Episode 5: Clinton Tried to Dissociate Assad from Iraq Bombing by Resuming Negotiations with Israel

Asharq Al-Awsat Publishes Secret Letters between the Syrian, Iraqi Presidents in the mid-1990s

US President Bill Clinton and his Syrian counterpart, Hafez al-Assad, in Damascus in October 1994 (Getty Images)
US President Bill Clinton and his Syrian counterpart, Hafez al-Assad, in Damascus in October 1994 (Getty Images)
TT

Episode 5: Clinton Tried to Dissociate Assad from Iraq Bombing by Resuming Negotiations with Israel

US President Bill Clinton and his Syrian counterpart, Hafez al-Assad, in Damascus in October 1994 (Getty Images)
US President Bill Clinton and his Syrian counterpart, Hafez al-Assad, in Damascus in October 1994 (Getty Images)

In the second half of 1998, Syria was reassured by its “tutelage” over Lebanon on its western front and was testing secret channels with the new decision-maker on its southern borders, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

However, the country was encircled by the Iraqi flames in the east and by a storm of Turkish threats and military build-up on its northern borders, aimed at pressuring President Hafez al-Assad to expel the leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Abdullah Ocalan.

As tension rose in Iraq at the beginning of 1998, Assad dispatched his deputy, Abdel Halim Khaddam, and Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa to Cairo, to convey a message to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

According to the minutes of the meeting, obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat from Khaddam’s personal papers, Assad and Mubarak were convinced that Saddam “was not removing the pretexts” to prevent military escalation. The two leaders agreed to send a joint message and to tell Saddam Hussein frankly, that the strike would target him in particular, as a regime change was required and would not happen but through an attack.

By the end of that year, the American threat was approaching Iraqi soil. Upon examining the documents and messages between Saddam, Assad and other leaders, it was evident that the Iraq issue was linked to other files - other gains pertaining to Syria.

In fact, in July 1996, French President Jacques Chirac tried to lure Assad to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon in exchange for working with Netanyahu for “Israel’s withdrawal from the Golan and the guarantee of Syria’s continued military presence in Lebanon.”

Almost two years later, US President Bill Clinton clearly declared Assad’s “neutrality” regarding a strike on Iraq by working to resume peace negotiations with Netanyahu “from where they left off” during the era of his predecessor Shimon Peres in 1996, when the Syrian President received an Israeli commitment to a complete withdrawal from the occupied Syrian Golan Heights to the June 4, 1967 line.

On February 21, 1998, Clinton wrote to Assad: “If Saddam compels us to take military action, it will be important for Syria to remain committed to Iraq’s full compliance with UN resolutions… I am fully aware of our previous efforts (in the Syrian-Israeli peace negotiations) and I am not ready to go back to ground zero. However, based on my conversations with the Prime Minister of Israel (Benjamin Netanyahu), I believe that it is still possible, even at this time, to achieve a peace agreement. Flexibility will be required on both sides.”

Assad responded on March 13, 1998, saying: “You have noticed the extent of anxiety and tension that prevailed in public opinion, especially in the Arab and Islamic worlds, due to the possibility of military action against Iraq that would increase the suffering.”

He added: “But resuming negotiations without continuing to build on what has been achieved will not only be a waste of five difficult years of US, Syrian and Israeli efforts, but will also lead to derailing the negotiations.”

The Iraqi problem was one of the most dangerous crises that the region witnessed after the Iraqi forces invaded Kuwait. American pressure was mounting with regards to the weapons of mass destruction. The only way to inspect them was the creation of the Monitoring and Inspection Committee by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

In light of the tense situation, Assad made a phone call with Mubarak, during which they agreed that Khaddam and Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa visit Cairo to assess the situation and draw the appropriate position that would ward off harm from Iraq.

On February 17, 1998, Khaddam and Al-Sharaa met in Cairo with Kamal Al-Ganzouri, Prime Minister of Egypt, Amr Moussa, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Osama Al-Baz, Advisor to the President for Political Affairs, before meeting Mubarak.

According to the minutes of the meeting, Mubarak asked the Syrian delegation how they would evaluate the situation, their opinion about the correctness of the Americans’ intention to strike Iraq and the Israeli role in the crisis.

Khaddam replied: “Of course, Israel has a role. Mr. President, in view of what is happening, is this fierce campaign and this large crowd aimed for searching for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? […] Or there is something else being plotted for us, as Arabs, and for the region? Insisting on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction is just an argument, nothing more, nothing less. Moreover, Saddam says there is nothing there, that the weapons have been destroyed. He says that the eight presidential palaces have nothing and that they are open to the inspection body of the US and the United Nations. However, the Americans, the British and others who joined them still say that it is necessary to implement international legitimacy and UN resolutions and allow the international and US inspectors to search for weapons of mass destruction, biological or chemical weapons, etc., and come up with opinions and theories about them and their whereabouts.”

Khaddam asked: “Is this campaign and this mobilization that is taking place in full swing, for the sake of the weapons, or there is another goal – a goal that has been plotted long time ago and is being implemented now - while we, Arabs are facing what is happening while awaiting their will?”

Mubarak commented by saying that it was necessary to confront what was happening.

Khaddam replied: “Yes, and there is a conviction among the Arab citizens and in the Arab street that what is happening is planned by the Americans and the Israelis, on the one hand to provide support for Israel, and on the other hand for hegemony and control of this region, in implementation of the same Israeli project throughout history […]”

The Syrian vice-president went on to say: “I hope that we will work together to confront the situation and study the possible solutions, of course with Amr Moussa and Farouk al-Sharaa, so that we can see the picture clearly in all its dimensions. The first thing we should do is to work together to spare Iraq such a devastating military strike, and also to send a delegation to Iraq and make the necessary contacts, for the sake of the Iraqi people […]. Here I am carrying a message from President Hafez al-Assad on this subject.”

Mubarak replied: “Certainly, the implementation of Security Council and United Nations resolutions with regard to inspection and destruction of weapons of mass destruction and other weapons must be adhered to, and then the inspection mission should be carried out… to avoid a military strike.”

Khaddam, for his part, said: “Yes. I am one hundred percent sure that no Iraqi envoy would dare to convey such words to Saddam personally.”

Mubarak replied: “This is exactly what is happening, and it happened during his invasion of Kuwait. We advised him, but he refused to listen, and the result is what you see today.”

Khaddam told the Egyptian president that Saddam Hussein must be explicitly told that the strike “will come and target you in particular, as a regime change will not happen without an attack.” Mubarak agreed.

Days after the Cairo trip, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, arrived in Baghdad and held talks with the Iraqi leadership that led to the signing of an agreement, in which Saddam accepted the terms of the Security Council for supervision and inspection.

Khaddam recounted: “The storm receded, but for how long? Have American goals changed, or will their methods change?”

The Syrian vice-president said that during the crisis between Iraq and the United States, the US administration made several contacts with Damascus with the aim of “dissociating the Syrian position and reminding us of the 1990 alliance during the occupation of Kuwait.”

Saddam agreed to the demands of the Secretary-General of the United Nations. However, after accusing Baghdad of not cooperating with UN inspectors and observers, Clinton took a decision to bomb Iraq on December 15, 1998, focusing on Baghdad and strategic sites in Iraq, with the participation of Britain. On December 19, President Clinton ordered a halt to the bombing.

Khaddam said that these operations had a deep resonance in the Arab and Islamic worlds, and loud demonstrations took place. In Damascus, Syrians demonstrated and attacked the US embassy and the residences of the US and British ambassadors.



Gaza Tailor Turns Waste Fabrics Into Dresses for Girls

Palestinian dressmakers add skirt hoops to a child's gown, at a workshop where dresses are created including evening and wedding gowns despite limited resources and old dresses are recycled, in the city of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on June 13, 2026. (Photo by BASHAR TALEB / AFP) /
Palestinian dressmakers add skirt hoops to a child's gown, at a workshop where dresses are created including evening and wedding gowns despite limited resources and old dresses are recycled, in the city of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on June 13, 2026. (Photo by BASHAR TALEB / AFP) /
TT

Gaza Tailor Turns Waste Fabrics Into Dresses for Girls

Palestinian dressmakers add skirt hoops to a child's gown, at a workshop where dresses are created including evening and wedding gowns despite limited resources and old dresses are recycled, in the city of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on June 13, 2026. (Photo by BASHAR TALEB / AFP) /
Palestinian dressmakers add skirt hoops to a child's gown, at a workshop where dresses are created including evening and wedding gowns despite limited resources and old dresses are recycled, in the city of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on June 13, 2026. (Photo by BASHAR TALEB / AFP) /

A young Gazan girl twirls across the floor of a dressmaker's shop, her white dress billowing around her as a shy smile spreads across her face.

Trimmed with delicate tulle and topped with a soft veil, the dress looks fit for a celebration.

Few would guess that parts of it are from discarded fabric or an old gown salvaged from the ruins of the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.

The dress is the work of 24-year-old tailor Amir al-Rantisi, who has made it his mission to provide elegant dresses for special occasions for young girls and women in southern Gaza's Khan Yunis area.

He does this by recycling used fabrics and old dresses.

"When I go to Gaza (City) to get the fabric, I take it from a place that's been destroyed, from old fabric that's available, which was probably damaged by shrapnel or burnt," Amir told AFP.

"I select pieces from it, and I make dresses from those pieces. I also take old dresses and recycle them."

Palestinian women shop for dresses in the city of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on June 13, 2026. (Photo by BASHAR TALEB / AFP)

Outside the shop, his colorful creations in satin, organza and tulle hang from makeshift mannequins fashioned from iron poles -- vivid splashes of color against a backdrop of grey concrete and blackened buildings.

Several elegant long gowns are displayed on cement mannequins outside the shop, while colorful frocks sway gently from a clothesline stretched across the storefront, allowing customers to inspect the garments with ease.

Inside the workshop, neat rows of ready-to-wear dresses line the walls. Nearby, a customer dressed in a black abaya carefully examines a small dress, considering its intricate details.

The workshop itself hums with activity. On a table beside a collapsed wall, piles of old dresses sit waiting to be given new life as festive creations.

His mother, Nisreen al-Rantisi, works alongside him in the workshop, while another assistant tailor attentively takes the measurements of a young girl.

As Nisreen sorts through the colorful fabrics, selecting the perfect materials for the next creation, the assistant tailor deftly guides his scissors through a length of cloth, skillfully shaping it into what will soon become a beautifully crafted dress.

A Palestinian dressmaker sits at a sewing machine as he assembles a gown in the city of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on June 13, 2026. (Photo by BASHAR TALEB / AFP)

Keeping the business running, however, requires constant improvisation.

"We suffer greatly from power outages," said mother Nisreen al-Rantisi.

"Sometimes, we have orders or work that we can't complete."

Amir has found a way to tackle that too.

He has rigged an old bicycle pedal to his sewing machine, a makeshift solution to keep working through the frequent power cuts that plague the devastated Gaza Strip.

But it is difficult and inconvenient, said his mother.

"Sewing is done manually; one person has to sew while the other has to do the rest," she said.

Meanwhile, the cost of supplies has soared.

With imports into Gaza severely restricted and shortages widespread, even basic materials have become difficult to obtain.

"This spool of black thread is no longer available, and even if it's available, it used to cost seven shekels ($2.40), but now it's 50," said Amir.

Israel controls all entry points into the territory, and the number of trucks carrying foreign aid and private sector goods remains far too low to ease war-inflated prices or shortages, according to NGOs on the ground.

Yet, as the little girl spins once more in her white dress, her eyes wide with joy, Amir's work offers a rare reminder of how residents of Gaza are finding ways to create and celebrate despite the hardships of war.


Netanyahu and Trump on Collision Course as US, Iran Agree to Halt War

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds a news conference in Jerusalem, 15 June 2026, following the announcement of a US-Iran mediated preliminary framework to end regional military hostilities. (EPA)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds a news conference in Jerusalem, 15 June 2026, following the announcement of a US-Iran mediated preliminary framework to end regional military hostilities. (EPA)
TT

Netanyahu and Trump on Collision Course as US, Iran Agree to Halt War

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds a news conference in Jerusalem, 15 June 2026, following the announcement of a US-Iran mediated preliminary framework to end regional military hostilities. (EPA)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds a news conference in Jerusalem, 15 June 2026, following the announcement of a US-Iran mediated preliminary framework to end regional military hostilities. (EPA)

Benjamin Netanyahu bet that his joint war alongside Donald Trump would topple Iran's clerical rulers and bolster himself ahead of elections at home, as the architect of a US-Israeli alliance that would reshape the Middle East.

Instead, Israel's longest-serving prime minister is on a collision course with Trump as the US president seeks to extricate himself from the war, with both men's goals unmet and Israeli military operations tied down in Lebanon.

For now, Israeli officials have been cautious in public for fear of angering their most important ally, known for being prickly towards critics.

But in private conversations, the frustration is clear. The preliminary agreement is "terrible for Israel," said one senior Israeli official, giving a frank assessment on condition of anonymity. "And there is no one in the Israeli leadership who views it otherwise, from the prime minister to the chief of staff."

Washington says that over the next 60 days, when a ceasefire is in place, it will negotiate full terms that will address US and Israeli concerns, especially over Iran's nuclear program.

But Israeli officials told Reuters they thought the negotiating period under the deal was likely to be extended, tying Israel's hands from taking military action, while its concerns remain unresolved.

Netanyahu and Trump have repeatedly clashed over Israel's refusal to constrain its pursuit of Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon, where a cessation of hostilities is a key Iranian demand.

At the start of the month, Trump described ‌Netanyahu as "[expletive] crazy" in ‌an angry phone call, ordering him not to strike Beirut while the US was seeking a deal with Iran.

Netanyahu called ‌off attacks ⁠that day, but ⁠struck Beirut's southern suburbs a week later, provoking Iranian missile strikes on Israel and a public rebuke of both sides from Trump.

Hours before the US and Iran announced their interim deal, Israel hit the Lebanese capital again on Sunday, after rockets were launched at Israel from Lebanon, fire Trump described as "small and meaningless".

Netanyahu said that Israel has emerged "strong and steady," with a leadership that stands firm and wise. At a press conference in Jerusalem late on Monday, he acknowledged that he and Trump have sometimes had their differences.

"He is the president of the United States, I am the prime minister of Israel. We many times see eye-to-eye and there are times when we see eye-to-eye less so. I am in charge of Israel's security interests," Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu, facing autumn elections he is projected to lose, may be more willing to defy Trump as he contends with an Israeli public that opinion polls show has grown skeptical of the US president's commitment to Israel's security.

"This is ⁠a pretty stark moment of divergence of interests," said Dan Shapiro, a former US ambassador to Israel under the Obama administration, now ‌with the Atlantic Council think tank.

"He will try to not openly oppose (the deal), so as not to get into ‌a brawl with Trump," said Shapiro. "But he will indicate Israel is not bound by it, and Israel reserves its rights."

ISRAEL SAYS IT'S NOT BOUND BY US-IRAN PACT

The memorandum of understanding between the US ‌and Iran is expected to be signed on Friday in Switzerland. While precise terms were not immediately known, mediator Pakistan said the pact called for a permanent halt to military ‌operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon.

Netanyahu said that Israel would keep its forces in southern Lebanon and maintain “freedom of action” against Hezbollah attacks.

"Iran wanted us to withdraw from it but I stood firm," he told reporters.

"We are keeping our freedom of action and we are keeping the security zone to protect (Israel's) northern citizens," he said.

The interim deal would reopen the Strait of Hormuz oil chokepoint while leaving the fate of Tehran's nuclear program to be resolved during a 60-day negotiation period towards a final deal.

Two other issues that Netanyahu and Trump had both declared as justifications for the war at its outset - curbing Iran's missile ‌program and ending its support for regional armed groups - are not thought to be on the agenda during those talks.

Three Israeli officials said Israel sees it as very likely the 60-day pact will be extended to 90 days, with the US maintaining ⁠its deployment of military assets in the region ⁠as it negotiates a broader deal.

Two other Israeli officials said that Israel was caught by surprise last week when Trump first said that a deal with Iran was close. They acknowledged that Israel has had little success in influencing the talks.

All of the officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly.

NETANYAHU UNABLE TO SELL THIS AGREEMENT TO ISRAELI PUBLIC, ANALYST SAYS

Netanyahu, who often clashed with Washington under the administrations of Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden, has long portrayed himself to the Israeli public as being uniquely adept in dealing with the Republican Trump.

During Trump's first term, Israel secured major policy changes from Washington, which moved its embassy to Jerusalem and backed the Abraham Accords that brought Israel formal diplomatic ties with the UAE and Bahrain.

On Iran, Trump ditched a nuclear agreement negotiated under Obama that Israel had long complained was too soft.

During elections in 2019, Netanyahu displayed massive campaign billboards in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem showing him and Trump smiling and shaking hands.

But now, the US-Iran pact undermines Netanyahu's case that a close relationship with Trump sets him apart from other candidates for prime minister, said Jonathan Rynhold, a political scientist at Bar-Ilan University, near Tel Aviv.

"(Netanyahu) will be unable to sell this agreement to the Israeli public," Rynhold said. "The best that he can hope for is that they fail to reach an agreement and the war restarts to Israel's advantage in 60 days."

According to a poll released on Friday by the Israel Democracy Institute, just 41% of Jewish Israelis think their security is a central consideration for Trump, down from 64% in March.

Eli Cohen, Netanyahu's energy minister, said that Israel would be prepared to act alone if Iran rebuilds its nuclear and missile capabilities, though he said the chances of Tehran taking that step during Trump's tenure were low.

"If Iran tries to renew its nuclear and ballistic missile programs - we will be there and act," Cohen told Israel's public broadcaster Kan.


US-Iran Deal Leaves Major Lebanon Questions Unresolved

Displaced families drive past a man holding the Hezbollah party flag as they drive along the highway through the area of Jiyyeh as they return to their home villages in southern Lebanon on June 15, 2026. (AFP)
Displaced families drive past a man holding the Hezbollah party flag as they drive along the highway through the area of Jiyyeh as they return to their home villages in southern Lebanon on June 15, 2026. (AFP)
TT

US-Iran Deal Leaves Major Lebanon Questions Unresolved

Displaced families drive past a man holding the Hezbollah party flag as they drive along the highway through the area of Jiyyeh as they return to their home villages in southern Lebanon on June 15, 2026. (AFP)
Displaced families drive past a man holding the Hezbollah party flag as they drive along the highway through the area of Jiyyeh as they return to their home villages in southern Lebanon on June 15, 2026. (AFP)

A deal between Washington and Tehran that ends the Israel-Hezbollah war leaves many issues in Lebanon unresolved, failing to mention Israel withdrawing from the country or an end to Tehran's support for the armed group.

Under US pressure, Lebanese officials have been holding direct talks with Israel aimed at reaching a separate agreement on ending the hostilities, but Beirut appeared to have been sidelined with the overnight announcement on the regional conflict.

AFP looks at the deal and the questions it raises in Lebanon.

- What does the deal involve? -

Details of the agreement to end the Middle East war on all fronts have not been made public, but Iran and mediator Pakistan have both said it includes Lebanon.

Hezbollah drew the country into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in US-Israeli strikes.

Israel responded with airstrikes and a ground invasion that Lebanon says have killed more than 3,700 people and displaced more than one million others.

An official source told AFP that "Lebanon was not informed of the terms of the agreement or the time of the ceasefire".

Influential Lebanese parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a Hezbollah ally and intermediary for the group, thanked Washington and Tehran for their "insistence on including... an essential and binding clause on halting the Israeli aggression on all of Lebanon".

Hezbollah on Monday had so far not claimed any fresh attacks on Israeli targets.

- Israeli withdrawal? -

Information circulating about the deal does not mention any Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon, and Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on Monday said forces would remain in the country indefinitely.

Karim Bitar, a lecturer in Middle East Studies at the Sciences Po University in Paris, said that "the deal does not seem to involve Israel, which immediately meant that it wasn't a party to it... So it's very unlikely that there will be an Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon."

Israeli forces control a strip of Lebanese territory running along the entire border.

A Western military source told AFP that Israeli forces had crossed the Litani River at several points, referring to the waterway running about 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the frontier but closer in some areas.

"Tens of thousands of Israeli soldiers" are in south Lebanon where they hold some established positions, the source said, adding that Hezbollah still had a presence there.

"It's the biggest invasion since their withdrawal in 2000," the source said, referring to Israel's previous pullout after some two decades of occupation.

Hezbollah says it sent reinforcements south of the Litani after the latest war erupted.

Under a 2024 ceasefire that followed a previous round of hostilities, Hezbollah fighters were supposed to withdraw from the area.

- What future for Hezbollah? -

Washington has pressured Lebanese authorities to disarm Hezbollah for months, but the accord makes no mention of the group.

"Iran doesn't seem to have committed to ending its support and financing for Hezbollah," Bitar said.

Military expert Riad Kahwaji said that "Hezbollah will not agree to give up arms... and this crisis will be protracted."

He said this could lead to political instability and even unrest, "especially now Hezbollah believes that through Iran it has emerged victorious from this agreement, and therefore is going to try and dictate its terms on who rules."

- Lebanon-Israel negotiations? -

Lebanon and Israel have been holding direct talks in Washington since April, seeking to end the hostilities and to separate Lebanon from the regional war.

A new round is scheduled for later this month.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said Monday that "we will redouble our efforts" through the Washington negotiations "to secure a full Israeli withdrawal."

But after the Iran-US announcement, some cast doubt on the effectiveness of the bilateral negotiations.

Bitar said that "Lebanon could find itself once again as a scapegoat that pays the price both of American amateurism, Iranian cynicism, Israeli hubris and... the lack of a clear strategy from its own political class."