‘Guardian of the Republic’s Tomb’: Aoun Returned to Baabda Onboard an Iranian Train as a Guard, Not a President

Asharq Al-Awsat publishes excerpts from a new book by Lebanese Writer Fayez Azzi (Part 1/2).

Michel Aoun is sworn in as president as Speaker Nabih Berri (right) looks on. (AFP)
Michel Aoun is sworn in as president as Speaker Nabih Berri (right) looks on. (AFP)
TT

‘Guardian of the Republic’s Tomb’: Aoun Returned to Baabda Onboard an Iranian Train as a Guard, Not a President

Michel Aoun is sworn in as president as Speaker Nabih Berri (right) looks on. (AFP)
Michel Aoun is sworn in as president as Speaker Nabih Berri (right) looks on. (AFP)

In his new book titled, “Guardian of the Republic’s Tomb”, Lebanese writer Fayez Azzi reviews President Michel Aoun’s term in office and presents documents and analyses that show that he placed the country in Iran’s clutches, instead of achieving his long-touted slogan of “freedom, sovereignty and independence” that he used to address the “great people of Lebanon.”

Azzi was very close to Aoun when the latter acted as army chief and then head of the military government in 1988. But he distanced himself from the general in 2006 after he signed the memorandum of understanding with Hezbollah – an agreement that Azzi saw as a breach of Lebanon’s sovereignty and a change in the values that Aoun had long touted.

Asharq Al-Awsat is publishing two episodes of excerpts from the book, which will soon be published by Dar Saer Al-Mashreq in Beirut. This is the fifth book by Azzi, who had played a role in Aoun’s communication with the Syrians before his return from Parisian exile in 2005.

On the choice of the title of his book, Azzi said: “I hesitated a lot, and disregarded the advice of my friend (former information minister) Melhem Riachy, whom I visited a few days after he assumed the media portfolio in the government of Prime Minister Saad Hariri…”

“I have a new book. But I am taking my time to publish it. Because it is related to Michel Aoun,” Azzi told Riachy, who replied: “What is its title and what is it about?”

He said: “Aoun... the Republic.”

“Why three dots?” Riachy asked.

“I don’t want to rush in judging the man’s tenure, after I have accompanied him sincerely and with conviction for more than twenty years. So I’ll wait a year into his tenure, at least, to fill in the blanks in the title. I am torn between two words: guardian or protector; knowing that I am inclined towards my first choice: ‘Aoun, the guardian of the republic’s tomb,’ instead of: ‘Aoun, the protector of the Republic Palace,’”Azzi told his interlocutor.

The information minister responded: “Without hesitation, I advise you not to wait, just choose the first option.”

In his book, Azzi says that Aoun was able more than anyone else to fulfill an urgent need to protect the return of the displaced to their villages after they were forced to flee in 1985 during Lebanon’s civil war.

“This was my first concern and the only project that took me on a new political adventure called the Aounist experiment, to which I committed to the point of intoxication.

“This clarification has become necessary and obligatory. Without it, the reader will not be able to understand my long relationship with General Aoun, especially when they discover how close the ties were at times […] until he surprised me on February 6, 2006, by signing a memorandum of understanding between the Free Patriotic Movement and Hezbollah at the Mar Mikhael Church. I then dropped my understanding with him, turning it completely into a doctrinal enmity.”

Azzi recounts: “I knew Michel Aoun closely […]. He was practical and succinct and had convictions based on the purposes and intentions of reform and change. Here lies the secret of his strength and the fear that worried his allies before his opponents, especially if they (his allies) did not react to the general’s born or promised convictions.

“But this duality between the ‘rebellious’ general and the inconsistent president posed a great danger to the republic, specifically to the complex and almost impossible equation between a leader of the liberation battle and a president who was eager to satisfy the electorate.

“Therefore, I complete in this book a truth born of my conviction that the ‘former general’ who was elevated to the presidency, buried the dream of the republic, even before becoming an agent of the occupier and allied with the state’s rapists.”

On the general’s return from his exile in Paris, Azzi says: “Aoun’s visit to Syria was completed in a figurative sense. I was witness to the matter, on December 27, 2004, when Aoun and the Syrians agreed on his return to Lebanon […]. Gaby Issa (an official in the Free Patriotic Movement) visited Damascus and met with then-Syrian Vice President Abdel Halim Khaddam.”

Azzi recalls: “After his conditional return from Paris, he agreed with the Syrians, who, after [former Prime Minister Rafik] Hariri’s martyrdom, added two conditions to the agreement with Aoun: the first is to support [President] Emile Lahoud until the end of his term, and the second is to reach an understanding with Hezbollah.”

However, Aoun’s presidential ambitions collided with the endorsement of Hariri’s movement and Hezbollah of the election of Army Commander Michel Suleiman.

Thus, the Mar Mikhael understanding of 2006 did not fulfill the promise of Aoun becoming president.

Azzi said that at the end of Suleiman’s term, “the presidential elections turned into a theater for which two candidates initially competed: [Lebanese Forces leader Samir] Geagea and Aoun.”

“Michel Aoun, his team and his main allies did not spare any maneuver to disrupt the elections and maintain the presidential vacuum, as long as victory was not guaranteed […]. The speaker of parliament joined the scheme to disrupt the election in order to exploit the vacuum […].”

Azzi explained how Speaker Nabih Berri and Aoun both manipulated the constitution to hold the parliamentary session that saw the election of Aoun.

He says: “Aoun played an active role in disrupting the constitution, in letter and spirit, to reach the presidency.

“It was the end of the maneuver and the beginning of humiliation and surrender. Everyone welcomed [the elections] - some of them against their will – while failing to notice that the Lebanese politicians had abandoned the principle of free democratic elections, and submitted to the nomination of a biased president, who was increasingly submissive to the Iranian ruler. General Aoun repeated his old and constant phrase: ‘There is an empty chair, either they will invite me to it, or I will take it by force.’”

Episode 2/2: Geagea: We were unable to break Aoun’s position.



How Israel’s Multi-Ton Truck Bombs Ripped Through Gaza City

Destroyed buildings after Israeli military operations in Gaza City, November 12, 2025. (Reuters)
Destroyed buildings after Israeli military operations in Gaza City, November 12, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

How Israel’s Multi-Ton Truck Bombs Ripped Through Gaza City

Destroyed buildings after Israeli military operations in Gaza City, November 12, 2025. (Reuters)
Destroyed buildings after Israeli military operations in Gaza City, November 12, 2025. (Reuters)

In the weeks before the Gaza ceasefire on October 10, Israel widely deployed a new weapon: M113 Armored Personnel Carriers repurposed to carry between 1 and 3 tons of explosives, Reuters found.

As Israeli troops pushed toward the center of Gaza City, these powerful bombs, along with airstrikes and armor-plated bulldozers, leveled swathes of buildings, drone footage and satellite images show.

In most cases, but not all, the inhabitants fled ahead of demolitions after Israeli warnings, residents, Israeli security sources and Gaza authorities said.

Hesham Mohammad Badawi’s five-storey home on Dawla Street in the affluent Tel-al-Hawa suburb, damaged by an airstrike earlier in the war, was completely destroyed by an APC explosion on September 14, he and a relative said, leaving him and 41 family members homeless.

Badawi, who was a few hundred meters away, said he heard at least five APCs detonate in roughly five-minute intervals. He said he received no ​evacuation warning before the demolition and family members escaped “by a miracle” amid explosions and heavy gunfire.

Several buildings in the same block were demolished around that time, satellite images show.

The family is now staying with relatives in different parts of the city, Badawi said, while he lives in a tent by his former home. Israel’s military did not respond to Reuters questions about the incident. Reuters could not establish what Israel targeted in the attack or independently verify all the details of Badawi’s account of the events.

When Reuters visited in November, remains of at least one of the vehicles were strewn among large piles of rubble.

"We could not believe this was our neighborhood, this was our street," Badawi said.

To compile a detailed account of the role of APC-based bombs by the Israeli military in Tel-al-Hawa and the neighboring Sabra district in the six weeks before the ceasefire, Reuters spoke to three Israeli security sources, a retired Israeli military brigadier, an Israeli reservist, Gazan authorities and three military experts.

Seven Gaza City residents said their homes or those of neighbors were levelled or severely damaged by the explosions, which several likened to an earthquake. Analysis of Reuters footage by two of the military experts confirmed wreckage of at least two exploded APCs among the rubble at sites in Gaza City.

Israel packed 1 to 3 tons of ordnance in APCs, three military experts estimated, based on cabin space and wreckage of vehicle armor. Some of the ordnance was likely non–military ammonium nitrate or emulsion, though without chemical testing that conclusion is not certain, they said.

Such a multi-ton explosion could approach an equivalent power to Israel’s largest airborne bombs, the 2,000-pound US-made Mark 84, said two experts, who examined Reuters footage of the blast area and vehicle remains.

It could scatter vehicle fragments hundreds of meters and break close-by exterior walls and building columns. The blast wave would be strong enough to potentially collapse a multi-storey building, they said.

HIGHLY UNUSUAL

APCs generally transport troops and equipment on the battlefield. The three military experts ‌consulted by Reuters said use of ‌the vehicles as bombs was highly unusual and risked excessive damage to civilian dwellings.

In response to detailed Reuters questions for this story, Israel’s military said it was committed to the rules of war. Regarding ‌allegations of ⁠destruction of civilian ​infrastructure, it said it used ‌what it called engineering equipment only for “essential operational purposes,” without disclosing further details.

Decisions are guided by military necessity, distinction, and proportionality, it said.

In an interview with Reuters in Gaza for this story, Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said Israel’s demolitions with armored vehicles were aimed at the large-scale displacement of the city's residents, which Israel has denied.

The reporting provides new evidence of the power of these low-tech weapons and how they came to be widely used.

Retired reservist Brigadier-General Amir Avivi, founder of the Israel Defense and Security Forum (IDSF), a think tank, called the weapon an “innovation of the Gaza War.” One of the security sources said its increasing use partly responded to US restrictions on transfers of heavy Mark-84 airborne bombs and Caterpillar bulldozers.

Israel’s military and Prime Minister’s Office also did not respond to questions about the reasons for the shift in tactics. The US State Department, White House and Department of War did not respond to Reuters questions for this story.

Before the war, Tel-al-Hawa and Sabra, a historic area of modest houses in south-central Gaza City, bustled with bakeries, shopping malls, mosques, banks and universities.

Now, large parts lie in ruins.

Satellite imagery analysis by Reuters showed that about 650 buildings in Sabra, Tel-al-Hawa and surrounding areas were destroyed in the six weeks between September 1 and October 11.

MILITARY NECESSITY?

Two international law scholars, the UN human rights office and two of the military experts who reviewed Reuters findings said use of such large explosives in dense residential urban areas may have failed one or more principles of humanitarian law that prohibit attacking civilian infrastructure and using disproportionate force.

"The basis that some of it may be booby-trapped" or once used by Hamas snipers is not enough to justify mass destruction, Ajith Sunghay, head of the UN Human Rights Office in ⁠the Occupied Palestinian Territory, told Reuters, referring to Israel’s allegation that Hamas placed improvised explosive devices in houses, which Hamas denies.

In some circumstances, buildings could lose legal protection and become targets if Israel had evidence Hamas used them for military advantage, said Afonso Seixas Nunes, Associate Professor in the School of Law at Saint Louis University.

Israel’s military did not respond to Reuters requests to provide such evidence.

If not the result of military necessity, the ‌demolition of civilian infrastructure could amount to wanton destruction of property, which is a war crime, Sunghay said.

The level of ruin reflects a broader trend: 81% of Gaza’s buildings suffered damage or destruction ‍during the war, according to the UN Satellite Center. The area including Gaza City experienced most damage since July, with approximately 5,600 newly affected structures, it said ‍in October.

In August, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters Israel was packing tons of explosives into APCs because Hamas had placed explosive devices in “just about every single building” in evacuated areas.

"We detonate them, and they set off all the booby traps. That's why you see the destruction," Netanyahu said.

In response ‍to questions for this story, Qassem, the Hamas spokesman, denied booby trapping buildings, and said Hamas did not have the capacity to set devices at the scale Israel claimed.

FORCES ENTER GAZA CITY

Later in August, Israeli forces entered Gaza City with the declared aim of eliminating Hamas and freeing hostages held by fighters since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel that triggered the war.

Israel ordered a full evacuation of the city in September.

As troops advanced, backed by tanks and airstrikes, they extensively damaged eastern suburbs before approaching central areas of the city, where most displaced people were sheltering.

Hundreds of thousands fled south. The UN estimated 600,000-700,000 people remained in the city.

Israel’s defense minister has said soldiers demolished 25 towers that Israel said had Hamas tunnels underneath or were used as lookout points. The UN human rights office says Israel has provided no evidence the buildings were military targets.

Among the destruction visible in Sabra, Tel-al-Hawa and South Rimal between September 1 and October 11, Reuters identified al-Roya tower, which housed the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, a prominent human rights office that worked with charity Christian ​Aid, and al-Roya 2, a mixture of business and flats, brought down by airstrikes on September 7 and 8.

Two wings of the Islamic University of Gaza and a mosque on the campus were destroyed. In one six-block corner of Tel-al-Hawa almost every building was demolished - more than 60 in total.

Beyond the two cases of APC explosions analyzed in detail for this story, and airstrikes on towers caught on video, Reuters could not establish what weapons Israel deployed to demolish buildings, or the total number of APCs detonated ⁠from August until the ceasefire.

Gaza’s Civil Defense spokesperson Mahmoud Basal said the army detonated hundreds of APCs in that period, as many as 20 daily. Israel’s military did not reply to a question on numbers.

BADAWI’S HOUSE

Among the buildings destroyed was Badawi’s family home of four decades, along with more than 20 neighboring buildings in the same period.

"We didn’t recognize this as our house," he said.

Two military experts said Reuters footage of the area showed remains of at least one detonated APC.

The explosion had torn one APC caterpillar track from its running gear and “physically thrown it onto the roof” of a multi-storey building, a retired senior British military bomb disposal officer said, noting that M113 tracks each weigh hundreds of kilograms.

A thick, ripped piece of metal and a wheel torn in half, both scattered at the property, were consistent with a detonation from within the APC, said Gareth Collett, a retired British Brigadier General and leading authority on explosives and bomb disposal. He said the large size of the fragments was indicative of a commercial low energy explosive.

THE RETURN OF THE M113

Bought from the US after the Yom Kippur War in the 1970s, thousands of M113s were deemed to insufficiently protect soldiers and were mothballed, military historian Yagil Henkin said.

FMC Corp, originally the M113’s primary manufacturer, did not respond to Reuters’ requests for comment about its use as a weapon and potential associated human rights concerns.

BAE Systems, which currently provides maintenance for the vehicle globally, did not reply to Reuters questions about Israel's new use of the M113 other than to say it currently had no direct military sales to the country. It said equipment it sold to the US government could reach other countries indirectly.

In May, Israel posted a public tender seeking to sell an unspecified number of M113s internationally, public documents show.

The tender was later cancelled, according to an undated posting on the Ministry of Defense website. The cancellation allowed Israel to scale up repurposing M113s, one of the security sources told Reuters. The military did not respond to Reuters’ questions about the tender.

The first media reports of an APC detonating in Gaza date to mid-2024.

Use accelerated this year when Israel rationed stocks after the US paused deliveries of Mark-84 bombs over concerns about the bombs use in residential areas, the source said.

CATERPILLAR D9

The increased role of APC-based bombs also coincided with shortages in Israel of US company Caterpillar's giant D9 bulldozer, long used by Israel’s military for demolition, one of the security sources said.

Hamas heavily targeted D9s earlier in the war, killing or injuring soldiers and damaging the vehicles, the source said. Alarmed by their use to demolish homes, the US paused D9 sales to Israel in November 2024, adding to the shortage. Under President Donald Trump, D9 transfers resumed.

Caterpillar did not respond to questions from Reuters about the military ‌use of its machines in Gaza demolitions and has not publicly commented on the matter.

Amid the shortages, the military began using other methods of demolition, including APCs, another of the security sources said.

Danny Orbach, an Israeli military historian, told Reuters demolitions were normal in war, made necessary in Gaza due to tunnels and booby traps. He said Israel’s military was underprepared for the complex fighting, leading to the conclusion there was “no other way to fight such a war except destroying all buildings above ground.”

Israel's military told Reuters targets were reviewed prior to attack and the munition selected “to achieve the military objective while minimizing collateral damage” to civilians and civilian infrastructure.


What to Know about China's Drills around Taiwan

A rocket launches from Pingtan island in eastern China's Fujian province, the closest point to Taiwan. ADEK BERRY / AFP
A rocket launches from Pingtan island in eastern China's Fujian province, the closest point to Taiwan. ADEK BERRY / AFP
TT

What to Know about China's Drills around Taiwan

A rocket launches from Pingtan island in eastern China's Fujian province, the closest point to Taiwan. ADEK BERRY / AFP
A rocket launches from Pingtan island in eastern China's Fujian province, the closest point to Taiwan. ADEK BERRY / AFP

China's military drills around Taiwan entered their second day on Tuesday, the sixth major maneuvers Beijing has held near the self-ruled island in recent years.

AFP breaks down what we know about the drills:

What are the drills about?

The ultimate cause is China's claim that Taiwan is part of its territory, an assertion Taipei rejects.

The two have been governed separately since the end of a civil war in 1949 saw Communist fighters take over most of China and their Nationalist enemies flee to Taiwan.

Beijing has refused to rule out using force to achieve its goal of "reunification" with the island of 23 million people.

It opposes countries having official ties with Taiwan and denounces any calls for independence.

China vowed "forceful measures" after Taipei said this month that its main security backer, the United States, had approved an $11 billion arms sale to the island.

After the drills began on Monday, Beijing warned "external forces" against arming the island, but did not name Washington.

China also recently rebuked Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi after she said the use of force against Taiwan could warrant a military response from Tokyo.

What do the drills look like?

Chinese authorities have published a map showing several large zones encircling Taiwan where the operations are taking place.

Code-named "Justice Mission 2025", they use live ammunition and involve army, navy, air and rocket forces.

They simulate a blockade of key Taiwanese ports including Keelung in the north and Kaohsiung in the south, according to a Chinese military spokesperson and state media.

They also focus on combat readiness patrols on sea and in the air, seizing "comprehensive" control over adversaries, and deterring aggression beyond the Taiwanese island chain.

China says it has deployed destroyers, frigates, fighters and bombers to simulate strikes and assaults on maritime targets.

Taipei detected 130 Chinese military aircraft near the island in the 24 hours to 6:00 am on Tuesday (2200 GMT on Monday), close to the record 153 it logged in October 2024.

It also detected 14 Chinese navy ships and eight unspecified government vessels over the same period.

AFP journalists stationed at China's closest point to Taiwan saw at least 10 rockets blast into the air on Tuesday morning.

How has Taiwan responded?

Taipei has condemned China's "disregard for international norms and the use of military intimidation".

Its military said it has deployed "appropriate forces" and "carried out a rapid response exercise".

President Lai Ching-te said China's drills were "absolutely not the actions a responsible major power should take".

But he said Taipei would "act responsibly, without escalating the conflict or provoking disputes".

US President Donald Trump has said he is not concerned about the drills.

How common are the drills?

This is China's sixth major round of maneuvers since 2022 when a visit to Taiwan by then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi enraged Beijing.

Such activities were rare before that but China and Taiwan have come close to war over the years, notably in 1958.

China last held large-scale live-fire drills in April, surprise maneuvers that Taipei condemned.

This time, Beijing is emphasizing "keeping foreign forces that might intervene at a distance from Taiwan", said Chieh Chung, a military expert at the island's Tamkang University.

What are analysts saying?

"China's main message is a warning to the United States and Japan not to attempt to intervene if the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) uses force against Taiwan," Chieh told AFP.

But the time frame signaled by Beijing "suggests a limited range of activities", said Ja Ian Chong, an associate professor at the National University of Singapore.

Falling support for China-friendly parties in Taiwan and Beijing's own army purges and slowing economy may also have motivated the drills, he said.

But the goal was still "to cow Taiwan and any others who might support them by demonstrating that Beijing's efforts to control Taiwan are unstoppable".


Why Do the Houthis in Yemen View Israel's Recognition of Somaliland as a Direct Threat?

People gather in front of a digital billboard featuring Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi, in Sanaa, Yemen, 28 December 2025. (EPA)
People gather in front of a digital billboard featuring Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi, in Sanaa, Yemen, 28 December 2025. (EPA)
TT

Why Do the Houthis in Yemen View Israel's Recognition of Somaliland as a Direct Threat?

People gather in front of a digital billboard featuring Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi, in Sanaa, Yemen, 28 December 2025. (EPA)
People gather in front of a digital billboard featuring Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi, in Sanaa, Yemen, 28 December 2025. (EPA)

The Iran-backed Houthi militias in Yemen view Israel's recognition of Somaliland as direct threat, warning that any Israeli presence in the separatist region will be considered a military target.

Somaliland declared independence from Somalia in 1991. The region has operated autonomously since then and possesses its own currency, army and police force.

Diplomatic isolation has been the norm -- until Israel's move to recognize it as a sovereign nation, which has been criticized by the African Union, Egypt, the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council and the Saudi-based Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The European Union has insisted Somalia's sovereignty should be respected.

Houthi leader Abdelmalik al-Houthi said Israel's move was an "act of aggression on Somalia, Yemen and the security of the region."

In a statement, he added that Tel Aviv was seeking to establish "a military and intelligence foothold" in one of the world's most important waterways. He also warned that any Israeli presence in the region will be deemed a "legitimate target" for the Houthis.

Somaliland is strategically located at the entrance of the Gulf of Aden and close to the Mandeb Strait. It is one of the world's busiest waterways.

Analysts said that Israel's recognition gives it a direct outlet to the Red Sea, boosts its ability to monitor waterways and perhaps allows it to carry out military or intelligence strikes against its rivals, notably the Houthis in Yemen.

Since October 7, 2023, the Houthis had launched rocket and drone attacks against Israel and targeted ships affiliated with it in marine shipping lanes. Israel retaliated by carrying out attacks against Houthi targets in Yemen. The attacks by both sides ended with the announcement of the ceasefire in Gaza.

Political sources said the Houthis are alarmed at the prospect of Israel having a presence in Somaliland. In their view, this will lead to them being surrounded from the southwest. They also fear that Somaliland will be used as a platform for Israeli attacks against them in Yemen.