In Syria, the Dictator Was Replaced by a God
A year after the fall of the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, has Syria truly become a thriving utopia of peace, prosperity, freedom of expression, and tolerance under a one-hundred-percent Islamic democratic rule? This is the question Mohamed Saad Khiralla investigates.
On December 8, 2025, the first anniversary of the fall of the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad was observed a man who rained barrel bombs on his people, deployed chemical weapons, and ruled with his father a brutal family regime for half a century, a rule marked by killings, starvation, and forced displacement.
On that day, “Abu Muhammad al-Jolani “officially introduced as Ahmad al-Shar’ and his associates from Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham entered Damascus. The scene was neither spontaneous nor purely revolutionary; it was the result of overt international and regional arrangements, later marketed as a “political transition.”
Yet, the anniversary did not throw me back a single year; it hurled me centuries into the past, into the logic of the Umayyad state: rule by force, legitimacy by the sword, obedience claimed from the heavens, not the people. In Syria, history does not die it is recycled.
The choice of platform was no coincidence. As al-Shar’ first appeared after entering Damascus, he returned a year later to celebrate from the Umayyad Mosque, clad in military uniform, presenting himself as the “Transitional Syrian President,” delivering his defining statement:
“O Syrians, obey me as I have obeyed God in you…”
In the rhetoric of Islamic movements, this phrase is not a sermon; it is a clear declaration of a dominant ruler: the one who governs in the name of God, whose obedience becomes a duty, whose questioning becomes rebellion.
I was not surprised.
Nor was I more surprised watching the military parades of the new Syrian army, essentially a rebranded militia army, marching through the streets of Damascus, chanting slogans that were not celebratory but foundational, revealing who the “other” is and what this project intends once it consolidates:
“In the path of God we advance… O enemy of God, we have not forgotten”
“With our souls and blood, we defend you, Shar’”
“God is greatest… God’s rule, not human rule”
“Gaza, Gaza, Gaza is our slogan”
“Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, Muhammad’s army shall return”
This last slogan is not merely a chant; it is a deliberate evocation of the Battle of Khaybar (628 CE) in militant Islamic consciousness, carrying exclusionary connotations toward Jews. It is a political and security message, unambiguous, especially when echoed by a state army in the presence of the head of state.
So the question arises: what kind of state is being built on this foundation?
The answer begins with the constitutional declaration drafted by a committee chosen by al-Shar’. The text completely excludes the concepts of citizenship and democracy. It designates Islamic jurisprudence as the principal source of legislation, without specifying a particular school of thought, opening the door to the dominance of jihadist Salafi interpretations. It also stipulates that the president must be Muslim, entirely excluding non-Muslims, thereby undermining the principle of equality from its roots.
Yet, more alarming than the texts is the concentration of power. Ahmad al-Shar’ does not hold a single position; he consolidates multiple roles:
Transitional President of the Republic
Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Armed Forces
Chairman of the National Security Council
Authority to appoint one-third of the People’s Assembly
Authority to appoint the body that selects another third
Chairman of the Investment Authority
Overseer of the Curriculum Development Committee
Administrator of the Syrian Sovereign Wealth Fund
Chairman of the General Authority for Land and Sea Borders
No Syrian ruler has ever accumulated such powers before leaving only one theoretical addition: the right to “give life and take life.”
Under this rule, minorities pay the price. Alawites suffered revenge massacres along the coast. Christians faced church burnings and forced displacements. Druze were besieged and marginalized. Yazidis had their dignity violated again. Shiites were punished for their identity. The Kurds, Syria’s largest minority, continued to be persecuted, as if it were their eternal fate. The tyranny of the state did not end; it was revived under a religious veneer.
Some may ask: Can al-Shar’ change?
The answer came from him personally. In an interview with Christiane Amanpour on CNN, he did not disavow his past ties with al-Qaeda, but rather questioned the very definition of “terrorism,” in a tone that suggested pride, not reflection. Despite this, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham was removed from the US list of terrorist organizations in July 2025, and al-Shar’s name was removed from international terror lists by UN Security Council decision in November 2025, amid a rapidly accelerating political normalization.
((Conclusion))
One of former President Obama’s greatest errors was dealing with Iran in a way that allowed it to engulf Arab states and turn them into backyard territories ending in ruins. Today, it seems President Trump repeated the same mistake with Ahmad al-Shar’, who enjoys unprecedented support from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey the latter two governed by systems with transnational Islamist agendas, deserving independent analysis and future articles.
Under the illusion of “stability,” Syria is being sown with the seeds of a new religious authoritarianism potentially more lethal than its predecessor; when a ruler is manufactured as a divine destiny rather than a political choice, the question becomes: who dares to stand against a god once the process of divinization is complete?
Note: This is the English version (published here exclusively in Times of Israel) of my article, originally published last Thursday in its Swedish version in Bulletin in Sweden.
