Decision Makers: A Personality Profile of Ahmed al-Sharaa

Prepared using Margaret H. Hermann’s methodology for political personality profiling, which seeks to understand how a leader’s beliefs, values and attitudes shape their decision-making and predict future actions based on past responses and behavioural patterns.

Want to know more? Azure’s personality profiles can be fully tailored. Require an assessment of a head of state, a rising political figure, or a key regulator? Contact us to discuss how we can tailor assessments to your needs.

Bio

Name: Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammed Jolani

Position: Leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), interim President of Syria

Age: 42 (d.o.b. October 29, 1982)

Place of Birth: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Key Takeaways

• Strategic Thinker: Sharaa exhibits high conceptual complexity. He evaluates situations before acting and bases decisions on practical considerations.
• Relationship-Focused: His current priority is coalition-building, particularly seeking engagement with the West, but will seek to maintain strategic flexibility.
• Calculated Decision-Making: Sharaa balances ideological commitments with political expediency, making tactical compromises to advance his agenda.
• Pattern of Political Pivots: His history indicates a tendency to pivot when circumstances change, suggesting engagement with him is transactional rather than enduring.
• Uncertain Long-Term Trajectory: While Sharaa currently presents himself as a political leader, past behaviour suggests he may pivot again if alliances become untenable.

Leadership Traits

An assessment of Sharaa’s key leadership traits based on a 5,000-word dataset from eight different speeches and interviews.

Key Traits: High conceptual complexity, strong relationship-building focus, strategic pragmatism.

Analysis:

• Sharaa exhibits high conceptual complexity. This means he is a strategic thinker and pragmatic decision-maker. He is likely to carefully evaluate situations before acting and base decisions on practical considerations rather than rigid ideological beliefs.
• Leaders with both high conceptual complexity and strong relationship focus tend to engage the support of others to advance their agenda – while maintaining strategic flexibility. This aligns with Sharaa’s current efforts to recruit allies – including Western actors – and balance ideological commitments with political aspirations, making tactical compromises when necessary to further his objectives.

• Additionally, Sharaa’s low scores on both group bias and distrust indicate a pragmatic rather than ideological approach to alliances. While he remains a conservative jihadist leader, he has shown an innovative stance towards non-Islamic tribal and minority groups in Syria. His trust and distrust in allies is shaped by past experiences and current circumstances rather than an inherent ideological rigidity, meaning he assesses relationships based on practical benefit rather than blanket suspicion.

Implication: Sharaa sees Western support as crucial to advancing his agenda and current focus, which is to rebuild Syria. His adaptability and preference for team building suggest he will remain open to negotiation and political compromise, provided these align with his strategic interests and do not challenge his core authority. However, his history of pivoting also means that alliances with him should be viewed as transactional rather than enduring.

Historical Behaviour Patterns: Pivot Points

A study of Sharaa’s past behaviour reveals a tendency to respond to pressure by shifting allegiance or ideology – which later came to define his political trajectory. An early “pivot” away from his family’s expectations foreshadowed later decisions to break ties with ISIS, then Al Qaeda, and eventually position himself as a pragmatic leader who is open to alliances.

• Childhood and first pivot point: Sharaa had a strict upbringing within a middle-class Syrian family. His father, an oil consultant, worked as an advisor to Syria’s then-Prime Minister, while his mother was a schoolteacher. At school in Damascus, where his family settled in 1989, Sharaa was described by classmates as manipulatively intelligent but socially introverted; as he entered his teenage years, he became more defiant. His relationship with Alawite girl, a group considered heretical by jihadists, represented Sharaa’s first major pivot: when faced with familial and societal pressure over the relationship, Sharaa reacted by rebelling, rejecting expectations, and charting his own path.
• Recurring pivot points in Sharaa’s political trajectory: Sharaa has consistently shifted alliances and adapted strategies when circumstances required:
• 2003 – Joins al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI): Sharaa joined AQI shortly before the US invasion. He fought for three years in the Iraqi insurgency embracing jihadism, and was captured and held by US forces between 2006 and 2011.
• 2011 – Returns to Syria: Sharaa moved back to Syria as the civil war took hold.
• 2013 – Rejects ISIS Expansion: Islamic State created the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) with Abu Bakr al Baghdadi declaring his intention to expand into Syria and assimilate the Al Nusa Front. Sharaa distanced himself, instead aligning with al-Qaeda to maintain operational autonomy.
• 2016 – Breaks from al-Qaeda: As Syria’s landscape evolved, Sharaa pivoted again, severing ties with al-Qaeda and rebranding his group as Jabhat Fateh al Sham (JFS) to appear more independent.
• 2017 – Creates Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Sharaa merged JFS with other organisations to create HTS.
• 2020 – Crushes al-Qaeda Loyalists in Syria: To consolidate power in Idlib, HTS moved against al-Qaeda factions, reinforcing its dominance.
• 2023 – Positioning as a Political Leader: Sharaa has actively courted Western legitimacy, shifting his image from jihadist leader to pragmatic governor of Idlib.

Implication: Sharaa’s tendency to pivot when under pressure suggest that his current engagement with the West should be viewed as a strategic move rather than a permanent ideological transformation. His history indicates that if an alliance or ideological stance becomes politically untenable, he may shift again. This makes long-term alignment with external actors uncertain.

Rebranding or Genuine Shift? Assessing Sharaa’s “Conversion”

Since breaking ties with Al Qaeda and rebranding Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Sharaa has sought to distance himself from his extremist past, and to position himself as a legitimate political leader rather than a jihadist commander. His recent outreach efforts have included:

• Public Relations Strategy: Conducting high-profile interviews with Western media (BBC, CNN) to project a pragmatic and moderate image.
• Governance Initiatives: Spearheading economic and infrastructure projects in Idlib, including the construction of modern buildings and the promotion of local governance structures.
• Humanitarian Engagement: Visiting refugee camps, overseeing earthquake relief efforts, and presenting himself as a leader concerned with Syria’s long-term stability.

However, contradictions remain, which raises doubts about whether his transformation is genuine or merely tactical:

• Human Rights Violations: Reports indicate that torture and repression continue in HTS-controlled areas, particularly in Idlib’s notorious detention centres.
• Economic Mismanagement and Unrest: Reconstruction efforts in Idlib – which Sharaa sought to use his further his political goals and gain greater legitimacy for HTS caused inflation and economic hardship, and ultimately led to a local rebellion.
• Selective Repression: While Sharaa took a conciliatory approach to the unrest, he has also crushed both jihadist and rebel factions that challenged his authority, solidifying his control in the region. This approach is at odds with Sharaa’s self-portrayal as a moderate political leader.

Implication: A pattern of duality can be observed in Sharaa’s behaviour, which suggests his conversion may not be genuine. Sharaa exhibits characteristics commonly associated with narcissistic personality disorder. The narcissist is typically charming and pleasant to be around, however they consider those around them only as extensions of the self, and when an individual is no longer perceived as psychologically useful, they can suddenly be discarded. While this does not constitute a formal psychological diagnosis, It suggests that Sharaa’s engagement with external actors is driven by political expediency rather than ideological transformation.

Engagement with the West – Strategic Calculation or Genuine Shift?

Our assessment suggests that Sharaa’s current moderation is a strategic calculation rather than an ideological shift. He appears to recognize that securing Western engagement and legitimacy is beneficial for his long-term rule. However, his history of pivots suggests that if engagement with the West becomes politically untenable or fails to deliver tangible benefits, he may shift again.

Conclusion: Sharaa’s outreach should be seen as transactional rather than a fundamental ideological transformation. While he may remain open to negotiations and political compromises, this will only hold as long as it serves his broader strategic goals.