On the Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham Issue: An Interview with Abu Mohammad Al-Julani

Against the background of the Russia–US agreements, an interview with Abu Mohammad al-Julani – leader of Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (formerly known as the Al-Nusra Front), one of the largest rebel groups in Syria – appeared on the Qatari Al Jazeera website.

The interview, which was featured on the show “Private Meeting”, is not the first to be given by al-Julani, having appeared on Al Jazeera before. But it was not until late July that the world saw his face for the first time, when the Al-Nusra Front announced its split from al-Qaeda (on July 28) and the change of the group’s name to Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (“Front for the Conquest of the Levant”). The break with al-Qaeda is, of course, largely declarative in nature. Even the speech given to announce the end of the Al-Nusra Front’s affiliation with the group was replete with words of respect for its leaders, including Ayman al-Zawahiri. It is clear that al-Qaeda had approved the move beforehand, and that the balance of powers in the clashes between the special services of those countries which had exerted an influence over the organization (and others) had changed.

Al-Qaeda has actually intensified its support to the former Al-Nusra Front following its break with the group providing soldiers and military equipment. For example, in the moments before the attack on Aleppo’s al-Ramus quarter and the city’s military schools, al-Qaeda ideologues (such as al-Muhaysini) were calling for unity within the ranks. Media outlets working on the front, including Russian news sources, also noted the high concentration of professional soldiers – specialized personnel – in the area. Their presence can be explained by the outstanding opportunities that the Al-Nusra Front has in terms of its global network and the ability to attract external support. Various research centres note that the Al-Nusra Front is gaining influence inside Aleppo, and it could become the dominating force in the anti-Assad opposition camp (this has not yet been declared, given the existence of the two coalitions – Jaish al-Fatahand Fatah Halab).    

When asked to comment on the September ceasefire agreements, to which the al-Nusra Front was not party, al-Julani noted that the global community (including Russia and the United States) “endorses the approach of the Bashar al-Assad regime and all the crimes it has committed in the course of the Syrian Revolution…” According to him, the military and security agreements reached between the United States and Russia will lead to the surrender of the paramilitary factions. He believes that this is the aim of the agreements. And in this context, the work of the United Nations and Arab League Envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura is to ensure that civilians are removed from the area of combat so that the city can be handed over. Al-Julani cites the example of Homs, which was handed over in this very fashion to the government forces under the watchful eye of another United Nations and Arab League Envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi (al-Julani uses the word istislam, meaning “submission”, “capitulation” or “surrender”). According to al-Julani, the aim of de Mistura has always been to achieve the surrender of Aleppo.  

A message of this kind from the leader of the Al-Nusra Front is of great importance for the armed groups in northern Syria. Al-Julani is essentially stating that the world’s major powers (the United States and Russia) have only one fate in mind for the anti-government forces in Syria, and that is surrender. As far as al-Julani is concerned, this is all a “united game of the Americans, the Russians and the United Nations.” In this case, there is no doubt that the anti-government forces will start to coordinate their actions more closely with the Al-Nusra Front, especially given the organization’s achievements in the fight against the Syrian Arab Army of Bashar al-Assad. Al-Julani has a clear idea of what the government forces will do: first, al-Assad’s troops, together with the external forces supporting them, will surround Aleppo. This will be followed by talks in Geneva between Russia and the United States, before humanitarian aid is sent and civilians moved out of the city. Time is of the essence here. According to al-Julani, the anti-government forces under the leadership of the al-Nusra Front has been able to thwart this plan. This has been made possible by the offensive actions taken by anti-government troops and the capture of a number of territories from the retreating al-Assad army, thus temporarily breaking the encirclement – although the Syrian Arab Army and pro-government forces succeeded in taking back the regions they had yielded earlier.     

And there was no shortage of political slogans. Rather calmly, al-Julani suggested that the much-lauded humanitarian aid was nothing more than a means to an end and “a kind of disregard for and disrespect towards the people of Aleppo.” Meanwhile, the people of Sham, he said, took to the streets with slogans reading: “Better death than humiliation!” Al-Julani thus concludes: “The problem of the people of Sham [Sham here meaning Greater Syria, the Levant] is a problem of revolution and principles, rather than food aid, which is delivered at a specific time.”   

In his interview, al-Julani openly alludes to the fact that the blockade of Aleppo would not have been possible without the “advancement of Rafida, Shi’ite, Afghan, Iraqi, Iranian and Lebanese” forces in support of al-Assad. In this context, al-Julani’s attitude towards the “Russian bombardments” of Aleppo is unsurprising: the bombings, he believes, “do not discriminate between children, the infirm, adults, etc.” But al-Julani’s analysis of the situation is important: “With this agreement, the Americans stand side by side with the Russians in support of the regime that is against the people of Sham.” The Americans have targeted the al-Nusra Front, according to al-Julani, “because it is a powerful force in the fight against the project to have the people of Sham surrender.”

At the same time, the identity of the organization remains the same, although a certain evolution in al-Julani’s speeches can certainly be observed. He refers to Ahl al-Sham, rarely mentioning Ahl al-Sunna, meaning Sham Sunnites in the context of Sunnites in Syria, rather than a kind of global Sunni identity. Basically, he is talking about the Sunni population in the northern provinces, but he also means the Sunni threads in the central regions and, specifically, the recent events in Darayya, which resulted in the city coming under government control and the transportation of a number rebels and their families to the province of Idlib. Al-Julani is grateful those organizations (including the major organizations) that refused to enter into a “confrontation with Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham,” explaining it as a “result of the desire for revolution and jihad.”      

Abu Mohammad Al-Julani also touches upon economic and domestic issues and discusses problems related to the functioning of government institutions and how the new generation of Syrians needs schools. These issues were discussed during the airtime that is usually given over to the al-Nusra Front’s relationship with religious minorities (the Druze, for example) and the ideology of al-Qaeda in Sham. All this begs the question: What are the message they are trying to get across to Arab listeners? That the al-Nusra Front is a moderate organization? We shouldn’t let al-Julani’s tone and speech distract us. It entirely is possible that organization is in crisis, or is undergoing significant changes, especially given the following factors: the levers of influence that are being exerted on the al-Nusra Front have been transferred to the special services of external players; an ideological split may have occurred within the organization, resulting in ties with al-Qaeda being severed and a number of it commanders, including Abu Omar Sarakeb, being liquidated. This could weaken the organization, but it could also lead to it turning the screw on other groups in the region. In any case, the al-Nusra Front is a powerful force. And mechanisms for de-radicalizing the population (through the careful work of experts in the field) should be on the agenda, although this seems like a far-off proposition in the context of the universal distrust that exists among the United States and Russia, not to mention among the regional and domestic actors in Syria.