海角直播

US soldiers search debris after the terrorist attack blasted through four layers of concrete. AFP
US soldiers search debris after the terrorist attack blasted through four layers of concrete. AFP

1983 - US Marines bombed in Beirut

Short Url
Updated 19 April 2025

1983 - US Marines bombed in Beirut

1983 - US Marines bombed in Beirut
  • The 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut by a pro-Iranian group killed 241 Americans and led to the US withdrawal from Lebanon

BEIRUT: At about 6:25 a.m. on Oct. 23, 1983, Beirut and its suburbs were shaken, as far as its mountainous regions, by what seemed almost a muffled explosion.聽

People thought it was an earthquake, but seven minutes later the city and its surroundings were again shaken by a second, much more massive blast.聽

I was working for the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir as a war correspondent at the time. Beirut was besieged, in its southern suburbs, the mountains and the Kharoub region, by clashes between the Progressive Socialist Party and its allies on one hand, and the Lebanese Forces on the other, in what was known as the 鈥淢ountain War.鈥澛

The south of the country was also the scene of armed resistance by Lebanese fighters against the Israeli occupation. These fighters had links to leftist parties and previously with Palestinian factions.聽

Multinational forces, including the Americans, French and Italians, had been stationed in Beirut following the withdrawal of the leadership and forces of the Palestine Liberation Organization, as a result of Israel鈥檚 aggression against Lebanon including its occupation of Beirut in 1982.聽

Within a few minutes of the blasts, it became clear that the headquarters of the US Marines on Beirut鈥檚 Airport Road, and the base for the French contingent in the Jinnah area, had been hit by two separate suicide attacks. The unidentified bombers had stormed two fortified locations with trucks packed with tonnes of explosives.

How we wrote it




The day after the attacks, Arab News noted 120 Marine and 20 French deaths, a significantly lower figure than the final count.

The attack on the US base killed 241 American military personnel 鈥 220 Marines, 18 sailors and three soldiers 鈥 and wounded dozens. The bombing of the French military site killed 58 French paratroopers and more than 25 Lebanese.聽

The attacks were the second of their kind in Beirut; a suicide bomber had targeted the US embassy in Ain Al-Mraiseh six months earlier, on April 18, killing 63 people, including 17 Americans and 35 Lebanese.聽

The damage was enormous at the headquarters of the Marines. Four layers of cement had collapsed into piles of rubble, fires were burning, and there was a lot of screaming amid the blood, body parts and confusion. This is what we journalists could see amid the chaos in the immediate aftermath, and what sticks in my memory more than 40 years later.聽

The night before, a Saturday, the Marines had been partying, entertained by a musical group that had traveled from the US to perform for them. Most were still asleep when the bomb exploded.聽

No group claimed responsibility for the bombings that day, but a few days later As-Safir published a statement it had received in which the 鈥淚slamic Revolution Movement鈥 said it was responsible.聽

About 48 hours after the bombing, the US accused the Amal Movement and its splinter group, Islamic Amal, led by Hussein Al-Moussawi, of being responsible for the attack. According to reports in local newspapers at the time: 鈥淭he planning for the bombing took place in Baalbek, and the truck used was seen parked in front of an Amal Movement office.鈥澛

The US vice president, George H.W. Bush, visited Lebanon the day after the attack and said: 鈥淲e will not allow terrorism to dictate or change our foreign policy.鈥澛

Syria, Iran and the Amal Movement denied any involvement in either of the bombings.聽

Key Dates

  • 1

    Multinational US, French and Italian peacekeeping force is sent to Beirut to oversee withdrawal of Palestine Liberation Organization fighters.

    Timeline Image Aug. 24, 1982

  • 2

    US Marines withdraw.

  • 3

    Lebanese President Bachir Gemayel assassinated.

    Timeline Image Sept. 14, 1982

  • 4

    Christian militia, assisted by Israeli troops, massacres hundreds of Muslims in Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.

    Timeline Image Sept. 16-19, 1982

  • 5

    US Marines return to Beirut.

  • 6

    17 Americans among 63 people killed in bombing at US embassy in Beirut.

    Timeline Image April 18, 1983

  • 7

    Truck bomb kills 241 US personnel and wounds 128 at Marines鈥 compound in Beirut. Similar device kills 58 French paratroopers stationed nearby.

    Timeline Image Oct. 23, 1983

  • 8

    US court concludes Iran ordered the attack and Hezbollah carried it out.

French authorities responded to the attack on its forces by sending eight military jets to bomb the Sheikh Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, where they said 鈥淚ranian elements are stationed.鈥 They stated at the time 鈥渢he raids killed 200 people.鈥澛

An official from Islamic Amal denied that Iran had a compound in the Baalbek region, but added that his group鈥檚 association with 鈥渢he Islamic revolution in Iran is the association of a nation with its leader, and we are defending ourselves.鈥

On Nov. 23, the Lebanese Cabinet decided to sever relations with Iran and Libya. Lebanese Foreign Minister Eli Salem said the decision 鈥渨as taken after Iran and Libya admitted that they have forces in the Bekaa.鈥澛

A report in As-Safir quoted a diplomatic source as saying: 鈥淩elations with Iran have worsened due to the illegal interventions, practices and activities it carried out on the Lebanese scene, despite many warnings.鈥澛

The attacks on Oct. 23 were the strongest indication up until then of the shifting balance of regional and international power in Lebanon, and the emergence of a growing Iranian role in the civil war.聽

Researcher Walid Noueihed told me that prior to 1982, Beirut had welcomed all forms of opposition, including the educated elite, referred to as the 鈥渧elvet opposition,鈥 and the armed opposition, the members of which were trained in Palestinian camps or training centers in the Bekaa Valley and southern Lebanon.聽




The aerial view of the US embassy in Beirut following the explosion which killed 63 people, including 46 Lebanese and 17 Americans. AFP

He said the Iranian opposition to the Shah was present among these groups, and described Beirut as an oasis for opposition movements until 1982. However, this dynamic changed when Israel invaded Lebanon and besieged Beirut, resulting in the departure of the PLO under an international agreement that in exchange required Israel to refrain from entering Beirut.聽

While the Palestinian factions departed from Lebanon, however, the Lebanese fighters associated with the PLO, most of them Shiites who formed the bases of Lebanese leftist parties, did not.聽

The attacks on the US and French military bases led to the withdrawal of international forces from Lebanon, Noueihed said, leaving Beirut unprotected once again. Resistance operations grew, influenced by ideologies distinct from those of the traditional left, as groups such as Islamic Amal openly displayed slogans advocating confrontation with Israel.聽

In 1985, Hezbollah was officially established as 鈥渁 jihadi organization leading a revolution for an Islamic republic.鈥 It attracted support from Lebanese and Palestinian leftist parties, particularly after the collapse of the Soviet Union.聽

Noueihed said the emergence of Hezbollah coincided with a decline of existing symbols of national resistance, which seemed to signal an intention to exclude all other forces in the country from the resistance movement, leaving Hezbollah as the dominant party.聽

The Iranian influence in Lebanon became evident during violent clashes between Hezbollah and Amal, which resulted in dozens of casualties and concluded with Hezbollah consolidating its control amid the presence of Syrian military forces.聽

Beirut eventually became a city abandoned by the educated elite, as hundreds of writers, intellectuals, researchers and media professionals fled to Europe, fearing for their safety, Noueihed added.聽

  • Najia Houssari is a writer for Arab News, based in Beirut. She was a war correspondent for Lebanese newspaper As-Safir at the time the US Marine barracks were bombed.聽


Russia protests to Israel over alleged attack on diplomatic vehicle

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova speaks to the media in Moscow. (AFP file photo)
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova speaks to the media in Moscow. (AFP file photo)
Updated 27 sec ago

Russia protests to Israel over alleged attack on diplomatic vehicle

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova speaks to the media in Moscow. (AFP file photo)
  • The incident occurred 鈥渨ith the acquiescence of Israeli military personnel, who were present at the scene and did not attempt to stop the attackers鈥 aggressive actions,鈥 she added

MOSCOW: Russia lodged a formal protest to Israel following an alleged attack on a Russian diplomatic vehicle near the settlement of Givat Assaf near Jerusalem, according to a statement issued by the Russian foreign ministry.
鈥淥n July 30, a vehicle of the Russian Federation鈥檚 mission to the Palestinian National Authority, bearing diplomatic license plates and carrying personnel of the Russian diplomatic mission accredited by Israel鈥檚 Foreign Ministry, was attacked near the illegal Israeli settlement of Givat Assaf, near Jerusalem, by a group of settlers,鈥 Russia鈥檚 foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in a statement.
The incident occurred 鈥渨ith the acquiescence of Israeli military personnel, who were present at the scene and did not attempt to stop the attackers鈥 aggressive actions,鈥 she added.
Reuters was not able to independently verify the Russian foreign ministry鈥檚 report.
Zakharova said the Russian embassy in Tel Aviv had submitted an official demarche to Israeli authorities.

 


What to know as Israel considers reoccupying Gaza in what would be a major escalation of the war

What to know as Israel considers reoccupying Gaza in what would be a major escalation of the war
Updated 10 min 9 sec ago

What to know as Israel considers reoccupying Gaza in what would be a major escalation of the war

What to know as Israel considers reoccupying Gaza in what would be a major escalation of the war
  • The full reoccupation of Gaza would pose long-term challenges that Israel is well aware of given its long history of occupying Arab lands, including the likelihood of a prolonged insurgency
  • Israel captured Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war

JERUSALEM: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is considering ordering the full reoccupation of the Gaza Strip, according to Israeli media, a move that would draw fierce opposition internationally and within Israel.
It would mark a stunning escalation of the nearly 22-month war in the territory that has already been largely destroyed and where experts say famine is unfolding. It would put the lives of countless Palestinians and about 20 living hostages at risk, and deepen Israel鈥檚 already stark international isolation.
It would also face fierce opposition within Israel: Families of the hostages would consider it a virtual death sentence, and much of the security establishment is also reportedly opposed to an open-ended occupation that would bog down and further strain the army after nearly two years of regional wars.
The threat to reoccupy Gaza could be a negotiating tactic aimed at pressuring Hamas after talks mediated by the United States, Egypt and Qatar appeared to have broken down last month. Or it could be aimed at shoring up support from Netanyahu鈥檚 far-right coalition partners.
His governing allies have long called for escalating the war, taking over Gaza, relocating much of its population through what they refer to as voluntary emigration and reestablishing Jewish settlements that were dismantled when Israel withdrew in 2005.
Whether they prevail will likely depend on the one person with leverage over Israel 鈥 US President Donald Trump, who has not yet weighed in.
Ground operations in the most densely populated areas
To take full control of Gaza, Israel would need to launch ground operations in the last areas of the territory that haven鈥檛 been flattened and where most of Gaza鈥檚 2 million Palestinians have sought refuge.
That would mean going into the central city of Deir Al-Balah and Muwasi, a so-called humanitarian zone where hundreds of thousands of people live in squalid tent camps along the coast. Such operations would force another wave of mass displacement and further disrupt aid deliveries as the UN agencies and humanitarian organizations are already struggling to avert famine.
Israel already controls around 75 percent of the territory, which has been declared a buffer zone or placed under evacuation orders. With Israel also largely sealing Gaza鈥檚 borders, it鈥檚 unclear where civilians would go.
It would also pose a major risk for the remaining 20 or so living hostages, likely held in tunnels or other secret locations. Hamas is believed to have ordered its guards to kill captives if Israeli forces approach.
Hamas-led militants abducted 251 hostages in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack that ignited the war and killed around 1,200 people that day, mostly civilians. They are still holding 50 hostages, less than half of them believed to be alive, and recent videos have shown emaciated captives pleading for their lives.
Israel鈥檚 retaliatory offensive has killed over 61,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza鈥檚 Health Ministry, which does not say how many were civilians or combatants. The ministry, which is part of the Hamas-run government and run by medical professionals, is seen by the United Nations and other experts as the most reliable source on casualties. Israel disputes its toll but has not provided its own.
International outrage and further isolation
Israel鈥檚 wartime conduct has shocked much of the international community, and prompted even close Western allies to call for an end to the war and to take steps to recognize Palestinian statehood.
The International Court of Justice is considering allegations of genocide, and the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defense minister, alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the use of starvation as a method of war.
Israel has rejected the allegations and accused those making them of antisemitic 鈥渂lood libel.鈥 It says it has taken every effort to avoid harming civilians and blames Hamas for their deaths because the militants are deeply entrenched in heavily populated areas.
Israel has said it will keep fighting until all the hostages are returned, Hamas is defeated or disarmed, and Gaza鈥檚 population is given the option of 鈥渧oluntary emigration,鈥 which the Palestinians and much of the international community view as forcible expulsion.
Hamas has said it will only release the remaining hostages in return for a lasting ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal. It says it is willing to give up power but will not lay down its arms as long as Israel occupies territories the Palestinians want for a future state.
Another open-ended occupation
Israel captured Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war. The United Nations, the Palestinians and others continued to view Gaza as occupied territory after the 2005 withdrawal of Israeli troops and settlers, as Israel maintained control of its airspace, coastline, most of its land border and its population registry.
The full reoccupation of Gaza would pose long-term challenges that Israel is well aware of given its long history of occupying Arab lands, including the likelihood of a prolonged insurgency. Israeli support for the war already appears to have declined since Netanyahu ended a ceasefire in March, as soldiers have been killed in hit-and-run attacks.
As an occupying power, Israel would be expected to maintain order and ensure the basic needs of the population are met. In the West Bank, it has largely outsourced that to the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited autonomy in population centers.
But in Gaza, Netanyahu has ruled out any future role for the PA, accusing it of not being fully committed to peace, and has not produced any plan for Gaza鈥檚 postwar governance and reconstruction.
Long-term repercussions
Even if Israel succeeds in suppressing Hamas, the reoccupation of Gaza could pose an even more profound threat to the country.
It would leave Israel in full control of the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, which is home to around 7 million Jews and 7 million Palestinians 鈥 most of the latter denied basic rights, including the vote. Even before the war, major human rights groups said the situation amounted to apartheid, something Israel vehemently denies.
Unless large numbers of Palestinians are expelled 鈥 no longer merely a fantasy of Israel鈥檚 far-right 鈥 Israel would face an all-too-familiar existential dilemma: Create a Palestinian state in the 1967 territories and preserve Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, or rule over millions of Palestinians indefinitely and hope they never rally behind the idea of equal rights in a binational state.
Israel would no longer be able to point to Hamas鈥 rule in Gaza, or factional divisions among Palestinians, as reasons to avoid such a reckoning. And when Trump leaves office, it may find it has few friends to back it up.

 


Al-Hilal face ban from 2026-27 Saudi Super Cup

Al-Hilal face ban from 2026-27 Saudi Super Cup
Updated 05 August 2025

Al-Hilal face ban from 2026-27 Saudi Super Cup

Al-Hilal face ban from 2026-27 Saudi Super Cup
  • Al-Hilal had violated Article (59-3) of the Disciplinary and Ethics Regulations and was fined $133,000
  • The committee said the decision is subject to appeal

RIYADH: Holders Al-Hilal will be banned from the 2026-27 Saudi Super Cup if they qualify after withdrawing from this season鈥檚 four-team competition, the 海角直播 Football Federation鈥檚 (SAFF) Disciplinary and Ethics Committee said on Tuesday.

The decision came after Al-Hilal pulled out of the Super Cup, scheduled to be played from August 19-23 in Hong Kong, citing player fatigue following their Club World Cup campaign. They lost 2-1 to Fluminense in the quarter-finals on July 4.

鈥淎l-Hilal refused to participate in the Saudi Super Cup for the 2025-2026 season after the official schedule for the competition was issued,鈥 the Disciplinary and Ethics Committee said in a statement.

鈥淎s a result, the committee ruled that Al-Hilal had violated Article (59-3) of the Disciplinary and Ethics Regulations and fined the club 500,000 Saudi Riyals ($133,000) to be paid to the SAFF,鈥 the statement added.

In addition to the fine, the club was banned from participating in the 2026-27 Super Cup and stripped of any financial awards allocated for this season鈥檚 competition.

The committee said the decision is subject to appeal.

Al-Hilal have been asked for comment.

They won the Super Cup by beating Al-Nassr last season for a record-extending fifth title.

The Saudi Super Cup is contested by the winners and runners-up of the King鈥檚 Cup and Saudi Pro League. Al-Hilal finished second in the 2024-25 Pro League behind Al-Ittihad.

Al-Hilal, who were due to face King鈥檚 Cup runners-up Al-Qadsiah in the Super Cup semifinals on August 20, have been replaced by AFC Champions League winners Al-Ahli.

Since Al-Ittihad won the Pro League and King鈥檚 Cup, the extra Super Cup spot was awarded to Al-Nassr 鈥 the third-placed team in the league 鈥 who they face in the semis on August 19.


UN says reports of possible expansion of Israeli Gaza operations 鈥榙eeply alarming鈥 at session on hostages

UN says reports of possible expansion of Israeli Gaza operations 鈥榙eeply alarming鈥 at session on hostages
Updated 05 August 2025

UN says reports of possible expansion of Israeli Gaza operations 鈥榙eeply alarming鈥 at session on hostages

UN says reports of possible expansion of Israeli Gaza operations 鈥榙eeply alarming鈥 at session on hostages
  • Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar also spoke ahead of the session to highlight the plight of Israeli hostages

NEW YORK: The United Nations on Tuesday called reports about a possible decision to expand Israel鈥檚 military operations throughout the Gaza Strip 鈥渄eeply alarming鈥 if true.

UN Assistant Secretary-General Miroslav Jenca told a UN Security Council meeting on the situation in Gaza that such a move 鈥渨ould risk catastrophic consequences ... and could further endanger the lives of the remaining hostages in Gaza.鈥

He continued: 鈥淚nternational law is clear in the regard, Gaza is and must remain an integral part of the future Palestinian state.鈥

He added that the UN had also been clear that there was only one path to ending the ongoing violence and humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, through a full and permanent ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.

鈥淟ife-saving humanitarian aid must flow into Gaza at scale and without obstruction, and civilians must be guaranteed safe, unhindered access to assistance. There is no military solution to the conflict in Gaza or the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict,鈥 he said.

鈥淲e must establish political and security frameworks that can relieve the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, start early recovery and reconstruction, address the legitimate security concerns of Israelis and Palestinians, and secure an end to Israel鈥檚 unlawful occupation and achieve a sustainable two-State solution. 

鈥淚srael and a fully independent, democratic, contiguous, viable and sovereign Palestinian State, of which Gaza is an integral part, living side by side in peace and security within secure and recognized borders, on the basis of the pre-1967 lines, with Jerusalem as the capital of both States,鈥 he added.

Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar also spoke ahead of the session to highlight the plight of Israeli hostages, during which he also said countries that had announced plans to recognize a Palestinian state in recent weeks had sabotaged a ceasefire deal with the Hamas terror group.

Britain, France, Canada, and several other countries said they would recognize a Palestinian state in September, some of them unconditionally and some depending on Israel鈥檚 actions in Gaza.

鈥淭here are countries that acted, also in this building, to pressure Israel instead of Hamas during sensitive days in the negotiations by attacking Israel, campaigning against Israel, and the announcement of a recognition of a virtual Palestinian state,鈥 he said. 

鈥淭hey gave Hamas free gifts and incentives to continue this war, they directly assassinated the hostage deal and ceasefire.

鈥淟et me be clear, these countries prolonged the war. Hamas is responsible for beginning this war by invading Israel and committing the Oct. 7 atrocities.

鈥淗amas is also responsible for the continuation of this war by still refusing to release our hostages and lay down its arms. The international pressure must be on Hamas. Anything else only prolongs the war,鈥 he added.


Witkoff to meet with Russian leadership in Moscow on Wednesday, source says

Witkoff to meet with Russian leadership in Moscow on Wednesday, source says
Updated 05 August 2025

Witkoff to meet with Russian leadership in Moscow on Wednesday, source says

Witkoff to meet with Russian leadership in Moscow on Wednesday, source says
  • Officials in Washington provided few details of Witkoff鈥檚 schedule
  • 鈥淲itkoff will be traveling to Russia this week,鈥 Bruce said

WASHINGTON: US special envoy Steve Witkoff will be in Moscow on Wednesday to meet with Russian leadership, a source familiar with the plan said on Tuesday.

Officials in Washington provided few details of Witkoff鈥檚 schedule.

鈥淭he president has noted, of course, that Special Envoy Witkoff will be traveling to Russia this week, so we can confirm that from this podium,鈥 State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce told reporters.

鈥淲hat that will entail, I have no details for you.鈥

Russia鈥檚 state-run TASS news agency, quoting aviation sources, said an aircraft believed to have Witkoff on board, had already left the United States.

US President Donald Trump, who has signaled frustration with Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin in recent weeks, has given him until this Friday to make progress toward peace in Ukraine or face tougher sanctions.