Ahmed al-Sharaa, the new leader of Syria who also goes by the name Abu Mohammad al-Julani, represents a possible new era of leadership in the region. He was born in 1982, making him one of the youngest leaders around. There are other young leaders in the region, such as Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who was born in 1985. Sheikh Tamim Ibn Hamad al-Thani of Qatar was also born in 1980. This means a new generation is rising in the region. This generation is in contrast to some of the leaders in the region, who are not only aging but also represent eras that reflect a Cold War setting more than the modern era.
The new Syrian leader could remain in power for many years to come. It’s also possible that he does not remain in power. However, if he does, he could play a transformative role. This is because he is not just young but represents the victory of a brand of political Islam that had seemed to be fading from the region. What this means is that while many countries have turned on groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, which was more popular in the 1980s and 1990s, others have seen religious groups hold power for too long and ossify. For instance, the Turkish government has been run by Recep Tayyip Erdogan for two decades. His brand of Brotherhood-style politics is not new, but old.
The new Syrian leadership appears to already be worrying the Jordanians. The King of Jordan knows that he could also face a popular uprising. During the Arab Spring, many of the countries that saw their regimes fall were Arab nationalist regimes, while the monarchies in the region withstood the tide. That means that Gadaffi in Libya was overthrown, and so was Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt. Other Arab nationalist regimes suffered similar fates. Saddam Hussein was overthrown by the US invasion in 2003. Ali Saleh in Yemen eventually was killed in 2017. When the Arab Spring threatened to topple the monarchy in Bahrain, the Saudis intervened. They stemmed the tide.
A lot changed since then. Qatar and Turkey have tended to back more Islamic-leaning governments and groups such as Hamas. Meanwhile, the Saudis and the UAE have pushed back against the Islamists. There are other factors in the region. The weakening of the Sunni Arab states and Arab nationalism has provided Iran a way to play a large role in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. It also used this influence to galvanize Hamas for war with Israel. Now, many think the Iranian “axis” is on the decline. It has lost Syria, a key partner. What is stepping into the vacuum? Ankara and Qatar are rushing to re-open embassies in Damascus to grab a piece of the prize. Turkey says it could help train the forces of the new government. Jordan is worried.
The new leader in Syria will have to deal with the competing groups that want sway in Damascus. For now, he does not seem interested in meddling in neighboring countries. The overthrow of Assad has not led to protests in Amman, Baghdad, or Ramallah. However, it is clear that many leaders in the region are aging and represent an older era.
Mahmoud Abbas was born in the 1930s. For him, smartphones are a new invention. He was already a middle-aged man at the height of the Cold War. Nabih Berri, the Shi’ite leader in Lebanon, was also a product of the 1930s. Walid Jumblatt, the Druze leader in Lebanon, and Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu are both in their seventies. Their formative experiences were in the 1980s. The Egyptian leader Abdel Fatah al-Sisi was born in 1954. His military experience was also in the 1970s and 1980s. These are products of the Cold War era.
A new generation of leaders gone?
That does not mean they cannot be good leaders, but it means inevitably, they are not full of the youth of a new generation. The Hamas members who plunged the region into war on October 7 have destroyed a generation of young people’s opportunities. They did it for themselves so that Khaled Meshaal, Ismail Haniyeh, and Yahya Sinwar could feel good about themselves before their deaths, so they could see one more pile of bodies before they leave this vale of tears. That is what they did. They destroyed Gaza in their own vain.
The new Syrian leader may have a different view of the region than those who have thrived on war and destruction. He surely knows war, having lived it for the last two decades. Perhaps he will not glory in it as Hamas and Turkey’s leaders have done or fan the flames of it as Doha and Iran have done? It remains to be seen because it’s possible he could seek new adventurous causes as young people have a tendency to do. He has a choice now, as does MBS and others. They could form a new regional leadership. The new leadership in Damascus could say goodbye to the wars driven by Iran, Russia, Turkey, Hamas, Doha, and other countries. They could embrace peace, unlike Ismail Haniyeh and Hassan Nasrallah. This is the choice.
