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.”



Report: Netanyahu Relegated from Partner to Passenger in Trump's War on Iran

 US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)
US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)
TT

Report: Netanyahu Relegated from Partner to Passenger in Trump's War on Iran

 US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)
US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)

In the run-up to the February 28 attack on Iran, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel was not only in the Situation Room with President Trump, he was leading the discussion, predicting that a joint US-Israeli strike could very well lead to the demise of the regime in Iran.

“Just a few weeks later, after those sanguine assurances proved inaccurate, the picture was starkly different. Israel was so thoroughly sidelined by the Trump administration, two Israeli defense officials said, that its leaders were cut almost entirely out of the loop on truce talks between the United States and Iran,” said a New York Times report on Saturday.

“Starved of information from their closest ally, the Israelis have been forced to pick up what they can about the back-and-forth between Washington and Tehran through their connections with leaders and diplomats in the region as well as their own surveillance from inside the Iranian regime,” said the two officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

“The banishment from the cockpit to economy class has potentially significant consequences for Israel, and especially for the prime minister, who faces an uphill re-election battle this year.”

“Netanyahu has long sold himself to Israeli voters as a kind of Trump whisperer,” uniquely capable of enlisting and retaining the president’s support. In a televised speech early in the war, he portrayed himself as the president’s peer, assuring Israelis that he talked to Trump “almost every day,” exchanging ideas and advice, “and deciding together.”

“He had led Israel to war in February with grand visions of achieving a goal he has pursued for decades: stopping Iran’s push for nuclear weapons once and for all. As the war began with a stunning decapitation of much of the government in Tehran, it seemed as though an even more grandiose dream might come true: the toppling of the regime.”

“But many in Trump’s inner circle had always viewed the idea of regime change as absurd. And it wasn’t long before American and Israeli priorities began to diverge more, especially after Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices soaring and pressuring Trump into agreeing to a ceasefire.”

Far from vanquished, Tehran has behaved as though it won the war, merely by surviving it. Israel, by contrast, has seen its biggest objectives for the war elude its grasp.

Netanyahu set three goals at the start of the war: toppling the regime, destroying Iran’s nuclear program and eliminating its missile program. None have been realized.

Instead of burying Iran’s nuclear ambitions, a recent American proposal called for a 20-year suspension of, or moratorium on, Iranian nuclear activity and that time frame may have gotten smaller in subsequent proposals. That raises the prospect that an eventual deal could resemble the Obama administration’s 2015 nuclear accord, which Netanyahu fought against at the time and Trump exited from three years later.

With the Trump administration excluding Israel from the negotiations, Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles may have been left off the table, as far as Israeli officials know. In that respect, any deal would fail to improve on the 2015 agreement, which Netanyahu assailed in part because it did not address Iran’s missiles.

It would also be a dismaying setback for the Israeli public, for whom life largely ground to a halt as the nation was bombarded by Iranian missiles in March and April.

There are other concerns for Israel about the possible contours of a US-Iran agreement, including a lifting of economic sanctions against Tehran. Doing so could amount to an economic lifeline, flooding Iran with billions of dollars that it could then use to rearm and to help its proxy forces, like Hezbollah, replenish their own arsenals with weapons to use against Israel.

While little is certain yet about the shape of an eventual deal — and any agreement could still be postponed by a renewal of fighting — what seems clear is that Israel’s partnership with the United States has come at a steep price. A country that for generations prided itself on “defending ourselves by ourselves,” and whose leaders exasperated a succession of American presidents with their hardheaded recalcitrance, is now making little secret of its need, and willingness, to submit to Trump’s demands.

As Defense Minister Israel Katz said on April 23, as Trump threatened to resume the war and bomb Iran back to the “Stone Age”: “We are only waiting for the green light from the US.”

“That admission was a humbling climbdown from the heady first days of the war, when the two countries achieved air supremacy and were so confident of success that they urged the Iranian people to topple the regime and secure their future,” said the NYT.

Within two weeks, it became clear that the war would not produce instant victory, as Trump had hoped. The White House, and some Israeli leaders, put aside their hopes for regime change, and Trump turned his attention toward ending the fighting.

“He had viewed Netanyahu as a war ally, but not as a close partner when it came to negotiating with the Iranians,” American officials familiar with his thinking said; in fact, he considered Netanyahu someone “who needed to be restrained when it comes to resolving conflicts.”

Israel soon found itself demoted from “equal partner” to something more akin to a “subcontractor” to the US military.

Israel would often clear plans with the United States, only to have the Trump administration throw it under the bus after those plans were executed, such as when Israel struck the South Pars natural gas field and oil facilities along the Gulf in southern Iran.

Trump even pressured Israel to bring a premature halt to its campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon within days after the ceasefire on April 8, forcing Israel to accept restraints on its fighting with a hostile adversary right on its border.

“The sidelining is particularly hard to take for some Israeli officials, who, speaking on condition of anonymity, noted that the country willingly shouldered some of the war’s more controversial assignments.”

For Netanyahu, it has meant repeatedly recalibrating his rhetoric, and even adjusting his description of Israel’s war objectives, in response to Trump’s frequent vacillations.

After initially telling his citizens that Israel’s goals were to “remove” the existential threats of an Iranian nuclear weapon and of its ballistic missile arsenal, by March 12 Netanyahu was articulating a new idea. This one downplayed the fact that those threats had not been removed, and instead exalted Israel’s close partnership with the United States.

“Threats come and threats go, but when we become a regional power, and in certain fields a global power, we have the strength to push dangers away from us and secure our future,” he said. What gave Israel such newfound strength in the eyes of its adversaries, Netanyahu asserted, was his alliance with Trump — “an alliance like no other.”

 

*David M. Halbfinger and Ronen Bergman for The New York Times


A Grieving Father Buries His 6-Year-Old After a Land Mine Kills 3 Children in Syria’s Idlib

Idris Al-Ridah, center, weeps as he prays during the funeral of his son Mohammed, who was killed in an explosion caused by war remnants while playing with other children in the village of Abu Habbah in eastern Idlib countryside, in Abu Habbah, Syria, Thursday, May 21, 2026. (AP)
Idris Al-Ridah, center, weeps as he prays during the funeral of his son Mohammed, who was killed in an explosion caused by war remnants while playing with other children in the village of Abu Habbah in eastern Idlib countryside, in Abu Habbah, Syria, Thursday, May 21, 2026. (AP)
TT

A Grieving Father Buries His 6-Year-Old After a Land Mine Kills 3 Children in Syria’s Idlib

Idris Al-Ridah, center, weeps as he prays during the funeral of his son Mohammed, who was killed in an explosion caused by war remnants while playing with other children in the village of Abu Habbah in eastern Idlib countryside, in Abu Habbah, Syria, Thursday, May 21, 2026. (AP)
Idris Al-Ridah, center, weeps as he prays during the funeral of his son Mohammed, who was killed in an explosion caused by war remnants while playing with other children in the village of Abu Habbah in eastern Idlib countryside, in Abu Habbah, Syria, Thursday, May 21, 2026. (AP)

Idris al-Ridah wept as he carried the lifeless body of his 6-year-old son Amir, wrapped in a yellow and brown blanket, in northwest Syria.

The father collapsed to the ground as he laid his son to rest, his small body lowered into a grave next to two other young children who were siblings, Aya al-Fankih, 4, and Rayan al-Fankih, 6.

The three children were killed on Thursday in the village of Abu Habbah, in the countryside in the northwestern province of Idlib, when a land mine left behind from Syria's war exploded while they were playing near a well.

The deaths are the latest reminder of the dangers posed by unexploded war remnants scattered across the country years after the conflict began.

Mines and booby traps have killed and maimed hundreds of Syrians since Syria’s conflict began in March 2011, leaving about half a million people dead.

The Syrian Civil Defense said four other children who were near the well were also wounded in the blast.

"We heard a very loud explosion next to our house,” one resident, Mahmoud al-Aleiwi. He added that “when we got to the location there were a number of children’s bodies thrown around the well.”

He said one of the children was thrown 300 meters (984 feet) away by the explosion and was found on the roof of a house.

At a nearby hospital, wounded children cried as family members tended to them. One child had shrapnel wounds across his face and body, his legs wrapped in bandages. Another lay in bed with blood visible through bandages wrapped around his head.

Ten-year-old Ibrahim al-Suwadi was injured last month in a separate explosion caused by unexploded ordnance inside a damaged school in the town of al-Habit in Idlib’s southern countryside.

Sitting beside his father inside their home, al-Suwadi described how he was playing with his friends at the school when they went inside a room and found the mine.

“Two brothers picked it up and took it to the bathroom,” the boy said. “We thought it was an exploded mine so we started throwing rocks at it. All of a sudden, an older boy grabbed my hand and we ran, the mine exploded and I lost consciousness then I don’t remember anything.”

His father said the family had fled their village in 2013 during fighting and spent years living in displacement camps before returning after the fall of Bashar Assad’s government in December 2024.

Humanitarian organizations say unexploded ordnance remains one of the deadliest legacies of Syria’s war.

“Syria has ranked among the top contaminated countries around the world over the past years,” said Jakub Valenta, head of humanitarian disarmament and peace building for the Danish Refugee Council in Syria. He added that according to the data from the United Nations, around 14.3 million people are in danger of explosive ordnance in the country.

Valenta said the explosive hazards include anti-personnel mines, anti-tank mines and other unexploded devices left behind in residential and agricultural areas.

“We’re estimating that around 1,200 people and probably more have been affected by explosive ordnance accidents directly,” he said. “Out of those 1,200 people there were around 740 fatal casualties. The vast majority of these people are men and children.”

According to the Danish Refugee Council, around 60% of contaminated areas in Syria are agricultural lands, complicating efforts by displaced families to return home and rebuild livelihoods.

In Damascus’ southern suburb of Kisweh earlier this month, Syrian trainees working with Danish Refugee Council teams carefully removed and destroyed unexploded ordnance during training exercises aimed at expanding local demining capacity.

The organization says it has recruited and trained new Syrian explosive ordnance disposal teams to help clear contaminated areas and educate communities about the risks.

“The number of the casualties is among the highest worldwide in terms of explosive accidents and victims,” Valenta said.

“These people suffer lifelong injuries, physical like losing a limb or their vision and suffer mental health problems," he said. “These people also lose their jobs and livelihoods."


Archives Interrupted: Vintage Pics Show Gaza 'We No Longer Know'

Kegham Djeghalian, whose work is on display in the French city of Marseille, opened Gaza's first ever photo studio in 1944 © MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP
Kegham Djeghalian, whose work is on display in the French city of Marseille, opened Gaza's first ever photo studio in 1944 © MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP
TT

Archives Interrupted: Vintage Pics Show Gaza 'We No Longer Know'

Kegham Djeghalian, whose work is on display in the French city of Marseille, opened Gaza's first ever photo studio in 1944 © MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP
Kegham Djeghalian, whose work is on display in the French city of Marseille, opened Gaza's first ever photo studio in 1944 © MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP

When Kegham Djeghalian photographed daily life in Gaza last century, the Palestinian territory was synonymous with Hollywood-inspired brides, fancy dress parties and excursions to smoke a hookah at the beach.

They are images from a time far removed from the rubble and tent cities of the now war-ravaged Gaza Strip.

"It's a Gaza we no longer know. A joyful Gaza, one full of hope, connected to the world, with trains and an airport," said his grandson, who has curated a show of his work in France's southern city of Marseille.

Djeghalian survived the Armenian genocide of 1915 -- a term strongly denied by Türkiye -- then settled in Gaza, opening the city's first ever photo studio in 1944.

He refused to leave, despite the recurring conflicts hitting the small territory wedged between Egypt and what became Israel in 1948, spending four decades capturing images of the Palestinian society that had adopted him, up until his death in 1981.

Some 300 of his surviving photographs are on show in Marseille until September.

'Photo Kegham of Gaza: Unboxing' is to travel to Bristol in the United Kingdom in October © MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP

- 'Diverse society' -

In one image, children have clambered onto each other to form a human pyramid in the courtyard of a school for Palestinian refugees displaced after the creation of Israel.

In another, women with voluminous hair blowouts pose smiling next to a sewing machine.

In a third, French philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir have just stepped off a small propeller plane.

The photograph has no caption, but the pair visited the Gaza Strip in March 1967 shortly before Israel seized the coastal territory in the Six-Day war.

"I grew up with family stories about Kegham, the Gazan photographer who survived the Armenian genocide," the curator, who inherited the same name as his grandfather and calls himself Kegham Jr, told AFP.

The 41-year-old professor of visual culture, who spent part of his childhood in Egypt, says his father discovered over 1,000 photo negatives "by chance" in 2018 in three red boxes at the back of a cupboard in the family's Cairo apartment.

They included studio portraits and family photos, images of children on balconies and at the beach, and crowds in the streets.

"We see a diverse society: Armenians, Greeks, Palestinians, Bedouins. But also those displaced in 1948," said Kegham Jr.

Today two-thirds of Gaza's population are descendants of Palestinian refugees, according to the United Nations.

Efforts to complete the photo archive were interrupted by the Gaa war, its curator said © MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP

- 'Unfinished' -

Kegham Jr said he did not want any captions or context to the pictures in the exhibition titled "Photo Kegham of Gaza: Unboxing", which is to travel to Bristol in the United Kingdom in October.

The "interrupted and unfinished" archives thus illustrate "a rupture of histories, shattered by war, by genocide, by occupation", he said.

Kegham Jr was unable to visit Gaza, with the territory under blockade since Hamas seized control in 2007, and then a devastating war ravaging the territory after the Palestinian Islamist militant group attacked Israel in October 2023.

To complete his photo collections, the grandson reached out to a Palestinian called Marwan al-Tarazi who held part of the archives after his brother inherited the studio.

A part of the exhibition dubbed "Zoom call" shows screenshots of their conversation in 2021.

The collaboration was interrupted when, in October 2023, Israeli strikes killed Tarazi, his wife and grandchild, he said.

In front of the images at the Marseille Photography Centre, Houri Varjabedian, a 70-year-old Marseille resident hailing from an Armenian family in Lebanon, said it felt like looking into a family album.

Her maternal grandfather, a dentist in the Ottoman army, had himself been photographed in Gaza, she said.

She said it was heartbreaking to see "those wonderful palm trees, that beach".

"It's a bit terrible given the current events," she added.