Arafat Chose to Fight for 6 Months... Moscow’s Position Was his Greatest Disappointment 

Asharq Al-Awsat publishes recollections of influential players during 1982 Israeli invasion of Beirut. 

Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)
Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)
TT

Arafat Chose to Fight for 6 Months... Moscow’s Position Was his Greatest Disappointment 

Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)
Smoke billows from strikes during the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. (Getty Images)

On this day in 1982, Beirut was besieged by the Israeli army and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat boarded a ship that took him to his new exile in Tunisia. The Palestinian Liberation Organization’s loss of its last front with Israel would leave its mark on the Palestinians and Lebanon.

As Israel tightened its siege of Beirut, Arafat took a secret decision to carry on fighting for six months until regional and international stances emerged. He was forced to leave Lebanon after 88 days, marking an end of what he described as the “longest Arab-Israeli war.”

The greatest disappointment to the Palestinian resistance and its allies in the Lebanese National Movement came from their Soviet ally. Moscow had refused to deliver a serious warning or send a destroyer off the Lebanese coast or a ship to evacuate the wounded.

Arafat’s insistence that he leave Lebanon by sea, not through Damascus, reflected the extent of the differences between him and Syrian President Hafez al-Assad. Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) Ahmed Jibril recalled that Arafat had bluntly told him that the Syrian leadership will not be credited for him holding out for three months in Beirut.

Asharq Al-Awsat will publish a series of features highlighting the significant developments and recollections of influential players during that heated summer of 1982.

From a building in east Beirut, Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon observed Arafat as he boarded the ship that would take him to Tunisia. He wrongly believed that had broken the Palestinian resistance and that it would fade away in exile. The invasion failed in luring Lebanon to strike a peace deal with Israel. The current Lebanon has an even more hardline position towards Israel.

Against the backdrop of the war, Syria and Iran will lay the foundation of their alliance. Hezbollah would be born in Lebanon. Syria, which had withdrawn its troops from Beirut in wake of the invasion, would redeploy them years later, before again being forced to pull them out in 2005 after the assassination of Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

In the besieged city, I was determined to record the testimonials of influential political and security figures. I tried to obtain Arafat’s testimony, but he turned down the offer, saying he didn’t want the Palestinian people to be punished “because of his memories.”

In Tunisia, Arafat told me: “What do you want me to recount? To tell you about Sabri al-Banna (Abou Nidal), who was hosted by three Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus and Tripoli, and who was obsessed with assassinating Palestinians, not Israelis?”

“Do you want me to tell you about the so-called intifada in Fatah that was backed by Syria and funded by Libya? Or do you want me to complain about the practices of Palestinian groups that tarnished our image of resistance or led to our labeling as terrorists? I’m not saying that Fatah was faultless. We all made mistakes, but we always tried not to lose our way and lose our cause.”

“The Palestinian people have been punished a lot. They were punished for clinging on to their cause and for firing the first shot. (...) The PLO was punished for adopting a hard line and punished when it adopted a moderate approach. Do you want the Palestinian people to be punished because of my memoirs? I don’t want to open old wounds.”

“As I was leaving Beirut, a journalist asked me: ‘Where to?’ I replied: ‘To Jerusalem. We are preparing for our date in Palestine and Jerusalem. We don’t have any other place to be.’”

The KGB general and Iran

In 1980, Palestinian ambassador to Tehran and Fatah central committee member Hani al-Hassan received an urgent call to head to Beirut. Upon his arrival, Arafat told him they were headed to a meeting at the Soviet embassy. Hassan understood that he needed to voice Arafat’s views. He knew how influential the Soviets were in the Palestinian revolution. He knew of the consequences of refusing delicate Soviet proposals.

Other Fatah members at the meeting included Salah Khalaf (Abou Ayad) and Khalil al-Wazir (Abou Jihad). The Soviets were represented by General “Alexander” who was the KGB official overseeing operations in the Middle East. The insistence that Palestinian leaders, not their representatives, be present at the meeting meant that Moscow expected the talks to yield a decision.

General “Alexander” spoke about the situation in the region, especially Iran, in wake of the Soviet military invasion of Afghanistan. He said the time had come for the Palestinians to cooperate with the Soviets to facilitate the Communist Party’s control of Iran. The Soviet Union wanted to expand its power in the region and Iran was a significant prize given its geographic location and resources.

Hassan was surprised with the proposal and asked to be excused from the meeting, but Arafat refused. Hassan said he would not stand against the Iranian revolution that had “offered us several major services,” referring to its severing of Iranian-Israeli relations that were forged under the shah.

Tensions soon erupted and the Soviet general declared that the Palestinians “won’t be able to do anything without us.” Hassan replied: “If the Soviets enter Iran, then Israel’s strategic value will grow a million-fold to the West. So, don’t even think about it. For our part, we will ensure that every effort is made to form good Iranian-Soviet relations.”

Hassan believed that the meeting exposed how the Soviets dealt with the situations in Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan and future conflicts in these countries.

Meeting in a Soviet forest

Another significant meeting was held years earlier. In the early 1970s, head of the PFLP’s External Operations Wadie Haddad met with KGB chief Yuri Andropov in a forest on the outskirts of Moscow. The meeting was held in utmost secrecy because Haddad at the time had been planning plane hijacking operations for years. Haddad asked for weapons from the Soviets, and they were smuggled to him off the coast of Aden, Yemen.

The first high-level contacts between Moscow and the Palestinian revolution took place in 1968 at the suggestion of Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser. Nasser and Arafat traveled to Moscow together on a secret visit. Two years later, a Soviet envoy met with Arafat in Jordan and the relations between the Palestinians and Soviets came out to the open.

Moscow realized the importance of relations with the Palestinians so it forged ties that allowed it in a few years to wield influence in Palestinian political and security decisions. Moscow formed close ties with the Palestinian left, including the PFLP, Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and leftists in the Fatah movement.

These relations led the Palestinian resistance and allied parties in Lebanon to rule out the possibility of Israel invading Beirut. It had already launched its invasion on June 6, 1982, and was advancing on the capital. On the day of the invasion, the Fatah and Lebanese National Movement met in Beirut. Present were Abou Ammar, Abou Jihad, Abou Ayad, Abou al-Walid, Secretary General of the Lebanese Communist Party George Hawi and Secretary General of the Communist Action Organization in Lebanon Mohsen Ibrahim.

They discussed the possibility that the invasion could go beyond southern Lebanon, especially with Sharon as defense minister. They never predicted, however, that the Israeli forces would advance on Beirut and reach its outskirts because Syrian troops were in the capital and any clash with the Israelis could lead to a full-scale war between them. They believed that Israel would not provoke Syria, an ally of Moscow.

They were proven wrong when the Israeli army was met with little resistance and eventually besieged Beirut. It was later revealed that the Soviets and their allies did not have information about the Israeli plans. The Syrians were also in the dark.

Meeting with Bashir Gemayel

When the Israeli forces reached the Chouf area in Mount Lebanon and appeared intent on Beirut, a secret meeting was held between Abou Ammar al-Hassan, head of the Lebanese Forces Bashir al-Gemayel and Lebanese military intelligence chief Johnny Abdo. Gemayel wanted to hold the meeting to deliver a message to Arafat that the Palestinians must lay down their arms and leave Lebanon. “I am ready to secure a safe and dignified exit. I want an immediate answer before the Israelis reach Beirut,” he said. Hassan suggested that they take their conversation to the balcony because they feared Abdo’s house would be wiretapped.

Hassan noticed how worried Gemayel appeared. He told him: “Let me speak to you frankly. I follow you and it is my duty to follow you. I know you have presidential ambitions, but you won’t achieve them this way. You were the one who paved the way for the Syrians so that they could strike the Palestinians. Now, you have brought in the Israelis so that they can strike them both.”

“At the end of this game, we will both be struck, and you will be finished. Lebanon is enticing. Neither the Israelis, nor the Syrians will pull out. You are opposed to both of them. Let me repeat, you are mistaken in thinking this is the way that will lead you to the presidency. Your odds will be better if you decide to side with us and the Lebanese National Movement.”

“Who will agree to hosting the Palestinian fighters? Jordan, Syria or others? He vowed that he will ensure that a small number of fighters would remain and they would answer to the Lebanese army. The game slipped from his hands when the Israelis reached Beirut.”

Hassan later informed Mohsen about the meeting. Mohsen then met with Arafat and Hawi. They were primarily concerned with determining whether Moscow could stop the invasion. Hawi, with his close ties to the Soviets, believed that striking the Palestinian revolution was a red line for both sides the Soviets and Communists. After a month or so, he realized that everything was permissible, and nothing was off limits. Arab countries had no way of influencing international powers.

Hawi was hoping Moscow would threaten Israel to withdraw from Lebanon. He hoped they would send a naval vessel off the coast of Beirut or at least evacuate the wounded. Soviet ambassador to Beirut Alexander Soldatov could promise nothing of the sort. Hawi kept relaying these disappointing stances to Arafat. Hawi and others could not believe that the Soviets would stand idly by as Israel invaded Lebanon.

Arafat was dealt a crushing blow during a meeting with Soldatov. The ambassador told Arafat to leave Beirut, even if he had to board an American destroyer. Arafat was incredulous and refused to leave. He would eventually relent when it appeared that the Soviets would not support him or stand against the Israelis.



At a Gaza Zoo, War Takes Its Toll on the Animals

A female lion sleeps inside a cage at a zoo in Nuseirat, in the central Gaza Strip, August 12, 2026. (Reuters)
A female lion sleeps inside a cage at a zoo in Nuseirat, in the central Gaza Strip, August 12, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

At a Gaza Zoo, War Takes Its Toll on the Animals

A female lion sleeps inside a cage at a zoo in Nuseirat, in the central Gaza Strip, August 12, 2026. (Reuters)
A female lion sleeps inside a cage at a zoo in Nuseirat, in the central Gaza Strip, August 12, 2026. (Reuters)

As children walked into the zoo near Gaza's Nuseirat refugee camp, they found a lion barely looking back at them through the bars of its cage and chimpanzees sitting listlessly in their enclosure.

Many of the animals were malnourished, weakened by shortages of food, medicine and vaccines. But they were still alive, largely thanks to the efforts of zoo owner Mahmoud Gomaa.

He originally ran the attraction in the southern city of Rafah, but said he had to flee when Israeli troops attacked and occupied part of the area in 2024.

As the conflict raged, he moved the surviving animals from town to town before finding a place in Nuseirat ‌in central Gaza earlier ‌this year.

There, he reopened the zoo, hoping to give traumatized youngsters ‌something ⁠to enjoy after ⁠nearly three years of destruction.

ZOOKEEPER RETURNED TO FIND ANIMAL BONES

"In the beginning of the war people were looking for a way to survive ... and I was looking for a way to save the animals more than saving myself," Gomaa told Reuters.

There were a number of zoos in Gaza before the conflict between Israel and Hamas erupted, displaying exotic and wild animals including lions and eagles, municipal records show.

Anyone trying to keep one open now faces enormous challenges, ⁠vets and animal experts said, not least in getting food in ‌a territory struggling to feed its human population.

"Owners ‌are currently feeding them frozen meat," veterinarian Nidal Fadel said. "This is a catastrophe and a wrong nutritional plan ‌because in nature they eat fresh prey."

Palestinian children play outside a zoo damaged during the war, in Gaza City, August 15, 2026. (Reuters)

The animals themselves are bearing the brunt ‌of the war — sometimes directly.

When Gomaa fled Rafah, he said he had to leave behind three lions, several crocodiles and some African ostriches.

A few months later, Gomaa returned and only found the bones of the crocodiles and the ostriches. Those three lions, which he had locked in their cages, had ‌disappeared.

There is also the trauma caused by the sound and sight of the conflict raging around them.

"Lions can detect sounds and ⁠disturbances that humans may not ⁠notice," said Amir Khalil, a veterinarian who has led several trips to Gaza by the animal welfare organization Four Paws and rescued other zoos' animals.

"Bombing and constant conflict create enormous stress and fear for them," he added.

In Nuseirat, the surviving lion barely looked up at the visitors. But the children had better luck with some of the other animals, letting parrots ride on their shoulders and petting smaller monkeys.

It was a rare chance to relax in an enclave still facing regular airstrikes, despite a fragile ceasefire. Israel's military, which says its attacks are aimed at militant targets, did not immediately respond to questions about the conflict's impact on civilian facilities like zoos and their animals.

"Today there is no avenue for children to play," said visitor Karam Al-Mazin, 42.

"There is nothing except rubble, stones and tents, so children today are bored and are in a difficult situation."


The 60-day Deadline for an Iran Peace Deal is Expiring. Here's Where Things Stand

A woman holds an Iranian flag as part of a pro-government campaign in downtown Tehran, Iran, Monday, Aug. 17, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
A woman holds an Iranian flag as part of a pro-government campaign in downtown Tehran, Iran, Monday, Aug. 17, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
TT

The 60-day Deadline for an Iran Peace Deal is Expiring. Here's Where Things Stand

A woman holds an Iranian flag as part of a pro-government campaign in downtown Tehran, Iran, Monday, Aug. 17, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
A woman holds an Iranian flag as part of a pro-government campaign in downtown Tehran, Iran, Monday, Aug. 17, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

The deal that US President Donald Trump signed at Versailles in June set an ambitious 60-day deadline for ending the war with Iran and reaching an accord on its nuclear program.

The deadline was Monday, and the two sides are further apart than they were then, The Associated Press said.

Talks, such as they are, have focused on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and lifting a US blockade on Iran, both of which were supposed to have happened under the interim deal. There has been no sign of any compromise on the strait, or that detailed nuclear talks have even begun.

The US, meanwhile, has no good options for getting out of the war it started alongside Israel.

Acceding to Iran's latest demands would mean giving it control over a critical international waterway that carried a fifth of the world's traded oil and gas before the war — and would be tantamount to admitting defeat. Escalating the deeply unpopular war would further draw down US supplies of advanced missile interceptors, jolt the world economy, and drive up gas prices ahead of US congressional elections.

So both sides have dug in, hoping the other will blink first. So far, neither has.

The interim deal collapsed weeks later

The June deal, known as the Memorandum of Understanding, called for a halt to all military operations and set a 60-day deadline for an agreement to permanently end the war and resolve the longstanding dispute over Iran's nuclear activities.

It called for the Strait of Hormuz to be reopened but gave Iran a vaguely defined role in facilitating traffic, leaving open the possibility it could charge fees after the 60-day deadline. Iran has seized on that clause to claim control over the waterway.

A week after the deal was signed, Iran began firing on vessels using a route along the coast of Oman, on the other side of the strait, that is overseen by the US military and intended to bypass Tehran's control.

The US responded by striking Iran, which retaliated by attacking Arab countries hosting American forces, like Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. The US canceled waivers issued as part of the deal that had allowed Iran to sell its oil internationally and Trump restored a blockade of Iran's ports.

Each side accused the other of violating the June agreement, of which almost nothing remains.

The fighting eventually died down. A related truce in Lebanon between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah has mostly held, even as Israeli troops occupy large areas in the country's south. Lebanon's "territorial integrity and sovereignty" were to have been ensured under the June deal.

Iranian officials say they stopped negotiating with the US in June, while acknowledging that messages have been relayed by intermediaries. Trump says the talks have continued, occasionally claiming progress after pulling back from threatening major strikes.

Pakistan, which played a key role in brokering the June agreement, noted last week that the deadline was Monday while expressing hope it would be extended.

“We are not closing the chapter,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Tahir Andrabi said. “Pakistan is making all-out efforts to bring the two parties to the negotiating table.”

Iran's leaders think they can force Trump to give up the strait

Earlier this month, Iran issued a list of demands for reopening the strait, including the lifting of the American blockade, the withdrawal of US forces from around Iran and the payment of reparations for damage inflicted in the war started by the US and Israel on Feb. 28.

Even then, Iran has said it would control the strait — and potentially charge fees — through an agreement it is negotiating with Oman, and that the strait will not go back to being an open, toll-free waterway as it was before the war.

Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen have meanwhile begun attacking oil tankers in the Red Sea, threatening another crucial trade route that had been used to relieve some of the pressure from the strait being closed.

Trump has rejected Iran's demands — saying it's Tehran that should pay war reparations and claiming the US controls the strait. He appears to be banking on economic pressure — in the form of the blockade and longstanding sanctions — to bring Iran's rulers to their knees.

Iran's economy has been battered by the war and isolation, and inflation has soared. The crisis could stoke renewed anti-government protests, like those that were brutally crushed in January.

Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which rose immediately after the interim deal, is back to a small fraction of what it was before the war. Rising prices of fuel and other goods are expected to climb further the longer this continues with effects far beyond the Middle East.

The clock is still ticking for both sides.


Battered by War, Iran’s Rulers Wary of More Economic Pain and Unrest if US Tightens Pressure

People walk in the Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran, August 17, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
People walk in the Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran, August 17, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
TT

Battered by War, Iran’s Rulers Wary of More Economic Pain and Unrest if US Tightens Pressure

People walk in the Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran, August 17, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
People walk in the Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran, August 17, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters

Even as Iran projects resilience in the war with the United States, its leaders are worried that a threat of more economic punishment by Donald Trump could increase hardships, reignite unrest and further erode the regime’s legitimacy.

The US president vowed on Friday to hit Iran hard economically, a day after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Washington would impose measures on Tehran that have "never been seen" as early as next week. Washington has not said what those measures will entail.

For all the bravado of Iran's leaders after holding out in nearly six months of conflict and effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global oil supply route, they face mounting pressure at home that could result in nationwide unrest, according to three Iranian officials.

The officials, two political insiders, a former Iranian official and a dozen ordinary Iranians spoke to Reuters for this story on condition of anonymity, either for fear of retribution or because they are not authorized to speak to media.

Iran entered the war with high inflation, a weakening currency, energy shortages, sanctions and deep structural weaknesses, and must now contend with damaged infrastructure, disrupted trade, lost production and the cost of rebuilding.

Arshia, a civil engineer, spent a decade working in Iran’s construction industry before the war that began with US and Israeli attacks on February 28 brought projects largely to a standstill.

He is now struggling ‌to find work as ‌projects are delayed or cancelled and costs soar, with little prospect of a rapid recovery.

"I’m worried. If Trump imposes ‌more sanctions, ⁠how will ordinary ⁠people survive? I don’t want my country to be punished militarily or economically. We’re already struggling,” said the father of two from the central city of Isfahan.

His plight reflects a broader reality across Iran, where US strikes damaged factories, power plants, transport networks and other critical infrastructure, adding to pressure on an already strained economy.

Mohsen, 53, was forced to shut his small import-export business with Gulf countries after Iran retaliated against US strikes by targeting American bases and assets in the region.

"I had to lay off 10 employees. It was painful, but I had no choice. I could no longer afford to pay their salaries, and now I’m relying on my savings to support my family," he said from the southern port city of Bandar Abbas.

INFLATION, UNCERTAINTY HIT HOUSEHOLDS

Iran’s annual inflation rate reached 66% in July, while consumer prices were 87.9% higher than a year earlier, according to Iran’s Statistical ⁠Center. Food inflation hit 128% year-on-year.

For Iran’s rulers, the greater threat may be not economic pain itself, but the risk ‌that worsening hardship reignites mass unrest, said the two insiders and one official.

The appointment of Hossein Taeb ‌last week, a key architect of past crackdowns, to lead Iran’s Basij militia is one of the clearest signs yet of growing concern over a resurgence of unrest, a former reformist ‌official said.

The Basij, a paramilitary volunteer militia, is affiliated with Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guards, which have both been used by the clerical rulers to quell protests.

Economic ‌grievances have repeatedly spilled into nationwide protests in Iran in recent years.

In January, nationwide protests over economic hardships were crushed by the IRGC and the Basij force, with thousands killed.

In recent months, Iran’s clerical rulers have responded to fears of renewed unrest with executions, arrests, summonses and lengthy prison sentences targeting journalists, lawyers, activists, human rights advocates and students, rights groups say.

Officials say the measures are needed to maintain stability during wartime. Critics say they could deepen the divide between the clerical establishment and a public frustrated by rising economic pressures.

SALARY 'GONE WITHIN DAYS'

Families are cutting ‌back on meat and other staples, opting for cheaper alternatives.

"I’m ashamed in front of my children. My salary is gone within days. Meat and chicken have disappeared from our table. I have no idea how we’re going to ⁠get by," said Hossein, a government employee in ⁠the central city of Yazd.

Rents rose 31% year-on-year in March, according to the Statistical Centre, while state media reported Tehran housing prices at roughly 50% above last year.

Iran’s minimum wage was raised by about 60% this year, but continued rial depreciation has eroded purchasing power, with the dollar value of the minimum wage falling from about $105 to $86 since late March.

Bijan, 40, earned about $1,000 a month as an engineer when he entered the job market 15 years ago. He has since turned to online tutoring to make ends meet. Now, he and his wife struggle to make about $400 a month and have left Tehran for a cheaper province.

"I used to work maybe five or six hours a day ... Now, it’s all work or looking for work, or feeling anxious about not having enough work," said Bijan.

For many Iranians, fear of renewed conflict has made planning for the future increasingly difficult.

US NAVAL BLOCKADE RATCHETS UP COSTS

Iran has sought to keep essential goods moving through alternative routes, including land corridors and the Caspian Sea, but those alternatives are also coming under strain.

Strikes on bridges have disrupted overland transport, increasing the cost and time needed to move goods into Iran.

President Masoud Pezeshkian last week acknowledged the squeeze, saying: “Our problems have multiplied several times over, while our income has also fallen.”

Goods that once arrived by ship now take longer routes into Iran, driving up prices, he said, adding that Iran is selling less oil and collecting less tax revenue from damaged or struggling businesses.

The blockade has also effectively cut off Iran’s gasoline imports, lawmaker Reza Sepahvand told Iran's ILNA news agency on Saturday, adding that Iran’s daily gasoline output had reached its limit at about 130 million liters, compared with consumption of 137 million liters.