Qantara: You believe in "building bridges" within Syrian society to promote peace. How do you do that?

Sami Hadaya: I am part of a group called Wasl, which works on civil peace. We are trying to foster dialogue between areas that were completely cut off from each other over the past 14 years. Wasl is a group of more than 130 people who are either independently active or in focal positions in civil society organisations or political parties, all of whom have expertise that they can provide. 

Wasl's objective is not representation, but to be active and effective, to pool resources together. We have groups for advocacy, humanitarian relief and community dialogue, as well as groups for every region. It's an attempt to centre civil and political activism around civil peace. 

How did Wasl react to the massacres on the coast in March?

We sent delegations with people of different ethnicities and from different areas to console victims and their families. For the people on the coast, it was unexpected that a Sunni from Daraa would come to mourn the massacre with them. Our delegation visited more than 20 families from Tartous, Latakia, Banyas and Jableh. Delegates from Daraa, Sweida, Homs and Hama listened to their stories and expressed unreserved solidarity. From there, the delegation—including comrades from the coast—went to Idlib and Jisr al-Shughur to console the families of the general security forces who were killed by remnants of the old regime.

Why is it so important to acknowledge each other's pain?

We need to reach a certain awareness that we have all suffered. Our sufferings were different, but they don't have to cancel each other out. After the massacres on the coast, many Syrians were in agony. Something broke in them. They had seen this before: people getting killed, whole families massacred, houses being burned, people losing their homes. We thought that this was a chapter that ended with the fall of the regime, and suddenly it re-emerged. We are convinced that when the blood of one group is spilt, it is the blood of all Syrians.

You quoted a friend who said that Syrians never really had the chance to get to know one another. Why do you think that is?

Because we had a regime that was interested in creating divisions within the Syrian people. The Assad regime worked very diligently to create rifts wherever possible, not just along sectarian lines, but along tribal lines or even within family structures. The goal was to foster loyalty towards Assad by creating strong distrust within society. Syrians were afraid of their own brothers and resorted to the regime for protection.

A lot of people are convinced that the Assad regime favoured Alawites. Do you agree?

I don't think the regime ever had any sense of loyalty towards Alawites as a sect, nor any hatred of Sunnis. They were interested in authoritarian rule only. Sectarianising the conflict was a strategy to allow the regime to continue existing. So, from the very early stages of the uprising, whenever there was a demonstration in a Sunni majority area, it was met with live bullets.

Demonstrations in Druze or Ismaili majority areas were sometimes allowed and sometimes met with lower levels of violence. Assad wanted Sunni protesters to take up arms in response to the existential threat they faced. In turn, when this Sunni militarisation happened, minorities were meant to feel excluded and at risk, resulting in a feeling of distance from the revolution.

How would you describe the relationship between the Left and political Islam in Syria at the moment?

I am a bit disappointed with certain circles of the Left. Some see political Islam as the absolute enemy. I am against this exclusionary position. How can we tell Islamists to be inclusive if we are not?

I have reconciled with political Islam for the first time in my life. I realised that progressive politics could exist across the spectrum and that political Islam is not inherently wrong. It has problematic currents like Salafism, which is ultra-conservative and exclusionary, just like Stalinism within the Left. 

So, are you open to cooperation regardless of ideology?

Neither I nor those around me will give up on individual and political freedoms, particularly given the huge price that was paid for them. But as a believer in democracy and pluralism, I would be willing to support progressive voices within political Islam, hoping to create spaces within the discourse that are useful for the Left. It is important to me to improve people's material reality. Whether Muhammad or Marx takes credit for it, I don't care. 

So, yes, I am open to cooperation if certain things are guaranteed—that we are not heading towards a civil war or division of the country. After the experience of the last 14 years, we learned to be pragmatic. We must achieve unity and construct a national identity.

Where do you see possible overlap or potential for learning in the political ideas of the Left and political Islam?

I think the Left in our region has failed to come up with organic concepts and theories. They imported most of their conceptual frameworks from the West. There must be a strong intellectual revision to find aspects that are rooted in the history of the region. 

For example, we had a meeting in Damascus with leftists who had been active in the squatters' movement in Greece. One of the suggestions was to take over the houses of people in exile and use them to host displaced people from refugee camps. There was a pushback against the suggestion, given the recent history of forced displacement and land takeovers by the regime. 

Someone suggested using the concept of Waqf instead. In Islamic empires, it was something similar to public ownership. Landowners could donate their houses to be administered by the state, in some cases temporarily, with the guarantee that they would be returned to the original owner. In the meantime, the house is given to people in need.

Are there any states in the region that could offer lessons for Syria?

Egypt had quite a similar context. Due to an intense fear of political Islam, they ended up supporting a military dictatorship. That is the dichotomy that we as a region need to escape. Exaggerated fear of political Islam is what allowed military dictatorships in the region to survive. I am very invested in having a positive story to tell about political Islam. Just give us one successful story! That could break that dichotomy and lead to a wave of democratisation in the region.

How do you assess the actions of the interim government so far?

Based on Ahmed al-Sharaa's history, I see a potential dictatorial project in the making. I think it was a one-man project from the outset. Whether in ISIS, Jabhat Al-Nusra or in HTS, al-Sharaa never accepted an equal. The positives, if I am being as rational as possible, are that he is both politically smart and realistic.

If he is only interested in ruling, but is not very ideological, his primary focus is the balance of power in the country. I see that reflected in the contradictory developments of the past months: massacres on the coast and then negotiations with the Syrian Democratic Forces; an exclusionary constitutional declaration and then a relatively inclusive government formation. These contradictions are not arbitrary—they reflect the government trying to appeal to every single part of society, offering everyone an opportunity or an opening. 

What do you expect from the coming months?

I hope we can achieve an inclusive state that represents all the components of Syrian society and prevents us from the worst-case scenario that is civil war or division. I think we all feel an existential threat, that this country in its current geography might not exist in the future, or that there could be a civil war that would impact the areas that were not affected before. 

It would be such a shame if the first opportunity we have as a Syrian people to construct a state, and a national identity ends in a return to the violence of the past 14 years. We now have five years to ensure we are moving toward democracy and decentralised governance. As the Syrian Left, we must make use of this period and appeal to the broadest possible segment of the Syrian population. We need to build bridges, so that if the government turns to oppression, we are too strong a political force to be repressed.