieh (Kamel Jaber archive)
TT

Israel Obliterates South Lebanon's Architectural Heritage

The residence of Said Shahine, father of Ghaleb and Fahmi Shahine, which was completely destroyed in the city of Nabatieh (Kamel Jaber archive)
The residence of Said Shahine, father of Ghaleb and Fahmi Shahine, which was completely destroyed in the city of Nabatieh (Kamel Jaber archive)

Daily attacks around the city of Nabatieh and the town of Kfar Rumman have not stopped the Zein family from launching work to restore “what can be restored” of the home of Youssef Bek Zein, which was damaged by intensive Israeli strikes several months ago.

Descendants of one of Nabatieh’s best-known political families see preserving their heritage as an act of defiance against Israel, which they say is erasing physical traces and memories from the land and seeking to eliminate historic homes with distinctive architecture, political family residences, and urban and historical landmarks of all kinds across South Lebanon.

During the two large-scale wars Israel waged on South Lebanon, airstrikes and demolitions wiped out dozens of heritage landmarks, including political family homes whose architecture and libraries documented periods of Jabal Amel’s political history over the past two centuries.

This photograph taken from the southern Lebanese village of Hanniyeh shows smoke rising from the site of a series of Israeli controlled explosions in the nearby village of al-Mansouri on September 28, 2026. (Photo by Kawnat HAJU / AFP)

In Nabatieh alone, Israeli bombardment razed 147 homes between 80 and 110 years old. Some had developed from houses originally built 200 years ago. They included heritage properties belonging to local political leaders, ministers and lawmakers who had played roles in Nabatieh and its surroundings over past decades.

The damage also extended to political family residences around Nabatieh, including the Asaad family home in Taybeh. Local activists say many old houses were razed along with it, including the home of Khalil Abdallah in Khiam, one of the region’s most prominent historical leaders, built in 1862.

Abdel Aziz Zein’s Home: A Cultural Role

The home of Youssef Bek Zein, heavily damaged by Israeli bombardment, is now among the last remaining heritage landmarks and architectural witnesses in the Nabatieh area following the loss of the Abdel Aziz Zein residence.

In recent years, that residence had become a cultural hub in the region. His son, Dr. Saad Zein, expanded it to host cultural and community activities.

“My family home, the Abdel Aziz Zein residence, was more than 80 years old,” Dr. Saad Zein told Asharq Al-Awsat. “An Israeli strike completely demolished the house and wiped out all its features — not only its architecture, but also its cultural role.”

The Abdel Aziz Zein residence (Saad Zein archive)

Zein said the house had served as a venue for cultural and social activities since at least 2000. He had established a small museum there documenting the history of Jabal Amel, and the house “became a cultural destination in the region.”

The residence was later expanded to include gardens and a diwaniya, a traditional reception space that is a central feature of southern Lebanese architecture. In recent years, it became known as the “Saad Zein House.”

The strike on the large residence also damaged the adjoining Zein family home. That residence had been a center of political and social leadership for more than a century. Built 150 years ago, it housed the Ottoman governor in the 19th century before ownership passed to the Zein family and Youssef Bek Zein took up residence there.

Even the Family Tombs Were Hit

Zein entered parliament after the proclamation of Greater Lebanon in 1924, and his family became one of Jabal Amel’s most prominent political families during the last century. Its parliamentary representation continued uninterrupted until 2018.

“The Youssef Bek Zein residence was severely damaged. The roof, courtyard and family tombs were hit, including Youssef Bek’s grave,” Dr. Saad Zein stated.

“We are now working intensively and quickly to restore the house so it can be usable again and remain a witness to a political era, given that the family is one of Jabal Amel’s founding families and has maintained a cultural, developmental and social presence — a role that continues with me and my uncle.”

Zein stressed that the targeting of political homes and urban and historical landmarks “aims to erase traces and memories from the land in order to sever the Lebanese people’s connection to their homes, land and heritage.”

Deliberate and Systematic Destruction

Cultural and social figures in Nabatieh broadly agree that what occurred during the wars of 2024 and 2026 amounted to the “systematic destruction of memory without any actual justification.”

They argue that the concentrated bombardment and leveling of longstanding family homes historically associated with political positions opposed to Hezbollah contradicts the Israeli military’s assertion that its strikes target only Hezbollah facilities and headquarters.

One particularly notable case was the leveling of the home of former lawmaker Habib Sadek, founder of the Cultural Council for South Lebanon, in Kfour, west of Nabatieh.

Sadek was among South Lebanon’s best-known political and cultural activists. He served in parliament in 1992 and was one of the most prominent chroniclers of Israeli violations in the south since the 1940s. He encouraged the publication of works sponsored by the Cultural Council and combined a political career with his work as a writer, poet and thinker.

Manuscripts Documenting Violations

Kamel Jaber, head of the Cultural Council’s Nabatieh branch, told Asharq Al-Awsat that after Sadek’s home in Khiam was demolished in 1977, the area remained under occupation until 2000 and the family was forced to live between Beirut and Nabatieh.

“The family was determined to build a house outside the city resembling the homes of southerners — meaning it would have a garden surrounded by pine trees, with roses blooming in it,” Jaber said.

“Sadek paid particular attention to a diwaniya on the lower floor of the house, where he kept many of the manuscripts he had presented through various radio programs, as well as writings from the 1960s and 1970s. He also created extensive libraries in the diwaniya containing books, manuscripts and the rest of his cultural legacy.”

Jaber said Sadek was “one of the most prominent cultural figures who wrote and published works and books about the south, documenting violations and various forms of Israeli occupation, whether related to ambitions over water, geography or other issues, and produced studies showing the harm inflicted on the south through occupation.”

From that perspective, Jaber said the targeting of the house “was a targeting of Habib Sadek, his role, legacy and career.” He ruled out any security-related reason for striking the house, which he said was “closed and checked daily by a caretaker.”

Erasing Architectural and Political Heritage

The devastation is viewed locally as part of an effort to eliminate Nabatieh’s urban, architectural and political heritage.

After the 2024 war, cultural figures in the city launched an initiative, involving civil society groups in cooperation with the municipality, to document heritage buildings lost to Israeli bombardment. The survey was updated just two weeks before this article was written.

It found that 147 homes had been completely razed, leaving only a very small number of such buildings standing.

During the 2026 war, what remained of the Fadl al-Fadl house in the Manshieh district was demolished. The house was built late in the last century and designed by an Egyptian architect. General Gouraud visited it in the 1920s during a trip to the south while serving as French high commissioner in Lebanon.

The home of former lawmaker Mohammed Bek al-Fadl, meanwhile, lost large sections after strikes hit its surroundings in 2024. The house is 102 years old. Jaber, who works to document local memory through a civil society organization in Nabatieh, said its new owner had decided to restore it.

The home of Mohammed Bek al-Fadl (Kamel Jaber archive)

Erasing Cultural Memory

Nabatieh residents see the campaign as targeting architecture that embodies the area’s cultural heritage and its social, political and urban memory.

In Nabatieh, Israeli strikes completely leveled the residence of the late minister and lawmaker Rafik Shahine, as well as the home of Said Shahine, father of lawmakers and ministers Ghaleb and Fahmi Shahine.

Other buildings lost in the strikes had been regarded as architectural masterpieces, including the palace of Dr. Bahjat al-Mirza, considered one of the city’s most beautiful homes because its facades featured carvings in stone. Mirza was among Nabatieh’s first physicians in the 20th century to open his home to provide medical care to residents.

Mahmoud Shahine’s house was also razed in 2026. The building had served as a school during the last century and was among the houses constructed on the remains of older homes built some 200 years ago.

On Sept. 6, 2026, an Israeli strike leveled the home of Dr. Adnan Sharif, a century-old architectural landmark.

The home of Dr. Adnan Sharif (Kamel Jaber archive)

The home of former lawmaker Anwar Sabbah, father of Sadek Sabbah, director of Sabbah Brothers television production company, was also demolished. Built on a hill in Nabatieh in the early 1990s, it was separate from the family residence in the city, which remained standing.

Strikes also razed Ghandour Hospital, one of the main hospitals that provided medical services to the Nabatieh area during the period of occupation beginning in the 1980s.

A War on History

Israeli strikes did not only target houses and mansions but also hit archaeological and heritage sites across the south.

A market dating to the Mamluk era in Nabatieh was heavily bombarded, leaving part of it in ruins. The capital of an ancient column was dislodged at a UNESCO-listed site in the southern coastal city of Tyre.

A religious site known as “Shamoun al-Safa,” visited by both Muslims and Christians in the southern town of Shamaa, was also razed, as was Shamaa’s Crusader castle.

There is also no information about the condition of “Ain al-Fawqa” in Taybeh after the area surrounding it in the town square was devastated. The water collection spring was built in a spiral form and contains architectural features resembling examples from the Roman and Byzantine periods. It was restored during the Ottoman era.

Culture Minister Ghassan Salame told Reuters last month that historic towns outside the designated area were pummeled with airstrikes, including Tyre and Nabatieh.

Heavy bombing hit the town of Tebnin, prompting fears that its Crusader fortress was also damaged, Salame said.

"Heritage is not only Roman and Phoenician antiquities,” he added. “Heritage is also historic buildings, archaeological sites, and buildings with a cultural function."

He expressed concern that the Israeli campaign could completely erase centuries of Lebanese history.

UNESCO, meanwhile, said in a statement that it was concerned about the situation in Tyre, a World Heritage site under the agency’s enhanced protection.

It added it was deeply concerned by reports of damage to Shamaa Castle in South Lebanon and fighting near Beaufort Castle, denouncing what it described as “unlawful attacks on cultural property.”


'Currently Impossible': North Korea Defections in Freefall

Visitors look towards North Korea, which has worked to seal off links to the outside world. Lillian SUWANRUMPHA / AFP
Visitors look towards North Korea, which has worked to seal off links to the outside world. Lillian SUWANRUMPHA / AFP
TT

'Currently Impossible': North Korea Defections in Freefall

Visitors look towards North Korea, which has worked to seal off links to the outside world. Lillian SUWANRUMPHA / AFP
Visitors look towards North Korea, which has worked to seal off links to the outside world. Lillian SUWANRUMPHA / AFP

A building-sized North Korean flag waves from a tower on the de facto border with South Korea, marking territory that experts say has become nearly impossible to escape.

The combined total of North Koreans to reach South Korea in the past six years is less than the number that typically defected each year for decades -- and appears to be declining further in 2026, said AFP.

The main cause is leader Kim Jong Un's aim to preserve his family dynasty by sealing the country off from the outside, keeping people in and information out, experts say.

"As I understand it, bringing family members directly from North Korea is currently impossible," 29-year-old Chae Yoon-seo, who fled in 2019, told AFP.

She swam across a river into China at night with a smuggler's help, and travelled through Laos, Vietnam and Thailand before finally flying to South Korea.

Defections to the South hit a peak of more than 2,900 in 2009 and stayed well above 1,000 per year for the next decade.

But there were just 63 in the first half of this year -- down by over a third from the same period in 2025, said Seoul's Unification Ministry.

- 'Soviet-style border' -

Arrivals have fluctuated over the decades, but plunged sharply during the Covid pandemic when many nations shut their borders.

A key change in North Korea, however, started years before.

After taking power in 2011, Kim began restricting the informal trade and migration links along the roughly 1,415-kilometer (880-mile) northern border with China.

In addition to being an economic lifeline, the Chinese border region has also been the first step in most defectors' escapes.

The long frontier was relatively porous, unlike the heavily mined, fenced and surveilled Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) that serves as the Koreas' de facto border.

Along the boundary with China, Kim's government has erected fences and installed cameras as well as strips of sand that preserve the footprints of anyone who crosses.

"North Koreans built a real Soviet-style border security system," said Andrei Lankov, an expert on the North at Kookmin University in Seoul.

Beijing has helped too, said Lankov, noting China's preference to keep the status quo of the Kim dynasty by opposing potential instability from defectors or their supporters.

As part of its efforts, China reportedly has put in place hundreds of facial recognition cameras, noted Rachel Minyoung Lee, senior fellow with the Stimson Center's 38 North.

She added that Beijing also added more patrol boats and new or planned deportation facilities along its northeastern border.

- Ousted, killed or exiled -

The roughly 34,500 defectors to reach the South since 1998 are a fraction of North Korea's 26.6 million people, UN figures show, but the plunging number of escapes has consequences.

"Defectors are the main source of information about the North," said Fyodor Tertitsky, lecturer at Seoul's Korea University, noting both South Korean intelligence and researchers interrogate them.

Though some people still do get out.

Defector Gyuri Kang's 2023 escape by boat with her mother and aunt -- across the maritime border with the South, an extremely rare feat -- was a "miracle", she told a UN hearing.

She is also a case in point for why North Korea has made great efforts to seal itself off.

Kang noted the influence of South Korean dramas smuggled in on USB drives, finding them "so refreshing and more credible than North Korea state propaganda".

"North Korean authorities are keenly aware of the impact of outside media," she said.

In 2020, North Korea made possessing foreign media a crime punishable by years-long forced labor terms -- and potential death sentences for large-scale distribution, according to Amnesty International.

Lankov, from Kookmin University, said external information is the greatest threat to the long-term survival of North Korea's leadership.

"If they let their people interact with the outside world, they are highly likely to be overthrown, and maybe killed or driven into exile," he added.

Chae, the defector, said her hope was that the North's isolated people are not one day simply forgotten by the outside world.

"These days, there are a lot of cynical reactions on helping other countries, so I am a bit worried that one day, interest in North Korean human rights might fade away as well," she added.