It was one of the greatest surprises that Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam broke his silence and went so far as to attack the Syrian regime to the extent of making him admit that the nation is more important than the regime.
Has Khaddam’s despair with the regime reached the point where he would take such a step, which is usually taken only by the highest figures?
Abdul Halim Khaddam cannot be considered just an ordinary person in Syria, especially when we consider the nature of the relationship he had with the late President Hafez al-Assad, who, without a doubt, established the foundations of the current regime in Syria in 1970. This regime was inherited by Bashar al-Assad, who sought to maintain it in his own way, which may differ from his father’s approach.
In his unusually lengthy interview with Al Arabiya, Abdul Halim Khaddam showed that he possesses a minimum level of loyalty to the men who served Syria and worked to pull it out of the crises it faced.
Khaddam found no escape but to speak the truth about Rafik Hariri, the genuine Arab nationalist who did everything he could to protect Syria under circumstances that could only be described as extremely difficult.
But beyond giving everyone their due and acknowledging each person’s true role, especially Mr. Farouk al-Sharaa, the Foreign Minister who may understand everything except foreign policy, Khaddam resorted to openly exposing the Syrian regime with unprecedented frankness.
There is no need to revisit what was said in the interview, except to highlight that Khaddam unequivocally confirmed that Hariri received direct threats from the regime’s key figures, including President Bashar al-Assad, in the months leading up to the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister and leader of the Sunnis in Lebanon.
The former Syrian Vice President, who was close to General Hikmat al-Shihabi, the Chief of Staff and one of Hafez al-Assad’s closest aides, did not fail to point out the Sunni dimension of Hariri’s assassination. He stated explicitly that one of the regime’s criticisms of the late Prime Minister was his attempt to unite the Sunni community in Lebanon around himself. Khaddam also pointed out that the Syrian regime ignores other parties in Lebanon, all of which are sectarian parties like (Amal) or (Hezbollah) and others, and only sees a problem in the consolidation of Sunnis around Hariri, although it would have been better if the former Vice President had confirmed that Hariri never sought to be a Sunni leader but was keen on the national and Arab dimensions of his work in Lebanon and beyond.
In any case and under any circumstances, Abdul Halim Khaddam’s (Abu Jamal) statements mark a turning point on three levels: firstly, the composition of the Syrian regime; secondly, the investigation into the assassination of Rafik Hariri and other Lebanese figures who fell victim to terrorism in 2005; and thirdly, the Arab and international cover that the regime enjoyed until the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister on February 14, 2005.
Regarding the composition of the regime, Khaddam’s statements for the first time reveal the depth of the internal crisis in Syria and how decision-making has become the prerogative of one man, who is now captive to his close circle of influential members.
Khaddam was clear in his attempt to draw a comparison with the conditions during Hafez al-Assad’s era. What the former Syrian Vice President, who was responsible for the Lebanese file, did not say is that, while it is true that the father, Assad, had the final decision, it is also true that he did not make his decisions in an impulsive manner as is the case now. In clearer terms, Khaddam’s stance represents a significant blow to the regime, especially coming weeks after the suicide of General Ghazi Kanaan, who was the Minister of the Interior and, prior to that, the actual ruler of Lebanon for twenty years. Ghazi Kanaan preferred silence to grand statements and likely chose suicide over openly declaring what was on his mind and what he suffered from in recent years.
As for Khaddam, he chose to speak rather than to commit suicide, and it is not unlikely that others might follow his lead. The big question concerns what General Hikmat al-Shihabi, who has been outside Syria for some time, will do regarding the investigation into the assassination of President Hariri. Khaddam’s statements reinforce the theory that the investigation is heading towards uncovering the truth. The truth is simply that those who decided to get rid of the former Lebanese Prime Minister did not realize that they were not committing just an ordinary crime that would pass like other crimes in Lebanon and elsewhere. The planners, instigators, and executors, due to their stupidity and the spirit of criminality and hatred driving them, failed to recognize that the world had changed and that Rafik Hariri was not just a Lebanese figure who could be easily removed, and life would continue as if nothing had happened.
It has been established from Khaddam’s statements that the assassination of Rafik Hariri was a major earthquake on both the Lebanese and Syrian fronts. Unlike other disasters that start big and then diminish, this is a disaster that starts big and grows even larger. It is an earthquake in every sense of the word, an earthquake that led, among other consequences, to the Syrian forces’ withdrawal from Lebanon in a manner that can only be described as dishonorable, a manner that any Arab would have preferred to be different. But what can be done with a regime that believes that eliminating the other is a means of dialogue
Turning to the Arab dimension, what Abdul Halim Khaddam said makes it clear beyond any doubt that the Arab cover for the Syrian regime has been lifted. To be more specific, it can be said that Saudi Arabia has removed its support from a regime that was considered its favored child until recently. It becomes apparent after the broadcast of Khaddam’s interview with all its explosive content that the Saudi option has become clear regarding pursuing the full truth about who killed Rafik Hariri and other figures in Lebanon, from Basil Fleihan to Samir Kassir, to George Hawi, to Gebran Tueni…
The game of regional balances that Hafez al-Assad mastered has become part of the past. This is something Abdul Halim Khaddam, who knew better than anyone that Syria would not have entered Lebanon without Arab and international cover, understood. Syria lost international cover after the adoption of Resolution 1559 and lost Arab cover after the assassination of Rafik Hariri.
Khaddam’s statements revealed how deep the crisis of the Syrian regime is. The man tried at times to maintain a thread of communication with President Bashar al-Assad, but he soon severed it, especially when he said that no Syrian agency could commit a crime as significant as the assassination of Rafik Hariri without the president’s knowledge.
In the end, Abu Jamal left the final decision to the international investigation, aware that the truth would eventually come out. He certainly took into account the regime’s reactions, including the remarks made by deputies who seemed to come from another world during the Syrian People’s Assembly session that followed his television interview. These deputies suddenly discovered that there was corruption in Syria and that Abdul Halim Khaddam was a symbol of this corruption. This is a step forward, and perhaps they will follow it with another step that leads to uncovering the truth about the assassination of Rafik Hariri and other Lebanese national figures, rather than continuing to evade it. Yes, talking about corruption is good, especially if someone dares to go beyond Abdul Halim Khaddam to uncover the truth and nothing but the truth. All that remains are futile maneuvers that neither advance nor delay the process, which Khaddam realized when he washed his hands of the regime, distinguished it from the homeland, and chose to speak out instead of resorting to suicide.
