Hezbollah should have no role in Lebanon’s future, says Bahaa Hariri, son of Rafik Hariri

Hariri: The Lebanese want total divorce from Hezbollah
0 seconds of 30 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
Next Up
Hariri: I have political differences with my brother Saad
00:35
00:00
00:31
00:30
 
Short Url
Updated 30 March 2021
Follow

Hezbollah should have no role in Lebanon’s future, says Bahaa Hariri, son of Rafik Hariri

  • Broad alliance needed to implement unfinished business of 1989 Taif Agreement, Bahaa Hariri tells Frankly Speaking
  • He contrasts contribution of “true friend” Saudi Arabia with part played by Iran, which has never “given us a penny”

DUBAI: Bahaa Hariri, the eldest son of slain Lebanese statesman Rafik Hariri, is calling for a broad alliance — a “supermajority” — to coalesce around a plan to agree on the way forward for Lebanon as it faces multiple crises.

Such an alliance is needed to implement the unfinished business of the Taif Agreement, the peace deal brokered by Saudi Arabia 30 years ago, Bahaa said as he gave a candid assessment of Lebanon’s situation on Frankly Speaking, the televised interview in which senior Middle East policymakers are questioned on their views about the most important issues of the day.

“We have to make sure that across the sectarian divide, the forces of moderation go hand in hand to put (together) a complete comprehensive plan — whether it’s an economic plan, a COVID-19 plan, a constitutional plan, a judiciary plan, or a security plan,” he said, noting that Lebanese was “at the precipice.”

 

0 seconds of 1 minute, 23 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
01:23
01:23
 

 

Bahaa, a billionaire Lebanese businessman, added: “We seek the full support of Saudi Arabia to make sure of the full implementation of the Taif Accord. It is key for us that Saudi Arabia helps us out and supports us in this. That's the key.”

The Taif Agreement, signed in 1989 under Saudi auspices at the end of the bitter civil war, had never been fully implemented, Bahaa said, but remained as a blueprint for achieving progress in the country. “If we are going to come to the Arab world and the international community, they’ll tell us you have an accord, but three-quarters of it hasn’t been executed,” he said.

“If we want a new accord, it may take us another 10 years and maybe half a million dead.”

Referring to the Taif Agreement, Bahaa said: “We need to make sure that this accord is executed to the letter: The separation of religion from the executive and the legislative branches; the establishment of a senate that protects minorities; the establishment of an independent judiciary; and an electoral law that meets the aspirations of all Lebanese. And that we have a new election.”

 

0 seconds of 22 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:22
00:22
 

 

Having said that, Bahaa made it clear he had no plans to put himself forward as a possible leader of Lebanon as it continues months-long attempts to form a new administration. "I don't have all the answers to many questions and I don't want to be the leader,” he said.

“Today, we don't have a civil war - we have complete mismanagement of a configuration that is in complete divorce. That configuration, of course, is Hezbollah, and the warlords and whoever supported them.

“The situation is only getting worse and that's why we believe that the economic plan and the entire plan that we're putting together has to be around a non-sectarian government, a technocratic government that takes the agenda moving forward.”

By the same token, Bahaa said there should be no role for Iran-backed Hezbollah in the new agenda, and castigated Iran for its destructive interference in Lebanon’s affairs.

“Iran has never given us a penny. It has always supported a terrorist organization called Hezbollah, which is not the Lebanese people but only a sect within the Lebanese people. It has killed people and has tried to destroy everything we're trying, as good Lebanese, to move forward,” he said angrily.

Bahaa contrasted the part Iran has played with the role played by Saudi Arabia, which he said had been a “true friend” of Lebanon. “Saudi Arabia has done a lot for Lebanon. It has helped us with the Taif Accord, and on political stability. It has helped us in putting billions of dollar deposits after Taif to stabilize the currency,” he said.

“It was always in the lead in encouraging other GCC nations in pouring foreign direct investment in the Central Bank to stabilize Lebanon, and encourage foreign direct investments from the Arab world to invest in Lebanon.”

Bahaa would welcome constructive involvement from the international community to help solve Lebanon’s ongoing crisis, but is wary of further involvement by Emmanuel Macron after the French leader called for the involvement of Hezbollah in the reform process.

 

0 seconds of 43 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:43
00:43
 

 

“We welcomed (France’s) help, and we welcome any initiative, but as we have said, it has to fall in line with the aspirations of the revolution,” Bahaa said, referring to the protest movement that appeared in Lebanon in October 2019 and intensified after the horrific explosion at Beirut port last summer.

“We welcome all efforts from the international community, but the most important thing is that it has to meet the aspirations of the Lebanese. The Lebanese want total divorce of Hezbollah and the warlords. I don't think Lebanon can afford any more patch-up solutions.”

Bahaa is also hopeful that the new Biden administration in the US, as well as British and European governments, can be persuaded to get involved in the Lebanese reform process. Equally, he is optimistic that the new opportunities presented by the Abraham Accords, as well as the reopening of trade and economic relations between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, can defuse tensions in the Middle East and Lebanon.

Hezbollah is suing Hariri in the Lebanese judicial system after he blamed the Iran-backed group for the explosion, but he is determined to defend the case strenuously. “The alleged offense is that we have tarnished the reputation of a branded global terrorist organization,” Bahaa said. “We believe that — based on the most reputable investigative reporters of the world — that they control the port. Fine, if that's the case. We have the best lawyers who will defend our case.”

The Aug. 19, 2020, verdict of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which investigated the 2005 assassination of his father, represented “closure” in the case, but added that there remained substantial evidence of the responsibility of Hezbollah’s senior leadership.“These courts are not after a party; they are after individuals. The courts were very clear in saying that they had evidence, but not enough evidence to indict the others,” Bahaa said.

As for his father’s legacy, Bahaa said it has been squandered in the sense that the opportunities presented by the Taif Agreement have been wasted by successive Lebanese politicians who are responsible for the current dire condition of the country. “We were almost there, and (the current political leaders) have to bear the full brunt and the responsibility of what happened,” he said.

Speaking about his younger brother, Saad Hariri, who was prime minister of Lebanon for six of the last 11 years, Bahaa said his fraternal affection remains, but that political differences were insurmountable, especially relating to Hezbollah and the influence of Lebanese “warlords” over the political process.




Bahaa Hariri said the forces of moderation in Lebanon need to work together across the sectarian divide to tackle the countries crises. (Screenshot/AN Photo)

“He is my little brother and I love him very much. This will never change — not today, not tomorrow, not till the end of my days,” Bahaa said. “But you cannot solve the problems when these cronies are the problem, okay. This hasn't happened just for a year or two; we've been on it for almost 16 years now.”

Thus, he rules out supporting Saad in his efforts to form a new government if he includes terrorist-designated Hezbollah in the administration. “I have stark differences politically with him,” Bahaa said. Asked if he would support Saad in a Hezbollah-influenced government, his reply was: “Absolutely not.”

Bahaa judged that the current Lebanese president, Michel Aoun, was under also the influence of “warlords,” and that international sanctions should be extended to other members of the political establishment, in addition to Aoun’s son-in-law Gebran Bassil, who was placed under US sanctions on corruption charges last year.

“It’s not enough. I think others have to be sanctioned,” Bahaa said. “It is the same for all the warlords, not only one. We cannot take one and isolate the others.” However, he declined to identify further potential targets for sanctions “because in the justice system you are innocent until proven guilty.”

Having been involved in business in Saudi Arabia, Bahaa believes the latest peace breakthroughs in the Middle East can lead to a revival of economic activity and an influx of foreign investment, despite the damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The biggest venture of his new business enterprise - the $500 million Al-Abdali development in Amman, Jordan - had been only marginally affected by the economic slowdown, he said.

Watch full episode below:

 

 

Twitter: @frankkanedubai


Analysis: What happens if Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz?

Updated 10 min 38 sec ago
Follow

Analysis: What happens if Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz?

  • Tehran has never fully closed the strategic waterway but it has threatened to do so many times in response to geopolitical tensions
  • Iran-Israel war has potentially immediate ramifications for energy-exporting Gulf states and, in the longer term, for the entire world

LONDON: It is thanks to a quirk of ancient geological history that almost half the global oil and gas reserves are located under or around the waters of the Arabian Gulf, and that the flow of the bulk of bounty to the world must pass through the narrow maritime bottleneck that is the Strait of Hormuz.

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the world that Israel’s unprecedented attack on Iran earlier in the day was an act of self-defense, aimed at disrupting its nuclear program.

By Saturday, Israel had broadened its targets from nuclear facilities, ballistic-missile factories and military commanders to oil facilities in apparent retaliation for waves of missile and drone strikes on its population centers.

In his video broadcast, Netanyahu said: “We will hit every site and every target of the ayatollahs’ regime, and what they have felt so far is nothing compared with what they will be handed in the coming days.”

In a stroke, Israel had escalated the conflict into a crisis with potentially immediate ramifications for all the oil- and gas-producing Gulf states and, in the longer term, for economies of the region and the entire world.

Reports originating from lawmakers in Tehran began to circulate suggesting that Iran was now threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz. Sardar Esmail Kowsari, a member of Iran’s parliament and a commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, warned in an interview that closing the waterway “is under consideration and that Iran will make the best decision with determination.”

While the strait is, in the words of the US Energy Information Administration, “the world’s most important oil transit choke point” — about a fifth of the world’s total petroleum liquids consumption passes through it — the two main oil producers, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, are not without alternative routes to world markets for their products.

Saudi Aramco operates twin oil and liquid gas pipelines which can carry up to 7 million barrels a day from Abqaiq on the Gulf to Yanbu on the Red Sea coast. Aramco has consistently shown resilience and ability to meet the demands of its clients, even when it was attacked in 2019.

The UAE’s onshore oil fields are linked to the port of Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman — beyond the Strait of Hormuz — by a pipeline capable of carrying 1.5 million barrels a day. The pipeline has attracted Iran’s attentions before. In 2019, four oil tankers, two each belonging to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, were attacked off the port of Fujairah.

Iran has never fully closed the Strait of Hormuz but it has threatened to do so multiple times in response to geopolitical tensions.

Historically, it has used the threat of closure as a strategic bargaining tool, particularly during periods of heightened conflict. In 2012, for instance, it threatened to block the strait in retaliation for US and European sanctions but did not follow through.

Naturally, disruptions in supplies would cause an enormous increase in energy price and related costs such as insurance and shipping. This would indirectly impact inflation and prices worldwide from the US to Japan.

According to the experts, Iran can employ unmanned drones, such as the Shahed series, to target specific shipping routes or infrastructure in the strait. It may also attempt to use naval vessels to physically obstruct passage through the strait.

Ironically, the one country in the region that would face no direct consequences from a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz is Israel. All of its estimated consumption of 220,000 barrels of crude a day comes via the Mediterranean, from countries including Azerbaijan (exported via the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan pipeline, which runs through Turkiye to the eastern Mediterranean), the US, Brazil, Gabon and Nigeria.

The capability to disrupt traffic in the Strait of Hormuz is one thing, a full closure is quite another, as it would harm Iran’s own economy given that it relies on the waterway for its oil exports.

History teaches that shutting off the flow of oil from the Arabian Gulf is far easier said than achieved. The first country to attempt to prevent oil exports from the Gulf was Britain, which in 1951 blockaded exports from the Abadan refinery at the head of the Gulf in response to the Iranian government’s decision to nationalize the country’s oil industry.

The motive was purely financial. In 1933 Britain, in the shape of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Co., a forerunner of today’s BP, had won a lopsided oil concession from the Iranian government and was reluctant to give it up.

The blockade did not last — impoverished post-war Britain needed Abadan’s oil as badly as Iran — but the consequences of Britain’s actions are arguably still being felt today.

The very existence of the current Iranian regime is a consequence of the 1953 coup jointly engineered by Britain and the US, which overthrew then Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, architect of the oil nationalization plan, and set Iran on the path to the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

The first modern blockade of oil shipments in the Gulf happened the following year, when Saddam Hussein, hoping to take advantage of the disruption caused by the revolution and the ousting of the shah, attacked Iran, triggering the disastrous eight-year Iran-Iraq War.

Still equipped with the shah’s US-supplied and trained air force and navy, Iran’s first reaction was successfully to blockade Iraqi warships and oil tankers in Umm Qasr, Iraq’s only deep-water seaport.

Iraqi aircraft began attacking Iranian shipping in the Gulf, provoking an Iranian response that focused initially on neutral ships bringing supplies to Iraq via Kuwait, a development that soon escalated into attacks by both sides on shipping of all flags.

The first tanker to be hit was a Turkish ship bombed by Iraqi aircraft on May 30, 1982, while loading at Iran’s Kharg Island oil terminal. The first to be declared a total loss was a Greek tanker, struck by an Iraqi Exocet missile on Dec. 18, 1982.

In terms of lives lost and ships damaged or destroyed, the so-called Tanker War was an extremely costly episode, which caused a temporary sharp rise in oil prices. By the time it ended in 1987, more than 450 ships from 15 countries had been attacked, two-thirds of them by Iraq, and 400 crew members of many nationalities had been killed.

Among the dead were 37 American sailors. On May 17, 1987, American frigate the USS Stark, patrolling in the Gulf midway between Qatar and the Iranian coast, was hit by two Exocet missiles fired by an Iraqi Mirage jet.

But at no point throughout the Tanker War was the flow of oil out through the Strait of Hormuz seriously disrupted.

“Iran couldn’t fully close the strait even in the 1980s,” said Sir John Jenkins, former UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

“It’s true that in those days the UK and others had a significant mine-sweeping capacity, which we lack today. But even if Iran laid mines again or interfered with shipping in the strait in other ways it will almost certainly draw in US maritime forces from the 5th Fleet (based in Bahrain) and perhaps air assets too.

“Also, attempting to close Hormuz will hit their own significant illegal oil trade.”

Regardless, the Iranians “will be very tempted to do this. But it is a delicate calculation — doing enough to get Russia and in particular China involved in support of de-escalation but not enough to provoke US action, effectively on the side of Israel,” Jenkins said.

In an analysis published in February last year, following an uptick in maritime aggression by Iran in and around the Strait of Hormuz, the Center for Security Policy, a Washington think tank, concluded that because 76 percent of the crude oil that passes through it is destined for Asian markets, “as one of Tehran’s sole remaining allies, it would not be in China’s best interest for the strait to fully close.”

Lessons learned during the 1980s Tanker War are relevant today. In the wake of that conflict, an analysis by the Strauss Center for International Security and Law offered a cool-headed assessment of the vulnerability of the Strait of Hormuz to any attempt at enforced closure by Iran.

“Our research and analysis reveals significant limits to Iran’s ability to materially reduce the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz for a sustained period of time,” the report, published in 2008, said.

“We find that a large-scale Iranian campaign would yield about a 5 percent chance of stopping each tanker’s transit with small boat suicide attacks and a roughly 12 percent chance of stopping each tanker’s transit with volleys of anti-ship cruise missiles.”

Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a temporary sharp rise in insurance premiums and the price of crude oil.

“But the Tanker War did not significantly disrupt oil shipments … Even at its most intense point, it failed to disrupt more than 2 percent of ships passing through the Gulf,” the report said.

The bottom line, it said, “is that if a disruption to oil flows were to occur, the world oil market retains built in mechanisms to assuage initial effects. And since the long-term disruption of the strait, according to our campaign analysis, is highly improbable, assuaging initial effects might be all we need.

“Panic, therefore, is unnecessary.”

Israel’s critics say it already has much to answer for in unleashing its unilateral assault on Iran. Netanyahu has been claiming for years that Iran was “only months away” from producing a nuclear weapon and his claim that that is the case now has no more credibility than before.

“Benjamin Netanyahu has started a war with Iran that has no justification,” said Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy at Washington think tank the Cato Institute.

Friday’s opening attacks overtook US President Donald Trump’s statement earlier that same day that “the United States is committed to a diplomatic resolution to the Iran nuclear issue.”

“Iran was not on the precipice of acquiring nuclear weapons,” Logan said. “It had not thrown out IAEA inspectors, from whom all information about the Iran nuclear program flowed. It had not enriched uranium to weapons-grade.”

Netanyahu’s true motives in launching his attack at this time are not hard for political observers to divine.

He has successfully derailed US-Iranian nuclear talks — ongoing negotiations, due to have been continued on Sunday in Oman, were canceled.

The attack has also caused the postponement of the three-day joint Saudi-French Gaza peace summit at the UN, which had been due to begin on Tuesday, with the issue of Palestinian sovereignty high on the agenda — anathema to Netanyahu’s right-wing, anti-two-state government.

“Israel has the right to choose its own foreign policy,” Logan said.

But “at the same time, it has the responsibility to bear the costs of that policy.”
 

 


Former Israeli PM Ehud Barak: Only full-scale war or new deal can stop Iran’s nuclear program

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

Former Israeli PM Ehud Barak: Only full-scale war or new deal can stop Iran’s nuclear program

  • Speaking to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, Barak said Israel’s ability to hold back Tehran’s program was limited
  • Barak said that while military strikes were “problematic,” Israel viewed the action as justified

LONDON: Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has warned that military action by Israel alone will not be enough to significantly delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions, describing the Islamic republic as a “threshold nuclear power.”

Speaking to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, Barak said that Israel’s ability to hold back Tehran’s program was limited.

“In my judgment, it’s not a secret that Israel alone cannot delay the nuclear program of Iran by a significant time period. Probably several weeks, probably a month, but even the US cannot delay them by more than a few months,” he said.

“It doesn’t mean that immediately they will have (a nuclear weapon), probably they still have to complete certain weaponization, or probably create a crude nuclear device to explode it somewhere in the desert to show the whole world where they are.”

Barak said that while military strikes were “problematic,” Israel viewed the action as justified.

“Instead of sitting idle, Israel feels that they have to do something. Probably together with the Americans we can do more.”

The former premier said that stopping Iran’s progress would require either a major diplomatic breakthrough or a regime change.

“My judgment is that because Iran is already what’s called a threshold nuclear power, the only way to block it is either to impose upon it a convincing new agreement or alternatively a full-scale war to topple down the regime,” he said.

“That’s something that together with the United States we can do.”

But he said he did not believe Washington had the appetite for such a move.

“I don’t believe that any American president, neither Trump or any one of his predecessors, would have decided to do that.”

Israel unleashed airstrikes across Iran for a third day on Sunday and threatened even greater force as some Iranian missiles fired in retaliation evaded Israeli air defenses to strike buildings in the heart of the country.

Israeli emergency services said at least 10 people had been killed in the Iranian attacks, while officials in Iran said that at least 128 people had been killed by Israel’s salvos.


Qatari foreign minister discusses Iran-Israel strikes in calls with UAE, UK counterparts

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

Qatari foreign minister discusses Iran-Israel strikes in calls with UAE, UK counterparts

  • Minister’s message confirms Doha’s condemnation of the Israeli attack
  • Qatar collaborating with partners to promote dialogue in pursuit of a diplomatic solution

LONDON: Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani, Qatar’s foreign minister, spoke with his Emirati and British counterparts in separate calls on Sunday to address the escalating hostilities between Israel and Iran.

Sheikh Mohammed and his UAE counterpart, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, discussed the Israeli attack on Iran, which began on Friday morning.

The Qatari foreign minister reiterated Doha’s condemnation of the Israeli attack, which violates Iran’s sovereignty and security and is a clear violation of the principles of international law, the Qatar News Agency reported.

Sheikh Mohammed had a separate conversation on Sunday with UK Minister of Foreign Affairs David Lammy. During this call, he said that the ongoing Israeli violations and attacks in the region are undermining peace efforts and could lead to a broader regional conflict, the QNA added.

He emphasized the need for diplomatic efforts, saying that Qatar is collaborating with partners to promote dialogue and enhance security and peace in the region and worldwide.


Turkish president discusses Israel-Iran strikes with Oman’s sultan, Kuwait’s emir

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

Turkish president discusses Israel-Iran strikes with Oman’s sultan, Kuwait’s emir

  • Leaders stress importance of de-escalation, halting aggression, resolving differences through diplomatic means

LONDON: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan discussed developments in the Middle East during separate phone calls on Sunday with the Sultan of Oman Haitham bin Tariq, and the Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Meshal Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.

Erdogan discussed with the Omani sultan the Israeli strikes against Iran, which began on Friday morning, and their “worrying repercussions” for the region, the Oman News Agency reported.

The parties stressed the importance of dialogue and diplomacy and a return to the negotiating table to settle conflicts and prevent the escalation of crises in the region.

The ONA reported that they exchanged views on maintaining security and stability in accordance with international law.

Erdogan and the Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Meshal also discussed the rapid developments in the Middle East and the conflict between “the friendly Islamic Republic of Iran and the brutal Israeli entity,” the Kuwait News Agency reported.

In addition, both leaders renewed their condemnation of the ongoing Israeli strikes in the Gaza Strip, where at least 54,000 Palestinians have been killed since late 2023. They emphasized the importance of de-escalating tensions, halting aggression, and resolving differences through diplomatic means in the region, the KUNA added.


MP calls out lack of bomb shelters in Arab-Israeli communities

Updated 15 June 2025
Follow

MP calls out lack of bomb shelters in Arab-Israeli communities

JERUSALEM: Ayman Odeh, an Israeli member of parliament of Palestinian descent, accused the government on Sunday of failing to provide Arab-Israeli communities with enough shelters after an Iranian missile killed four people in the city of Tamra.

“The state, unfortunately, still distinguishes between blood and blood,” Odeh lamented on X, after touring the city of 37,000 predominantly Arab residents.

A house there was destroyed by a missile launched by Iran overnight in response to Israel’s unprecedented attacks on the Islamic republic’s military and nuclear sites.

“Four civilians were killed yesterday: Manar Al-Qassem Abu Al-Hija Khatib (39), her two daughters Hala (13) and Shada (20), and their relative Manar Diab Khatib (41),” Odeh said, adding that “dozens more” were wounded

Cars and buildings were also damaged by the strike on the community in the Israeli region of Galilee, an AFP journalist at the scene reported.

“Tamra is not a village. It is a city without public shelters,” Odeh said, adding that this was the case for 60 percent of “local authorities” — the Israeli term for communities not officially registered as cities, many of which are Arab-Israeli.

Arab-Israelis are Palestinians who remained in what is now Israel after its creation in 1948, and represent about 20 percent of the country’s population.

The community frequently professes to face discrimination from Israel’s Jewish majority.

With Israel and Iran engaged in their most intense confrontation ever, Odeh, a communist MP for over 10 years, warned of “a threat of unprecedented destruction (that) will not distinguish” between Arabs and Jews.

He also accused the government of “neglect” toward citizens of Palestinian descent.

A video shared on social media Sunday night caused outrage after showing families apparently rejoicing in Hebrew as missiles fell on Tamra.

In some Arab neighborhoods, missiles launched toward Israel have also been welcomed with joy, AFP journalists reported.