Political transitions in any country undergo interim stages, and during this phase, before moving to implementation, the forces of change, particularly the central ones, announce the broad outlines of their strategy so that society can determine its stance on the political factions constituting these change forces. It is clear that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is the backbone of these forces, and it is a movement with a religious orientation.
This necessitates, from the outset, acknowledging that the transitional phase requires the establishment of the guiding principles for the program proposed by the new administration, enabling society to define its stance on the new regime. This new administration has a vision upon which its opposition to the previous regime is based, and I will not address the internal situation or the nature of the constitutional foundations upon which the new regime will be built, but will instead pose my questions specifically in the external arena. It is unreasonable to assume that there would not be an initial vision in the form of guiding principles for the external strategic directions of the new regime. Otherwise, how will society define its stance regarding the new regime? Here, I raise a set of questions that the Syrian society needs to know from the outset to determine its position. The strategic vision precedes the transition to practical application, making the following questions legitimate and requiring clear answers in an official statement rather than general comments that are open to interpretation:
First: What is the position of the new regime, particularly Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, regarding the Palestinian issue? Do you support the right of Palestinians to resist, or not? Will you provide them assistance in that? Or will you consider it a matter that concerns only the Palestinians?
Second: Are you in favor of normalization or against it? Are you ready for normalization?
Third: Do you reject Israel’s decision to annex the Golan Heights? If yes, what is your strategy for reclaiming it? And if you support normalization, will you condition it upon the return of the Golan, similar to Saudi Arabia’s position and the two-state solution?
Fourth: Will you ask American, Turkish, and Russian forces to leave Syrian territory? How long do you expect their presence to last?
Fifth: What political framework will you grant to the Kurds of Syria? Will it be separation, local governance, a model similar to Iraqi Kurdistan, or will you transform Syria into a federal state? While this matter is internal, its regional implications are well known.
Sixth: If (even if it opens the door to the devil) the project to extend a gas pipeline from Qatar to Europe is revived to reduce European dependence on Russia, would you agree to it?
The response to these questions will determine the foundations upon which a position regarding the new regime can be established.
