In a pair of op-ed articles published by The Jerusalem Post, concerns were raised about the “dangerous developments on the Syrian stage” and the intentions of the new authority in Damascus, led by Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, the leader of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS).
The articles, authored by Moshe Vozailov and Eric Mandel, argue that the perception of Jolani as a pragmatic figure is misplaced, warning that his leadership may signal a strategic shift in Syria’s political and military landscape.
Jolani: A Pragmatist or a Skilled Strategist?
In his article titled “Jolani of HTS: Not a Pragmatist, but a Skilled Strategist”, Vozailov critiques Western narratives that portray Jolani as pragmatic. According to him, this perspective stems from Western cultural biases rather than an understanding of the Middle Eastern reality.
Vozailov argues that Western observers view Jolani through a lens shaped by decades of war in Europe, which fostered values like economic stability, human rights, and international harmony. In contrast, the Middle East has evolved over millennia through tribal desert cultures, marked by regional conflicts and religious wars that continue to define its dynamics.
Western Misperceptions of Jolani
The author highlights a cognitive dissonance among Western policymakers, journalists, and academics when assessing Jolani. They struggle to reconcile the image of a jihadist leader with his diplomatic demeanor and strategic rhetoric.
According to Vozailov, this misperception is addressed through what he calls “cognitive distortion,” whereby Western observers interpret Jolani’s actions—such as wearing Western attire, avoiding excessive violence, and employing diplomatic language—as signs of pragmatism.
However, Vozailov asserts that these behaviors are rooted in the Islamic concept of taqiyya (dissimulation), which allows Muslims to conceal their beliefs in hostile environments to protect themselves. He draws parallels between Jolani’s strategy and historical instances of taqiyya, such as the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, which the Prophet Muhammad signed with the Quraysh tribe before later conquering Mecca.
Ties to Erdogan and Strategic Alliances
Vozailov also points to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as a key influence on Jolani’s diplomatic and strategic maneuvering. Turkey, a stronghold for the Muslim Brotherhood, is adept at manipulating Western perceptions and has reportedly guided Jolani in crafting a pragmatic facade to further his ideological and political goals.
One of Jolani’s main strategies, according to the article, is leveraging temporary truces (hudna), a concept rooted in Islamic tradition that permits ceasefires when Muslims are in a position of weakness. Vozailov warns that such truces are tactical moves to regroup and strengthen before resuming hostilities.
Western Optimism vs. Ground Realities
Eric Mandel, in his companion article, cautions against Western optimism about the new Damascus leadership. He specifically criticizes calls for lifting economic sanctions on Syria, labeling them premature and potentially damaging.
Mandel highlights a recent editorial by The New York Times that advocated easing financial sanctions to support Syria’s economy. He notes that while Western officials, such as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara Leaf, have engaged in dialogue with Jolani and his associates, these overtures ignore HTS’s violent history and extremist ideology.
Human Rights Concerns and Jihadist History
Mandel underscores HTS’s troubling record of human rights violations, including war crimes, strict imposition of Sharia law in Idlib, secret prisons, and the recruitment of child soldiers. He stresses that the organization’s rebranding as a governing authority does not erase its roots in Al-Qaeda and other jihadist factions.
Quoting Matthew Levitt, a counterterrorism expert at the Washington Institute, Mandel argues that U.S. policy in Syria must be based on verifiable actions rather than trust in the rhetoric of new Syrian leaders.
Strategic Risks of Reconstruction Aid
Mandel also warns against rushing to provide reconstruction aid to Syria, Lebanon, or Gaza without ensuring that extremist groups like HTS or Hamas are excluded from power. He asserts that such aid could be exploited to further these groups’ agendas, ultimately undermining U.S. and allied interests.
For Gaza, Mandel advises limiting aid to essential humanitarian needs while avoiding investments in infrastructure that could empower Hamas militarily or politically. Similarly, he argues that reconstruction efforts in Lebanon should be withheld until Hezbollah’s influence over the government is diminished.
Conclusion: The Need for Realistic Policies
Both authors conclude that Western policymakers must adopt a more realistic approach to the Middle East, grounded in a deep understanding of the region’s cultural, religious, and political complexities.
They caution against prematurely embracing Jolani or other figures who claim moderation, warning that such leaders may simply be employing strategic deception to achieve long-term ideological goals.
Ultimately, the authors advocate for a balanced strategy combining humanitarian aid with firm sanctions and a cautious evaluation of any new leadership in Syria, Lebanon, or Gaza.
