Al Jolani or Al Shraa?

The key to determining the future of the new governance in Syria lies in identifying the character and approach of its leader. If the leader of Hayat Tahrir Al Sham (HTS) has abandoned his organisational alias, Abu Mohammed Al Jolani, in favour of his real Syrian name, Ahmed Al Sharaa, this media rebranding has not been taken seriously by some key regional countries. These countries still view him as Abu Mohammad Al Jolani, a figure with extremist roots, while others see him as Ahmad Al Shraa, who has seamlessly transitioned from extremist camps and ideologies to the realm of politics, pragmatism, and statecraft.

There are also those who prefer to deepen the image of Al Jolani as a product of Takfirist organisations because this portrayal aids them in opposing the new Syrian rulers. Among these are Iran and its allies, who perceive any success of the new Syrian leadership as solidifying their regional defeat and losing critical geographical influence. Syria had previously been a major arena for Iran’s regional expansion, be it militarily, culturally, economically, and even demographically.

It is too early—and indeed unfair—to pass judgments on the developments in Syria and the performance of its new leadership. However, surrounding Syria are forces with varying interests: some seek to make the new Syria a sphere of their influence, others want it stable and unified, and still others aim to see it politically fragmented and descending into chaos.

Between Abu Mohammad Al Jolani and Ahmad Al Sharaa lies a distance that is not just about appearances, language, and rhetoric. This distance is defined by the behavior of the other factions ruling Syria today and how they govern the people. Are we witnessing transformations across all factions, or is this merely a political façade?

It is clear that Al Jolani is no longer welcomed by Ahmad Al Shraa, which is a positive development. However, the crucial factor is whether the performance of his associates will bolster Ahmad Al Shraa's position and not resurrect the image of Al Jolani. This is particularly important given that some regional powers do not favour Ahmad al-Shar’ah but rather prefer Abu Mohammmad Al Jolani with his historical baggage.