Abu Mohammed al-Julani, now known as Ahmed al-Sharaa, has transitioned from a jihadist leader to a political figure, heading Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). He envisions a future for Syria post-Assad, aiming to draft a new constitution over three years while improving living conditions. Despite appointing familiar allies, questions about inclusivity arise. Sharaa proposes a national dialogue conference to address ongoing conflicts, including the integration of Kurdish forces, although details remain unclear.
Transformation of Abu Mohammed al-Julani
In recent years, Abu Mohammed al-Julani has made a significant transformation from a jihadist warrior to a political figure. The leader of the Islamist militia alliance Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) has traded in his battle attire for a black suit and tie, now going by the name Ahmed al-Sharaa. This change signals a shift in his role and approach to leadership.
Sharaa’s Vision for Syria’s Future
Following the overthrow of the Assad regime, many observers are curious about what the future holds under Sharaa’s leadership. While he presents himself as a moderate, concerns linger regarding whether his Islamist roots will influence his governance. Until recently, Sharaa had been relatively quiet about his plans but has now shared his vision in an interview with a Saudi television channel. He outlined a lengthy process, projecting that it will take three years to draft a new constitution, with elections not expected for at least four years. In the meantime, his administration aims to enhance living conditions for the populace.
Sharaa continues to rely on familiar faces from his time in Idlib, appointing individuals he knows well to his transitional government under Prime Minister Mohammed al-Bashir. This group has experience managing a de facto state in northwestern Syria, complete with its own military and governmental structures. However, the lack of representation for various minorities in the provisional team raises questions about inclusivity and the future of governance in Syria.
Sharaa has responded to criticism by emphasizing that his current appointments are not intended to exclude any group and that he opposes power-sharing based on ethnic or religious lines, as it could complicate the transition. For many hoping for swift democratization, his cautious approach may come as a letdown. Past experiences in other countries, like Libya, have shown that rapid elections in the absence of strong institutions can lead to chaos rather than progress.
Syria remains fraught with challenges, as numerous armed factions continue to operate in the region. The Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are engaged in conflicts with Turkish-backed militias, while in western Syria, loyalist factions still pose threats to stability. Sharaa has indicated a desire to incorporate the Kurdish SDF into future security forces, acknowledging their integral role in Syria. However, the willingness of the Kurds to relinquish their autonomy remains uncertain, especially given HTS’s origins linked to Al-Qaeda.
To address these complexities, Sharaa has proposed a “national dialogue conference,” hinting at the potential dissolution of HTS. Yet, he has not specified the timeline or participant criteria for this conference, leaving many questions unanswered about the path forward for Syria.