عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Interviews

Barzani to Asharq Al-Awsat: At Secret Meeting, Americans Informed us of Decision to Oust Saddam

Masoud Barzani during his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat Editor-in-Chief, Ghassan Charbel.
Masoud Barzani during his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat Editor-in-Chief, Ghassan Charbel.
TT
TT

Barzani to Asharq Al-Awsat: At Secret Meeting, Americans Informed us of Decision to Oust Saddam

Masoud Barzani during his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat Editor-in-Chief, Ghassan Charbel.
Masoud Barzani during his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat Editor-in-Chief, Ghassan Charbel.

Saddam Hussein’s shadow often looms large over my meetings with Masoud Barzani. My career has allowed me to follow the thrilling and painful tales of both these officials. Both have an iron will and lived on a hot tin plate called Iraq.

Saddam believed that the spirit of the nation tasked him with the mission of reclaiming Iraq’s former glory. Barzani believed that fate had chosen him to act as the guardian of the Kurdish dream. Saddam was the boldest Iraqi leader in dealing with the demands of the Kurds. He was also the cruelest in leaving their country in tatters. Barzani, however, remained steadfast and undeterred in maintaining the approach taken by his father, historic Kurdish leader Mustafa Barzani.

Neither Saddam nor Masoud Barzani would succeed in taking the other out. Their relationship over the years would witness several strained handshakes and painful blows. However, two decades ago, destiny would determine the fate of the relationship when the American empire invaded Iraq.

Saddam was shown the gallows while Masoud Barzani would become president of Iraqi Kurdistan that would be ruled under the Iraqi and Kurdish flags. He succeeded in achieving the dream that the Kurds in Türkiye, Iran and Syria failed in achieving.

The current century began with an Iraq that appeared headed towards a long period of stability. The Kurds in the north continued to benefit from the no-fly zone, while in Baghdad, Saddam’s regime remained firmly in control, manipulating international inspectors and the conditions of the Oil-for-Food Program. His atrocities while quelling the Kurdish and Shiite uprisings after he was forced to withdraw from Kuwait remained heavily present in memory.

The opposition retained its dream of overthrowing the regime, but it appeared out of reach. It could defeat Saddam’s military machine alone. American air power was not for hire to provide Iraqi factions with cover to advance their international and regional agendas. A shocking development was needed to change calculations and equations. It would soon happen.

Planes and towers

The date September 11 is significant for the Kurds. On that day in 1961, Mustafa Barzani launched the Kurdish uprising whose embers would remain aflame until they were put out in 1970 through an agreement with the Baath party.

On September 11, 2001, Masoud and his son Masrour were in Iraq's Duhok city. They saw on television a plane flew into one of the World Trade Center towers. For a moment he thought the channel was airing a scene from a movie. Then he saw another plane fly into the second building. Breaking news then flooded in about a very major dangerous development taking place in the United States. It was unheard of that any country would attack the world’s lone superpower on its own soil.

It was difficult to predict that Saddam’s regime would end up paying the price dearly when it was revealed that the al-Qaeda organization was behind the attack. It was difficult to image that the regime and al-Qaeda were associated with each other. Each one followed contradictory agendas even though they were bound by their hatred of the US or at least made statements against it.

The leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party believed that a new phase had been opened, but its dangerous features had not yet emerged. He mended ties with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, headed by Jalal Talabani, and dispatched envoys to Türkiye, Syria and Iran to determine their reading of the potential impact of the attacks on New York and Washington.

Wounded America was boiling. The world was trying to guess where it would vent its anger and 2002 would bring signs that Masoud believed would help him predict what was to come. On January 30, US President George W. Bush would name Iraq in the Axis of Evil along with Iran and North Korea. Later that month, US Secretary of State Colin Powell would speak of the need to change the regime in Iraq and that the US would go about the mission alone if it had to. It wouldn’t take long for British Prime Minister Tony Blair to support the American position.

Decisive secret meeting

On February 17, 2002, Masoud welcomed a delegation from the CIA. The delegation spoke of how “America has decided to remove the Saddam regime”, “the attack would take place on several fronts” and that the “Kurdistan Region had a major role to play in our calculations.” The Kurds were invited to visit Washington.

Masoud informed the delegation that the Kurds would “support any operation that would lead to the establishment of a pluralistic federal democratic Iraq.” He recalled to Asharq Al-Awsat that he also demanded guarantees from the US that the Kurds would be protected and that Washington inform Iraq’s neighbors that the Kurds would not pose a threat.

On April 1, Masoud received a US Department of State delegation that reiterated Washington’s position for the ouster of the regime. On April 15, Masoud, his son Masrour, and leading member of his party and future foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari headed to the US. They would be joined by Talabani, his son Bafel, and leading member from his party and future Iraqi president Barham Salih.

The meeting in Virginia was attended by officials from the CIA and State Department. The Americans spoke firmly that the decision to oust Saddam had been taken and there can be no going back from it. They stressed that the Kurds were to receive their “full rights” and that Washington had approved the establishment of a federal Iraq. They added that Washington “would not allow any foreign meddling” and hoped that the Kurds would play a part in bringing together the Iraqi opposition.

The Americans were firm and decisive and the Kurdish response was the same. “As long as America has taken its final decision about the ouster of the regime, then we will do our best to make sure it happens,” they said. “As long as the alternative is a democracy and will allow the rise of a federal Kurdistan, then we will do everything we can.”

The Kurdish delegation departed Washington for Paris. French officials were convinced that the US had taken the final decision to oust Saddam. They, therefore, asked the Kurds about the alterative. Masoud stressed that the alternative would be agreed upon by the Iraqi opposition and that the new regime would be democratic and federal.

The delegation then headed to Damascus where the regime was informed of the American plan. The regime was “very pleased,” recalled Barzani, who assured the Syrians that Iraq would not be divided and that foreign meddling would not be allowed. The Syrian vice president was convinced that the US would not intervene militarily in Iraq and was ready to bet on it, added Barzani.

US criticizes Turkish ‘blackmail’

On July 21, an American delegation of experts landed in Erbil. Discussions revealed that Türkiye was concerned that the ouster of the Saddam regime would lead to the establishment of a Kurdish state. An American official said Türkiye was “blackmailing the US and demanding hefty sums of money.” He stressed that Türkiye would not be allowed to meddle “in any way, shape or form in Kurdistan’s affairs.”

Türkiye would continue to pose an obstacle as the countdown for the invasion wound down.

Later that month, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would declare that the invasion of Iraq must be launched from the south and north. Iran, meanwhile, was observing the developments. It had a long, torrid hateful history with the ruler of Baghdad. It was difficult for it to openly declare support for the American invasion, whose repercussions were unpredictable. It also believed that the removal of Saddam would remove an obstacle for it in Iraq and the region.

Iran ultimately allowed its loyalist Iraqi factions to take part in the meetings of the Iraqi opposition that preceded the war. It took the decision to facilitate the process of the ouster of the Saddam regime, while also taking another decision to destabilize the American military presence in Iraq and prevent the rise of a stable and pro-western system in Baghdad.

Damascus appeared to have supported Tehran’s position. General Qassem Soleimani, commander of Iran’s Quds Force, would be tasked with the mission to exhaust the American army, which would be surrounding Iran from Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US resorted to various justifications for its invasion. It claimed that the Baath party had ties with al-Qaeda, that it possessed weapons of mass destruction and biological weapons. Masoud adamantly stressed that his party did not provide any support to these claims.

As the war drew near, Türkiye’s concerns grew deeper. Commander of the United States Central Command, Tommy Franks met with Turkish officials who made a series of demands. They objected to the establishment of a Kurdish state and to Kurds seizing control of Kirkuk and Mosul. They stressed that Türkiye should have a say in the shape of the new system of rule in Iraq and objected to the Kurds being part of the process of overthrowing the Saddam regime.

The Kurds were informed that Türkiye’s involvement in the coalition that would oust Saddam was essential and important. The Americans were planning on attacking from the south and north, meaning Turkish territories. The Kurds rejected any form of regional involvement, whether from Iran or Türkiye.

Ultimately, the US did not yield to the Turkish demands and Türkiye did not allow the American forces to advance from its territories.

On the night of March 19, 2003, the war erupted, changing Iraq and the regional balances.

No international front was powerful enough to deter the Americans. Russian President Vladimir Putin was preoccupied in fortifying his country and China was still in the process of becoming the world’s second largest economy.

The fiercest objection came from French President Jacques Chirac, who warned Bush during a NATO summit in Prague that the war would destabilize the region and among its consequences would be the arrival of Tehran loyalists to power in Baghdad and consolidate Iran’s power in Damascus and Lebanon.

Attention turned to Iran to sense its position from the war. It facilitated the ouster of Saddam but at the same time, tasked Soleimani with preparing plans to destabilize the American military presence in Iraq. Masoud told Asharq Al-Awat that American officials later complained to him about Iran’s malign role, but they never spoke of targeting it or Syria, whom they accused of opening the borer to extremists to fight US forces in Iraq.

Iran would later send more messages. In 2007, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in occupied Baghdad to remind everyone that Iran is part of Iraq’s geographic destiny and that it would remain its neighbor after the American withdrawal.

Saddam’s end

Masoud never attempted to visit Saddam in prison. He never attended his trials. “Gloating is not a sign of a man,” he said. Along with the rest of the world, he watched as Saddam’s statues were toppled.

He was pleased with the overthrow of his enemy but feared that Iraq would drown in bloody vendettas, and they are many. He feared the eruption of a conflict between Shiites and Sunnis, and Arabs and Kurds. He feared that regional powers would turn Iraq into an arena to pursue old and new dreams. The developments would justify his fears and Baghdad would wallow for years in bloodshed.

Saddam probably never imagined that he would end up paying the price for what Osama bin Laden did in New York and Washington. He probably imagined that he would be remembered by history with the likes of Salaheddine and Abou Jaafar al-Mansouri, who built Baghdad.

Most Viewed

 
 
Interviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A tense beginning

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

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

The Addis Ababa shock

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

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

Egyptian intelligence reassesses Sudan

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

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

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

After 1999: Rapprochement with Cairo

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

The memorandum that shifted power

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

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

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

Al-Turabi’s influence and gradual reemergence

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

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

The 2001 Memorandum and South Sudan

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

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

Complicated relationship

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

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

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

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

The Arab Spring and the Islamic movement’s decline

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

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

The Communist Party’s influence

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

Responsibility for Sudan’s political impasse

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

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

Writing Bashir's speeches and choosing a side

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

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

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

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

Interviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Deepening Mutual Investment and Trade

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

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

Key Priorities

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

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

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

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

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

Saudi–British Cooperation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A British Plan to Contain Financial Challenges

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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