"Europeans are very naive if they allow themselves to be fooled by al-Sharaa, who remains, fundamentally, a jihadist."

Fabrice Balanche, professor of political geography at Lyon 2 University, is the French specialist on Syria, for which he won the 2024 geopolitical book prize for his Lessons from the Syrian Crisis ( Odile Jacob). He looks back on the first visit to Europe of Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, to Paris on Wednesday, May 7, at a time when abuses against minorities are increasing.

Fabrice Balanche: Ahmed al-Sharaa has already been received by quite a few people, including the King of Saudi Arabia, Erdogan, and the King of Jordan; the Emir of Qatar, for his part, came to Damascus. But this is Ahmed al-Sharaa's first visit to the West, as he has never before been received in European capitals.

This is flattery, pure sycophancy. In reality, the gateway to Europe is Germany. Why didn't he go to Germany then? I don't know, perhaps there was some reluctance. The fact remains that al-Sharaa chose France, which obviously flatters Macron, since Macron invited him to Paris last February for a conference on Syria. In the meantime, there was the massacre of the Alawites, then that of the Druze last week. Canceling his visit would have sent the wrong signal from Paris to Syria and the Arab countries pushing for normalization.

In Syria, there are religious minorities. The Alawites are heterodox Shiites: they believe in reincarnation, for example. The Druze also have a syncretic religion. They are considered heretics by jihadists and radical Salafists like al-Sharaa. The Druze oppose Ahmed al-Sharaa because they want autonomy based on the Kurdish model, and for the new regime in Damascus, that is out of the question. The Alawites, for their part, were linked to the old regime because the Assad family was part of it and recruited heavily from this community for the security forces and the administration. When the regime fell, they were targeted. The repression against the regime then transformed into a religious repression against a minority deemed non-Muslim. This caused thousands of deaths. The massacres, absolutely unbearable, continue, even on a smaller scale, so as not to attract attention. There are still assassinations every day. Last week, it was the Druze who were targeted, for the same reasons.

That's a good question. They try to make us believe that the atrocities against minorities are the work of irregular elements, but that's not true. They are led by al-Sharaa himself, who, in reality, has two faces: one tolerant and open to the West, because he wants to lift sanctions and obtain economic aid, and another, that of a ruthless jihadist, who does not hesitate to assassinate people to assert himself.

Al-Sharaa has learned from Daesh's mistakes. It doesn't publicize the killings. For example, before massacring the Alawites, they confiscated villagers' cell phones to prevent them from being filmed. It also forbids its men from filming so as not to leave any traces. But they can't help themselves; some still take "hunting photos," so the abuses eventually resurface.

Yes, absolutely. He's a master at it. He's always had people killed, but he never claimed responsibility. It was never "technically" him. Officially, it wasn't him or his men.

Al-Sharaa tactically broke with al-Qaeda in 2016—whose leadership he spent nearly twenty years with—to obtain financial and military support from the West and Arab countries. But ideologically, he never broke with it. Moreover, a US intelligence report was recently released in which he claimed to have never renounced his jihadist past. He is not someone who has repented. Europeans are very naive if they allow themselves to be fooled by al-Sharaa, who remains, fundamentally, a jihadist.

Al-Sharaa's objective is very clear: to obtain the lifting of sanctions, to bring together the Islamist factions, to unify the country by force, and to establish an Islamic republic. It is moderate for now, because it needs Western support and the lifting of sanctions. That's why he is playing the moderation card. On the European side, people naively believe that once in power, he will moderate himself in the face of the realities of power. But we haven't understood that when these people take power, it's to establish a dictatorship, not to moderate themselves. Quite the opposite. I'm not opposed to Macron receiving him, provided he judges the figure and conveys firm messages. Let him tell him that he is not going in the right direction, that if he continues, we will reinstate the sanctions, and that we will not support him and that we do not believe in his so-called inclusive government.

Yes, absolutely. For Macron, France has supported the Syrian revolution from the beginning. We supported the rebels, we even supported al-Sharaa when he was "in our hands," since we gave him orders. We now hope to reap dividends, particularly in the reconstruction of the country. CMA CGM, for example, renewed its contract last week for the port of Latakia. And then, we also want to outdo the Germans. Paris was annoyed that the Germans reopened their embassy before us in Damascus. Our embassy is not yet secure. It is surrounded by tall buildings. And with the resurgence of Daesh and jihadists, it would be too dangerous to send anyone there at the moment. The Germans don't have this problem. They reopened it, but only sent a chargé d'affaires, not an ambassador. There is a real competition between France and Germany for European leadership in foreign policy in Syria.

Read also: - “The fear? The Paty syndrome: that a madman is waiting for me outside the university to stab me” - Invasion of a class at Lyon 2: the university president “not surprised” that Balanche is targeted