The FRONTLINE Interviews
Abu Mohammad al-Jolani
Military Leader, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham
Abu Mohammad al-Jolani is a Syrian who fought for Al Qaeda in Iraq and founded Jabhat al-Nusra, the Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria. He later broke with Al Qaeda and ISIS. He leads Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, an Islamist group that opposes Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The United States has designated him a terrorist.
The following interview was conducted in Idlib, Syria, on February 1 and February 14, 2021, by FRONTLINE filmmaker Martin Smith. It was translated from Arabic and has been edited for clarity and length.
This interview appears in:
TOP
Abu Mohammad al-Jolani
Chapters
Text Interview:
Highlight text to share it
Speaking to the Western World
So I’d like to begin by asking you for the reason that you’ve decided to speak to an American reporter.Why have you decided to do this interview?
Yes.In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate.To begin with, this is a people’s revolution that had resonance across the world.There are over 5 million people living in this region, and there are another 5, 6 million outside of the country related to them. …We represent one part of a major event in the Syrian revolution, and we have a mission to accurately communicate the true image of the Syrian revolution to the world.
You have not spoken to an American reporter in the past, have you?
No, this may be the first time.
So why have you chosen now to speak to the United States?
There is no particular reason, really.You requested it, and we were already in contact with the middleman you contacted, working with him to communicate the current situation to the world.So he asked us, and we agreed to this interview.That’s all there is to it.
And who do you hope to reach?
The Syrian revolution has significance to a lot of people around the world.First of all, it’s an unfairly treated revolution that arose against a tyrant, who is a criminal and an oppressor, who kills his people.More than a million people were killed.There are more than 400,000 to 500,000 people in prisons.There are women in prisons who were tortured and raped.There are millions of homes that have been destroyed, and schools and hospitals.
So the truth about this cause deserves to reach the whole world accurately.There are some people who try to tarnish the revolution’s image; some are enemies, and some are not.They try to tarnish the revolution’s image and to describe it in a certain way.Our role and mission in defending the people, defending their safety, their religion, their honor, their property and standing against a criminal tyrant like Bashar al-Assad, means that it’s also our duty to transmit this image through your platform, or any platform, that can relay the truth to everyone around the world.
And what is your message to those that will listen to you here?What do you want them to understand most?
Most importantly, first and foremost, this region does not represent a threat to the security of Europe and America.This region is not a stage for executing external operations.That’s to start with.The other point is that there are some wrong policies adopted by the international community against the Syrian revolution.For example, till now there’s still international recognition of Bashar al-Assad, although he carried out tens of chemical attacks against his people.Actually, it was said over 100 attacks.And he destroyed schools, killed children and women, dropped barrel bombs on people in villages and towns, and destroyed great civilizations, like Homs and Aleppo.
… The key message that we want to relay, or for people to understand, is simple: The people wanted to change a ruler and a regime, and this tyrant and regime wanted to change an entire population.Changing a ruler is a lot easier than changing an entire population.
The Terrorist Designation
You’re designated as a terrorist by the United States, by the United Nations, by many governments.There’s a lot of Americans who would say you have no business being a leader as a terrorist.What do you say to them?
First of all, we don’t act as rulers in the region.We are completely a part of the Syrian revolution, and the Syrian revolution cannot be limited to a single person.It’s a people’s revolution.The other thing is that this is an unfair categorization.It’s a political label that carries no truth or credibility, because through our 10-year journey in this revolution, we haven’t posed any threat to Western or European society: no security threat, no economic threat, nothing.That’s why this designation is politicized.We call on countries that took these measures to revise their policies towards this revolution.
In September of 2014, you vowed to fight the United States and its allies.Have you changed?
Yes, we did criticize some Western policies in the region, but to wage a war against the United States and the Europeans from Syria, that’s not true.
You never said that you wanted to fight?
We didn’t say that we want to fight.We didn’t say that.But we were the subject of some attacks by the United States, through striking certain people who worked with us or were affiliated with us.So we just criticized those policies as a reaction to being targeted.
We would also like to discuss something: What is the definition of terrorism?Terrorism, how do you define it?Today, every country has a terrorism list.Any person or party that the country claims is opposing it is automatically added to the terrorism list.
So what does the terrorism classification mean?What does the word “terrorist” mean?It is now an adopted policy by any country in the world. Even small countries have terrorism lists, and they classify anyone who opposes them as a terrorist.So there is no specific definition yet of what terrorism means.
This is how Americans will react to this.You pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda.You worked with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the head, the emir of ISIS.So for you to say that you were not committed to fighting Americans when that’s in your past is impossible for people to understand.
This issue needs an objective and scientific analysis.The history of the region and what it went through over the past 20 or 30 years needs to be taken into consideration.… We are talking about a region ruled by tyrants, ruled by tyrants, by people who rule with iron fists and their security apparatuses.At the same time, this region is surrounded by numerous conflicts and wars. …So there are many objective circumstances surrounding the region. We can’t take a segment of this history and say so-and-so joined Al Qaeda.
There are thousands of people who joined Al Qaeda, but let us ask what was the reason behind these people joining Al Qaeda?That’s the question.Are the U.S. policies after World War II toward the region partially responsibility for driving people towards Al Qaeda organization?And are the European policies in the region responsible for the reactions of people who sympathize with the Palestinian cause or with the way the Zionist regime deals with the Palestinians?And are the broken and oppressed peoples who had to endure what happened in Iraq, for example, or in Afghanistan, are they responsible for the mistakes and policies of these successive U.S. administrations?
We recognize that innocent people were killed.If somebody did this and was associated with ISIS or others, we say we do not support these policies.We are against killing innocent people, even if we’re the ones who were oppressed and defending our rights.When this increased and escalated, it led to the split between us and ISIS for these reasons, because there were misguided policies adopted by ISIS in managing the conflict and the fighting that took place, or even heading towards killing some innocent people.So when it reached this level, we split, and we distanced ourselves from those who kill innocent people.That was the defining compass.
You have employed suicide bombers, have you not?
Yes, in some battles we used martyrs.What does it mean?It’s a weapon.We don’t have airplanes to use in fighting the enemy.But the question is, who were the martyrs deployed against?The martyrs were deployed against the Shabiha [state-sponsored militias] and the Iranian and Russian militias trying to break into the area and attack the protesters at some point and kill innocent people.We used martyrs against them.This is not an act of infamy; it’s an honorable act.A man sacrifices himself because he wants to defend innocent people who are being killed by … so it’s a means. It’s a means, not an end in itself.
If we had planes, we would have used planes.If we had artillery to replace martyrdom, we would have saved those brothers and used those weapons.So what’s the difference between a plane that drops a barrel bomb and kills innocent people, which is not condemned, while he who wants to defend those innocent people so he sacrifices himself so they can live in safety, is condemned.
The question is whether you’ve used methods which have resulted in any civilians dying.You’ve used suicide bombers against targets that you consider legitimate military targets, but in that process, you’ve killed many civilians, have you not?Do you deny that?
No, no.We are positive that we didn’t injure any innocent people during our operations, because we would target, for example, army barracks, or we would be in the battlefield, where there were no civilians.So this is where martyrdom operations are used.They are not used in residential or populated areas.Absolutely not.This did not happen.
Will you say here now then very clearly that you as a former Al Qaeda leader will not support what you call external jihad, that you will not support any attacks against the United States?
I repeat and reiterate that the era — our involvement with Al Qaeda in the past was an era, and it ended, and even at that time when we were with Al Qaeda, we were against external attacks, and it’s completely against our policies to carry out external operations from Syria to target European or American people.This was not part of our calculations at all, and we did not do it at all.
Early Life
So let’s go back in your history and find out how you got to this point that you’re in now.So you grew up in Damascus, right outside Damascus.So you want to tell me about your youth, what shaped you as a young man.I want to hear about your father.I know your real name is Ahmed al-Sharaa.
Yes, right.
You smiled.
So tell me about the home you grew up in, the kind of family you had and what were the influences.How would you describe yourself as a young man, as a teenager growing up and looking at the world around you?
We come from a family — we are from the occupied Golan.But my paternal grandfather was displaced from the Golan after the Israeli Zionist army entered the region in 1967.My father, in his youth, was influenced by Gamal Abdel Nasser; his orientation was that of an Arab nationalist.He was born in 1946.In his early days growing up — in 1958, there was a union between Syria and Egypt.Gamal Abdel Nasser’s style was to address the masses, the poor classes and people from rural areas, as a reaction against feudalism and the bourgeois class.However, this happened in Egypt and was copied in Syria only after the union between it and Egypt.People who lived in rural areas found that they gained from this new policy of Abdel Nasser, and therefore Abdel Nasser’s Arab nationalist socialist direction appealed to a lot of young people at the time.One of them was my father.
Then In 1961, the Baathists carried out a coup to oppose the Syrian[-Egyptian] union.My father was still a student in school.He participated in some protests against the Baathist rule of Syria.He was imprisoned.Then later he escaped prison and went to Jordan, where he was imprisoned again.Then they gave him a choice between going to Saudi Arabia or to Iraq.He chose Iraq.They dropped him off at the Iraqi border.Then he went to Iraq, to Baghdad, and continued his studies there.He finished high school then went to college.He was young when he was imprisoned, around 19 years old.
He studied economics and political science.During his studies, the Zionist occupation of the Golan took place, so he went to Jordan and worked with the Palestinian fedayeen [guerrillas].
My father then returned to Baghdad to complete his studies, where he stayed till 1971, when he returned to Syria, where he was imprisoned for a third time.He then reached a settlement with the Political Security Directorate, so they released him from prison.He ran for parliament, but of course he didn’t win because of his political background.He then went to Saudi Arabia and worked there in the early ’80s.He had studied economics and political science with a specialization in oil.He was an oil expert.He worked in Saudi Arabia at the ministry of petroleum for almost 10 years.I was born in Saudi Arabia in 1982, in Riyadh.Then, by the end of ’89, or beginning of ’89, we returned to Syria, and he also returned to Syria.
Let me pause for a second.So I want to understand what your opinion was of your father, or how you either admired your father or you were a critic of your father, or you had different ideas than he did.But he was an important figure in your life.
For sure, my father had a great influence on me, and there are aspects of Arab nationalism that always push a person to fight for the rights of the oppressed, and it also has a revolutionary nature to it.My father’s grandfather was also against — he was a key leader in the resistance against the French occupation of Syria during the French occupation of Syria.So there was the seed of defending the oppressed, the seed of justice in general, talk about issues of concern to the nation.Their focus was on the Arab nations, but for us in the Islamic movements, we take it to the level of the whole Muslim nation.For us it’s Muslims, then Arabs.In Arab nationalism, it’s Arabs, then Muslims.
So my father and I were not much in agreement regarding our ideas, but for sure he influenced us.The love of Palestine, for example, the desire to defend Palestinians in general, this was planted inside our home around the clock.
When did you become an Islamist?
I grew up and lived in Damascus, in the neighborhood of Mezzeh in the Eastern Villas area.It’s considered one of the upscale neighborhoods in Syria.It had middle and wealthy classes, and we were considered middle class.But the neighborhood in general was not conservative.It was largely liberal.The Islamic leanings were weak, almost nonexistent.
So the environment I lived in was not directing me or pushing me towards the Islamic trend.But at that time, I was strongly influenced by the Palestinian intifada [uprising], which was taking place in neighboring Palestine in 2000 and 1999.I was still a young man; I was 18 or 19 years old.I started thinking at that time about how I can pursue my duty of defending the nation, which was being persecuted by the occupiers and invaders.But we have to put this way of thinking in context.I was a young man who was 18.So it was a spontaneous, innate thought.It was not politicized or directed.
Then someone advised me to go to the mosque and pray at the mosque and to commit to praying at the mosque.So I went, and I started to commit to praying there, and I felt that life has another meaning, different than the pure worldly meaning we were searching for.So I started searching for this truth.There was something inside of me that was pushing me to search for the truth.How do we reach justice?How can we relieve the people of oppression?How can we spread goodness among people?I started searching for all of these meanings in God Almighty’s book, the Holy Quran, in the practices of the prophet.Then I studied the interpretation [of the Quran] with a virtuous sheikh.He was elderly at the time.I am not sure if he is still alive.
What was the name of the cleric?
Can I just not say his name?I don’t know whether he is still alive or if he passed away, because at the time he was 67 or 68 years.I fear that he might still be in the areas controlled by the regime, and that might put him at risk.
After 9/11
What did you think and feel on 9/11, at the time?
First of all, anybody who lived in the Islamic world, in the Arab world at the time who tells you that he wasn’t happy would be lying to you, because people felt the injustice of the Americans in their support of the Zionists, their policies towards Muslims in general, and their clear and strong support of the tyrants in the region.But people regret the killing of innocent people, for sure.If we look at it from the perspective of people who did not consider America a friend, in that sense it is considered an enemy.Thus, anyone would be happy about any danger it faces.But the killing of innocent people, victims, women, children, civilians, the people are hurt by these images.It’s exactly like what’s currently happening here.
I hope my words don’t offend innocent people who might be killed in any place and who might be hearing my words now, but we speak very clearly so we can analyze and understand how the events of the past 20 years got us to where we are now.
There are many people listening to this, and they don’t care how much sympathy you say that you express for innocent victims.It was, as they would put it, a cowardly attack that using those planes into those buildings, where many civilians were working that was not a military target, the World Trade Center, that was cowardly, and they call it terrorism.
True.I said that I understand their point of view, but the question is why it happened, the context in which it happened.I don’t encourage it.But I try to explain, objectively, the state of the region at the time, and I, as a young man who lived during this phase, I’m explaining my own feelings and the feelings of people around me during that time.Honesty regarding this matter should create motivation to research, to study and to become more knowledgeable and aware of the course of events.
When did you first go to Iraq?
I went first to Baghdad around two to three weeks before the war started.I went to Baghdad.I stayed there.Then I went to Ramadi.At the time the war started, I was in Baghdad.Then after some time, I returned to Syria.Then I returned to Iraq again.Then I went to Mosul and spent most of my time there.Then I was arrested, and I was put in prison.I was put in Abu Ghraib prison.Then I was moved to Bucca then to Cropper prison, in Baghdad airport.The American forces then handed me to the Iraqis, who put me in al-Taji prison.I was released from al-Taji prison after spending a total of five years in prisons.
You told me the other day that you never met Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.You can go on Wikipedia and look up Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, and it said that you were close to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Not true?
Most of the information available on the internet is false.It has no more than 2 to 3% truth to it.No, I didn’t meet Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was mostly present in Fallujah and Ramadi and around this region, and I was in Mosul during that time.I was a regular soldier.I wasn’t involved in any major operations that I would meet al-Zarqawi.Al-Zarqawi had a tight security protocol surrounding him.It wasn’t an open battle [warfare]; it was more of a security battle [guerrilla warfare], so people were in hiding.They weren’t meeting each other, as is happening here now.
Did you work under his command?Was he a leader of the insurgency that you were fighting with?
Yes, as a general commander; he was the general commander.After he pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda, many of the Iraqi factions joined Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and I was part of these factions that joined him.
Now he was a man that instructed his fighters to bomb a Shia shrine in Najaf, the U.N. HQ in Baghdad and many others, and eventually the most sacred of Shia shrines, one of the most sacred, in Samarra.Many civilians died in those attacks.You were a soldier in that army.So how did you feel about that?What did you feel about that strategy?
I was in prison during the Shia-Sunni war that took place over there.It started around 2006, when I was in prison.When I was out of prison, this war did not exist.I followed it as a prisoner.The news reached us six months later.The Americans banned us from communications.Even the radio was sometimes not allowed, so we did not hear a lot about what was happening outside.
But I can analyze why these things happened.
But some of the attacks happened before the arrest.The U.N. bombing was in 2003.Did you ever say to yourself, this kind of attack, this kind of mass killing of civilians, might not be such a good strategy, or were you supportive of it at the time?
We were against any killing of innocent people.I wasn’t alone.A lot of people who had a conscience, an awareness, and a true understanding of Islam and the religion were against the killing of any innocent person, even if it was going to cause the killing of a large number of enemies, but one innocent person would be killed.We were against this.It is not acceptable and justifiable religiously.
Why didn't you quit?Why stay with an army whose major tactic [was] to do mass suicide bombers that inevitably or intentionally kill civilians?Why did you stay a fighter in that kind of army?That’s what people would want to ask you.
We were always asking the same thing.At the level of organization, I wasn’t a leader.The organization in Iraq wasn’t centralized; it was decentralized.We were asking a lot of these questions: Why was this operation carried out and innocent people were killed?We are fighting to protect those people, so why are we the reason some of these innocent people are being killed?The answer was always that this person did it on his own, and we will punish him and we will hold him accountable.
… The Americans will say they came to liberate Iraq.And had you not resisted that, it would not have been a bloody struggle.That it was a reaction to your attacks, Al Qaeda attacks in Iraq, constant car bombings, IED, snipers, all of that.Had you not done that, the Americans believe there would not have been so much bloodshed.There would not have been bloodshed.The Americans did not come there in order to engage you in a fight.
And if there was no American presence, there would not have been a resistance.
Returning to Syria
… How was it that you came out of prison and rose to become a leader of Islamic State in Iraq?What did you do when you left?
Inside the prison, there were lots of developments.The prison played a part in the intellectual development of ISIS members, and what they’ve reached, it went through several stages.It’s true that in prison, this was strengthened, but it passed through stages and through several things.
My role in prison was to communicate the proper ideology to people around me.I realized in prison that there were many incorrect ideas regarding the true meaning of Islam, about the true meaning of of defense, the process of jihad.But I preferred not to be in conflict with anybody there, so I started to educate people about the true concepts until I gained some popularity among the prisoners, thanks be to God.
So my methodology differed completely from that of others, who were former police officers before becoming emirs in Al Qaeda organization.They were trying to turn the prison into an Islamic emirate, trying to pressure people to behave a certain way, to punish them.They used hideous measures to hold them accountable, so there were lots of crimes taking place inside the prison, including killing.For varied reasons, I rejected this largely, and I tried as much as possible to spread the correct ideas in the sections I was in.It reached a stage where people would move from the sections where those leaders were to my section.
So you got out.You went to see Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, then the emir of the Islamic State in Iraq.How did you manage to see him?Describe the meeting.What did you discuss?Where were you?
Before I got out of prison, there was an important leader, one of the leaders who were affected by the propositions I was making inside prison, and found it to be the right way to follow if we get out of prison.It was God’s fate that one of these leaders got out of prison four months before me.He was assigned the northern state, which included Mosul and its outskirts.It was the largest state under the rule of the Islamic State at the time.There was communication between this senior leader and al-Baghdadi, and he talked to him about me.He told him, there’s a person in prison, and he mentioned the characteristics he knew about me and the conversations between us in prison.
When I got out of prison, this leader was the first to meet with me.He met me on the same day that the Syrian revolution started, so he told me: “Is this what you were talking to us about inside prison?”I said, "Maybe the days we were hoping for are here, when the people would revolt against their tyrants."He said: “What do you think?Do you want to stay here in Iraq?”I said, “No, my place is in Syria.”He was one of the few people who knew that I am Syrian.Most people thought I was Iraqi.
Then this person said, “OK, let’s write to al-Baghdadi, to get his permission for you to go to Syria.”So I said I will write what my plan is in Syria and send it to him before I go.So we sent him — I wrote to him my thoughts about Syria.I focused on basic rules.First was that the Iraq experience should not be repeated — as I had numerous observations about it — not to repeat the Iraqi experiences or the Iraqi jihad or the Iraqi resistance to Syria.It was a different situation.It was long, like a research paper, analytical, close to 50 pages, in which I recounted Syria’s history, its geography, the sectarian diversity in Syria, the governance mechanism, how al-Assad’s family came to power, et cetera,because to a certain extent the Iraqi culture — some of the leaders in the Islamic State, their culture was limiting their knowledge of what is going on around them, because they had lived under sanctions and during long wars in Iraq, so they were isolated to a certain extent.Iraq was isolated from its neighbors.So these were the basic rules, and he wholly agreed to them.
Do you have a copy of that document?
No, now I don't have it.It was saved on a flash drive, and it’s gone.
I’d like to see it.I'd like to read it.
Me, too, but I don’t have it.It was lost in Damascus.
So did you then meet with Baghdadi?Tell me about that meeting.What kind of guy was he?
After this report, I started to prepare myself to go to Syria.I went to meet al-Baghdadi during the preparation period.I met him.Honestly, I was a bit surprised by him.He did not have a great competence to analyze situations.He didn’t have a strong personality.He was disconnected from the Iraqi war for a long period of time, because after getting out of Bucca prison, he went to Syria and remained there three to four years before returning at that time.He wasn’t known among the leaders of Al Qaeda organization and the Islamic State.
I needed to get to know him.He was going to be communicating between us, and when the communication is through letters, you can’t know the person well.I was going to take on a big responsibility, the responsibility of Syria, so there needed to be a personal relationship, to let my eye get to know him properly, to let my brain listen to him properly, so I know how to talk to him or how to evaluate his capability to judge situations and give orders.Does he study it properly or not?So I gave myself this opportunity.So I requested it.I said, “We should meet before I leave,” and he welcomed the idea and responded right away.
But this is what I don’t understand.You could have gone back to Syria and fought in the revolution, but you wrote a 50-page paper and applied to Baghdadi, who was an Al Qaeda affiliate, but earlier you said you didn't like Al Qaeda’s tactics.I don’t understand.There’s a contradiction here that you haven’t explained.
Yes, this was the base from which I was taking off.I needed some men; I needed some weapons; I needed some supplies.At the same time, I belonged to this [organization].There were codes between us so that I couldn’t just leave without permission, without taking permission to leave.
So how many men?How much money?What do you get when you sign up to be the Al Qaeda affiliate establishing a new chapter in Syria?What comes with that?
First, I asked for 100 men to come with me.But there were many leaders who did not welcome the idea of me going to Syria, so only six people came with me.I came with only six people.
As far as money, he gave me — at that [time], the Islamic State was poor.It didn’t have a lot of money.But he gave me half of what he received, which was around $50,000 to $60,000 a month for a short period of time, for six to seven months.As far as weapons, I used the money to buy some weapons, around 40 rifles, 50 rifles, but not many made it.They buried it under the sand, and it rusted and other stuff like that.They were ruined.
Al Qaeda Affiliation
Was this a mistake?This is an enormous problem for you today to have had this affiliation with Al Qaeda.You’re trying now to get the United States to drop its designation of your group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as a terrorist organization.Was it a mistake for you to take those men, that money from Baghdadi, from Al Qaeda?
What we are speaking about now is the story of my life, my experience, my history, so to speak.It is a model and an example of a lot of youth and people around us.So I do not regret these choices, because it happened in the context of the inherent circumstances unique to the time and place, as I mentioned, logical conditions at the time.We can’t judge ourselves in the past, no.They were natural and logical choices.
Today I talk — I don’t want to talk political talk or talk to compliment certain parties.No.We talk about reality, and we want to analyze the reality.This is who I am.This is who we are.This is how we grew up, and this is how we reached what we’ve reached.
But the question here is, did we use this money to hurt people?No.We used this money to confront an unjust tyrant regime that is killing people, and we defended those people.Another question: Was this money to become the basis — or for us to reach — no.It wasn’t enough.We spent multiples [of the amount] during that time, because it was a big battle.We were spread all over Syria.The regime still had strength and vitality, and it required big efforts and lots of money and men.So the six people were surely not a force sufficient for us to spread — within one year from six, we became 5,000 during the first year.The money also multiplied, and we were able to spread to a very large area in Syria.
Are any of those original six men you originally went in with still living?
Around half are still with me, and the other half went back to ISIS after the dispute.
Now, of course, most of them have been killed.
The ones who didn't go to ISIS, are any of them still with you?
There’s one.The rest were killed.
What gave you the authority to call for the introduction of the Sharia law in Syria, a largely secular society?
First of all, we’re calling for what we believe in.No one should object to any call by a person, especially since Islamic Sharia contains huge goodness, justice and social solutions.It is a just and right call.This mercy, humanity, justice that it contains can embrace all factions, including Christian, Jews and other factions belonging to Islam and other doctrines.Otherwise, how do we explain that there are Christians living for the past 1,400 years in Syria and in the Arab region, in general, when there were Islamic caliphates during that time, a big and great Islamic caliphate?How did they survive till today?So calling for Sharia law does not mean we want to exclude the others.It’s the complete opposite.
But you were subscribing to a Takfiri doctrine or a Salafi doctrine, at least, and you ran an organization that murdered Alawites because they were Alawites.
I mentioned that there were conditions unique to that time and place that helped in pushing the young people in general toward these organizations.But I am speaking, I am responsible for myself, for me.Responsible for myself.The American administration made many mistakes against other peoples.Will every American citizen, every American soldier be asked: “Why were you with them?Why were you with them?”He will respond, saying that there was an administration, and there were inherent circumstances unique to this time and place that imposed on me to be here.Administrations are making bad decisions. The American people cannot all bear the responsibility.
Let me add something.The basis of our disagreements with ISIS — why did we separate from the Islamic State?One of the fundamental reasons for breaking up from the Islamic State was al-Baghdadi’s deviation from the rules and parameters we had discussed in the document I had sent him.
So a year after coming here, after achieving some victory, having some contacts and a level of popularity among the people, that’s when interest in Syria by some leaders of the Islamic State started.So they started coming here.There were many attempts by leaders of the Islamic State to push us to start a war against the other factions, for example.We rejected this. …We stood against him.So he released the audio that everybody heard, announcing that Jabhat al-Nusra was affiliated with the Islamic State.I responded saying that was unacceptable.There was an agreement between us that, if there was any disagreement, it would be taken up by the Al Qaeda organization, to Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri.So we raised the issue, and the separation between us started.
Then, when we saw that the interest of the revolution and the interest of the people of Syria was also to break up from Al Qaeda organization, we initiated this ourselves without pressure from anybody, without anybody talking to us about it or requesting anything.It was an individual, personal initiative based on what we thought was in the public interest that benefits the Syrian revolution.
Leader of Jabhat al-Nusra
ِAnd so when you went to Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was, after the killing of bin Laden, was the head of Al Qaeda, what did you need him for?
The symbolism.It was a big problem.I was the leader of Jabhat al-Nusra here, and al-Baghdadi was the leader of the Islamic State, so who do we turn to?We needed a major personality that carries symbolism.A clash at this level needs a person with symbolic significance, so that some — the base, the people who hear their messages, would be influenced by it.
Did you order the execution of Alawite cleric Badr Ghazal?
No, no, no.
Have your men engaged in sectarian attacks against the Alawite community?
No, no.These were the fundamentals we started with.We targeted the thugs that were fighting the people.
Before you defected, or before your big dispute with Baghdadi, you objected to some of his ideas and some of his strategies.Can you recount those?
At the beginning of the work, the plan and the strategies I put in my report was approved.Later on, maybe they had little hope that we would succeed in Syria.Later, in a year, our numbers were large.We expanded and had a very large territory.That’s when interest in the area by the Islamic State grew, so al-Baghdadi sent some leaders who had a direct relationship with him.Those leaders tried to change some of the points we had agreed on in the past. They were trying to shift toward an expansion of the sectarian war.We also disagreed about this.
So these were the beginnings of the dispute.When al-Baghdadi saw that we oppose these policies, he tried to change the leadership composition that was around me during that time, so we responded to him.Then we rejected it, and we requested to split from the Islamic State.
How were you treated in Bucca, and how did the Americans treat prisoners?
As far as I’m concerned, I didn’t face a lot of pressure, except that they took away my freedom for five years without a law governing this, without any law.Five years without a trial.This was the most serious for me, what’s affected me the most.As for others, there was the scandal of Abu Ghraib.Then after the scandal of Abu Ghraib, it continued.The torture of certain people, not everyone, the coffin, waterboarding and similar methods.They existed, and they continued.And sometimes they sent detainees to secret Iraqi prisons.The Iraqis, the Shia and Iranian militias would be the ones carrying out the torture to interrogate them and get information.The Americans then come in as saviors, after the information is extracted, and they treat them in the hospital and take them back to a regular prison.
Since you were designated as a terrorist with a $10 million price tag on your head, you have been spending a lot of energy and time trying to convince outsiders that you’re someone who can be reasoned with.Describe the situation you’re in, and what is your strategy.You are in a box, it seems to me, and you’re trying to convince — with this interview as an example — to reach out to Americans.What is it that you’re looking for?
We are in a popular revolution, a war to liberate a people from a tyrant who is ruling this country.We are aware that there are many risks surrounding the Syrian revolution, but we — this is the equation.We make up for this with the spirit of faith that we carry, with our determination in our principles and our goals, and we will always work on that.We have the ability to keep sacrificing until the very last drop of blood in our veins, until we reach our goals, God willing.
But can you explain, I mean, the — to Americans, this is a very confusing crossroads, with the Russians, the Iranians, the regime, the Turks, yourselves all colliding.Explain the situation you’re in to somebody that doesn’t understand it.
The conflict in Syria has aggravated.It is no longer a conflict within the same people.It has become to certain countries — because of the policies driven by their different interests — it has become more like a mailbox to them, unfortunately.Russia doesn’t care much about the regime, but it uses the regime as a pretext to reach the beaches of the Mediterranean, with all its natural gas and warm waters.Those are their interests, and they focus on them on one hand.They also try to return to the international scene, after their loss from the Soviet Union in the early ’90s of the past decade.
As for the Iranians, they have huge interests in the region, interests that go long back in history, ancient history, the interests of the old Persian state, the Persian empire that used to exist in this region, that used to rule the region for a certain period and later withdrew from it.It used to fight over this region, with the Romans, and the Byzantines later on.They are now trying to restore their former glory.That’s why they focus on Iraq, because Iraq was part of their empire.They also focus on Yemen, because at some point in history, pre-Islam, Yemen was part of the Persian empire.They also focus on Lebanon and Syria.They talk about it explicitly, the Iranians.They say: “We go to Syria.It will cost us up front, but it will pay back with a huge gain; we will get a port on the Mediterranean.”The Mediterranean, of course, is of great importance, and any country with ambitions would want to have access to it.Russia shares this interest as well.Iran also says, explicitly: “We take resources; we take phosphate, and we transport it there.We transform Iraq and Syria into consumers of Iranian goods, and we have around $7 billion of exported goods to Iraq every year and a little bit less to Syria.”So this is — and at the same time, they use the Shiite doctrine to reach their goals and the interests they have been seeking throughout history.
The revolution almost defeated the regime. Back in 2015, we were on the verge of reaching very sensitive positions, very important positions.When the regime felt —despite the support they got from the Iranians and the lack of support given to the Syrian revolution from any country —when the regime and the Iranians felt that they were about to lose Syria in favor of the revolution, Qassem Soleimani himself went to Putin and convinced him to enter Syria, and of course, they had tested the waters to see how Americans and the Europeans would perceive it.There was silence. It was a green light for the Russians to enter Syria.After the Russians entered Syria, there was now a new attempt or opportunity to resuscitate the regime all over again, but thank God, the regime could not go too far. …
So we get to the problem now of how we solve this, how you get out of this trap that you’re in.
The solution is simple.I mean, we need to address the causes rather than the symptoms.The cause of this issue, this huge catastrophe, is this regime.Once it is no longer there, this huge disaster would disappear, this huge disaster of which people have been suffering, of which the neighboring countries have been suffering, of which the entire world in general has been suffering.Therefore, the main issue would be toppling this regime, pushing to topple it in every possible way.
A Message to Americans
But what do you want the Americans to do?Why do you — what’s your message to America?What is it that you can expect America to do?
I do not expect much.I mean, I’m not optimistic when it comes to the U.S. administration and its policies, but we explain to the American public opinion.We explain to them what — how things work, what are the right policies and what are the wrong ones.I criticize the U.S. policies.When the U.S. says they want to “improve the behavior of the regime, but not to remove the regime,” this is unreasonable, unbelievable and impossible.The Americans are capable of creating their own tools to pressure the Russians, to take them out of Syria, and they have many tools.If they ever wanted to use them to take down the regime, I mean, they have many tools to do the job.
But as for us, the people, the Syrian revolution, we do not count on the Americans, neither on any neighboring country.We know that for 10 years, this revolution was born alone and will remain alone and will conquer alone as well, God willing.
Why should Americans listen to you?You’re a former enemy of the United States; you were an Al Qaeda leader.Why should Americans listen to your analysis or you on this matter?
First of all, I do not force Americans to listen to me.I criticize policies, and it is my right.And I represent here, I represent a huge part of the Syrian revolution.I do not stand on the sidelines of the Syrian revolution.It is my right to speak out loud, to say how things should be, in favor of the Syrian revolution, which policies are appropriate and which aren’t.But to force them to listen to me, no, that is completely up to them.I said in the beginning that I don’t have any hopes and that I don’t ask anything of them.On the contrary, this revolution will do everything on its own. It will rescue itself, by itself.I don’t ask anything of them.
If you think it’s important for Americans to listen to you, to your cause, why not get somebody else that doesn’t come with your baggage, with your past?You may be the smartest guy within 500 miles of here, and the most sincere guy — I don’t know — but why not find somebody without your baggage to carry your cause?
I am not presenting myself to the West nor to the Americans, but I have made this huge effort, along with my brothers and the revolution, and what we have achieved came with no help from anyone else.It was our effort only, our blood, our sacrifices, and thanks to all that, we reached where we are now.This place where we stand today, it came with many sacrifices from our side, the blood of the martyrs that watered this land.Today, most of my speech, I do not address it to the U.S. politicians but rather the American and Western public opinion.
There are many people who are interested in this region and who are interested in rectifying wrong approaches, wrong policies that were implanted in this region.And it is my duty to present what I believe in and what I think would be the correct and effective approach that would eventually lead to saving this people, the Syrian people, from the catastrophe that they have been living in, because of the tyranny of this criminal.
Human Rights in the Prisons
But here — here’s the problem, and I do have to bring up the human rights situation in your prisons.You have cracked down on journalists, activists.You have currently released people that testified to being tortured in your prisons.How is it that somebody in America is going to want to trust you?
Within the Syrian revolution, there are many issues.We are not trying to show a very bright side of it.If we want to analyze things properly, we need to acknowledge facts as they are, to look at them the way they are, in reality.There are huge differences of opinions within the Syrian revolution.There are many oppositions within the Syrian revolution.There are kind people; there are evil people; and there are those who use twisted methods within the Syrian revolution.For instance, when we saw that ISIS went off-track and we had to enter a military conflict with it, we obliged.
When some people from ISIS started trying to bomb stores or to kill people from certain factions or to murder people in mosques, in courts or anywhere else, we conducted security campaigns and arrested a large group of them and put them in prison.On the same note, the ones who threaten the security of the region are not necessarily always from the Syrian revolution.I mean, ISIS, there are some people with low self-control who try to steal from people, who try to blackmail people, who kidnap people.
We also conduct campaigns against them.They go through a whole judicial process within the courts that are found in the liberated zones.But as for what is said about us attacking people, no, there is some exaggeration on this matter.
Those who have been in your jails, certainly under al-Nusra, in the past, speak of brutal treatment and torture.One, for instance, is Theo Padnos, an American who speaks of torture in an al-Nusra prison.Can you respond to that and say why it was that he was treated the way he was?
Who is Theo?I don’t know who he is.
Theo Padnos is an American who was taken prisoner.He says that your lieutenant, a man you know well, Abu Maria al-Qahtani, has apologized for his treatment.I’m surprised if you do not know the case.
We never had American prisoners, in the first place, not during the Nusra time or even now.This is the first time I hear about it.
There was an era when al-Nusra split from IS, and that was during the caliphate era, when many wrongdoings happened.But that was never part of our policy.Some fighters who defected from al-Nusra might have committed acts that were outside al-Nusra law, so to speak.Or they probably were members of ISIS who did bad things in the name of al-Nusra.
But we never arrested or detained anyone.That has never happened.
You have arrested, for instance, a British aid worker, Tauqir Sharif, who testified to being tortured after he was released.Also, Nour al-Shalo was held, an activist journalist.These two people are not Russians, ISIS.Can you justify the treatment of those two examples?
Tauqir Sharif used to work with a group that rejected the general system that is in place here, and they were rather extreme.They want to have clashes with the Turkish army sometimes; they want to launch battles at inappropriate times; they want to mess with the security of the liberated zones.It was proven that he used to cooperate with this group and to finance them, and he was arrested accordingly.He was brought to justice, and he was released after his trial.
As for Nour al-Shalo, her case was a criminal one at first.She had attacked a woman in a certain situation, and she went to court, and she was charged normally.It doesn’t mean that if she is a journalist, she is allowed to commit a certain crime and not be punished by the law, just because she is a journalist.Some people hide behind this aspect of journalism and media, because they know that we give them importance, so they hide behind this importance we give them, and they use it as a cover, and they go and create security problems, ethical problems or even — things of that sort.
But, can you. … Is it appropriate in your view to torture these prisoners?
There is no torture.This is completely rejected.And we are not responsible for it, arresting, torturing and the whole process at the courts.The judicial corps is completely independent in the liberated zones. It is not ours. There is an entire government here. We are the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Our goal is — our role is purely military.As for ruling the zone, we help the government in some things that they need from us, to help them fulfill their roles and missions.
So to be clear, you’re saying that Tauqir is lying, that he was not tortured?
He is making a media show.He is only making a media show in this matter.
This is a media show, too.Who would we believe?
Perhaps some human rights organizations could come and supervise the prisons and supervise — or take a look at the prisons.Our institutions are open to everyone.Organizations are welcome.People who are interested in this matter can come visit, too, and assess the situation: Are things being done properly or not in these institutions?We have no problem.And if there are any mistakes, we will help in rectifying them.
Human Rights Watch says that there are hundreds of people either detained or held in your prisons without fair trials, and, you know, I didn’t know that they had an open invitation.You’re saying Human Rights Watch, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, and other human rights groups have an open invitation from you to visit your prisons?
We do not have prisons.There are public prisons for the administration that rules the liberated zones.In my opinion, none of the leaders within this administration would object [to] having their prisons visited.What we must do is to help them reach those prisons, provide them with transportation.We will do any part required from our side.On the contrary, we welcome them.
What can you offer America?What can you promise to the United States?You want them to talk with you.What — what are you offering?
Our message to them is brief.We here do not pose any threat to you, so there is no need for you to classify people as terrorists and announce rewards for killing them.And also, all that does not affect the Syrian revolution negatively.This is the most important message.The second message is that the American policies in the region, and in Syria in particular, are incorrect policies that require huge amendments, as we mentioned, according to what we mentioned regarding Iran and Russia.
What we might have in common would be putting an end to the humanitarian crisis and suffering that is going on in the region, and putting an end to the masses of refugees that flee to Turkey or to Europe and create huge issues, either for the Syrian people, who are being displaced all over Europe, or for the Europeans themselves, for there are many consequences to the presence of refugees in new communities.This is the issue that we can cooperate the most on, by helping people stay here, by providing them with a dignified life here, in the region, or by liberating the lands of these people so that they can return to their homes, instead of having Russia or the Iranian militias push them to flee abroad.The humanitarian issue is the most important issue that we can work on together, to provide these people with dignified lives.
In 2017, you faced a number of rival groups that were opposed to the direction you were moving.Talk about the struggle you had with those rival groups.
There are so many factions in the Syrian revolution.I believe it has more parties and factions inside than any other revolution in the world.And those multiple groups did not have a supreme authority, and that was what the revolution was lacking.It did not have a central authority people would resort to in the event of disagreements.Therefore, conflicts constantly happened, even in areas where we had no presence.Disagreements would erupt sometimes over very minor issues and other times over more serious matters.Those conflicts were routine in areas that had no supreme authority.
So [it’s] correct that you fought against Ahrar al-Sham, against those who stayed with Al Qaeda, Hurras al-Din and ISIS, of course, and even the Free Syrian Army that was backed by the CIA.Talk about how bloody those battles were.How much blood and treasure was spilled in that time?
Each of those factions has a separate story that would take a long time.But to sum it up, when ISIS started to become an obstacle in the way of the Syrian revolution and started to transgress on the factions and on the people, and even transgressed on us and killed some of our soldiers, leaders and youths, so the confrontation was inevitable, although we tried hard to avoid this confrontation.
So we fought against ISIS.Then they turned into security operatives, to assassinate and fight here and there.The security forces in the liberated areas captured many of them and put in prisons those who tried to sabotage the Syrian revolution.
As for the Free Syrian Army factions, there were factions that claimed to be part of the revolution — some factions did — while in reality, they were merely gangsters, thieves and bandits.
It was our duty to act, after people pleaded with us to rescue them from those bandits.We tried amicably to make them stop harming people.After that, there was a little clash, and it was over.
I want to emphasize here that all those internal conflicts are, first of all, not in the best interest of the revolution, and we never want them to happen, and we don’t support them.
And even if we do enter into such conflicts, we would do so out of urgent necessity to avoid harm and to fend off threats.
But the right thing for all the factions of the revolution is to unify ranks, with the exception of those who deviate from general context, like ISIS, for example.And those should be entirely kept away from the scene of the revolution.
You seem not to convey a sense of great difficulty during this period, and I want to make sure I understand.Was this not a very stressful period of time?
It was a painful and difficult period, and I don’t take any pride in it.It was an exceptional condition in the revolution, and we can analyze it as a natural consequence for disagreement or not having a unified leadership.And that could happen anywhere.
But it is an unpleasant thing, and I’m not happy about that period and never look at the fact that we had to fight against other factions as an achievement in the revolution, of course with the exception of factions like ISIS that used to transgress on people, or some thieves who stole from people.Of course we don’t regret fighting against those.
HTS is a military organization.You decided, however, to prompt the formation of a Salvation Government.Whose idea was this?How did this come about?
As I mentioned earlier, the revolution didn’t have a central authority, and that caused many problems internally, on the social level, on the institutional level, and on the military organization level, and even on the economic level in the liberated areas.So we entered into negotiations with the factions, and as a result, there was a partial merger.After that, there were many initiatives by a broad segment of academics, civilians and university professors, because the talks in Idlib included representatives from all the Syrian provinces.
So that gathering consisted of experts from all fields, and there were many initiatives by the civil society representatives who sat with us and with other factions as well.Those discussions brought up the need to have institutions, governance and administration.
But it is unusual to the outsiders to see a Salafist group form and encourage a civil society.So talk about how you can reconcile the ideals of HTS with those of the civil society.
When we say it is an Islamic movement, people would immediately think that it is a movement that engages only in fighting.They would never imagine that this movement is also capable of building or running institutions in a country.
But in reality, Islam is completely different.Islam is not all about sacrifice and then nothing else; Islam is more about building than just fighting and confrontation.Fighting and confrontation is one part of Islam, so people can build afterwards.It confronts the enemies who want to break this nation, so that people, backed by civil society, would be capable of building the right structure for all Muslims.
Can you say here, to the people that are listening — who have great distrust of anybody with the label of Salafist, jihadist, Islamist — can you state here clearly what guarantees [the rights of] religious minorities, of women, of journalists, of activists?
First of all, to limit the description of the HTS to only being a Salafist or jihadist, I believe, needs a long discussion.And I don’t want to comment on that now, because it would take a lot of research and study.
We are trying today to talk about Islam in its real concept, the Islam that seeks to spread justice and aspires for building and for progress, and to protect women and preserve their rights, and for education as well.So if we agree that there’s an Islamic rule in the liberated areas, we say that there are universities, by Allah’s grace, full of students, two-thirds being female students.There are more than 450,000 to 500,000 students enrolled in schools.There are fully functioning hospitals in the liberated areas, and there are people working to build towns and pave roads.Others are trying to establish an economic system for people to live securely and peacefully.And there’s a judicial system that seeks to give people back their rights and not only to punish the wrongdoers in the way some people would think, when they hear it is an Islamic or a Salafi group.
Of course, I don’t claim the situation in Idlib is ideal, but I am saying that, given the current circumstances with the blockade, the great number of IDPs [internally displaced persons], the state of war, the Russian occupation and the Iranian occupation, I say that despite all those circumstances, there’s a self-asserting model that was capable of running the affairs of a whole country under an Islamic rule.And that has not been achieved solely by the HTS.Rather, it has been the will of a big segment of civilians and educated Syrians and other Muslim nationals in the liberated areas, who work day and night so people can go back home safe, pray in mosques, and so workers can go to work and farmers to their lands safely.
You have three villages under your control that are Christians.Can you state clearly that their rights will be protected to worship freely and not be coerced and harassed?
What I am going to say in this regard is not out of political marketing of HTS, but it is because we want to state facts, and that is the Islam that we are applying is based on what Allah wants us to do.The application of the Islamic Sharia law states that religious minorities should be protected, and that they should have the freedom to worship God in the way they see fit and as stated in their Sharias, and this has been put into practice here in Idlib.And I don’t want people to think I am saying this for political reasons or that I am trying to give a positive picture to the world.No, that is not what it is.We actually put it into action, as part of our belief, and Christians have been living here for over 1,400 years and have always maintained cordial relations with the Muslims.
I reiterate that our war today is not a war to fight against religions and sects, but to end oppression by the criminal regime against these people.So it is important for people and viewers to be aware of this fact and to come to know what we really are, in a close and realistic way.
In 2019, when American commandos came into Idlib, not far from where we did our last interview, in fact, Baghdadi was killed.Did you have any idea that he was here in Idlib, not far from you?If not, how could you not have known, and how did you react to the news of his killing?
IS is banned in Idlib, and we chase IS members here, because they unjustifiably inflict harm and kill people, and Baghdadi, too, was banned from coming to Idlib, and that is why he was in hiding in Idlib.Idlib is not fully under control, as America is.But we constantly chased IS operatives, wherever they were, and this is what we are constantly doing.
I did not know that Baghdadi was in Idlib.And my reaction?I was surprised that he was actually in Idlib.That is all.
Were you happy when he was killed?
I could not feel happy that he had been killed at the hands of the Americans.I wished he had been captured and held accountable by the revolution for all the crimes he had committed against the revolution.
Latest Interviews
Latest Interviews
Policies
Teacher Center
Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation
Koo and Patricia Yuen
FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation. Web Site Copyright ©1995-2025 WGBH Educational Foundation. PBS is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers and by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Additional funding is provided by the Abrams Foundation; Park Foundation; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; and the FRONTLINE Journalism Fund with major support from Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation, and additional support from Koo and Patricia Yuen. FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation. Web Site Copyright ©1995-2025 WGBH Educational Foundation. PBS is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
