A week from now, President Ahmed Al-Sharaa is supposed to land in Washington, on an important and (critical) visit, the first by a Syrian president to the capital of (Uncle Sam), which (whether we like it or not) holds the keys to (solution, connection, and composition) as the first capital of international resolution, in the absence of (multi-polarity).

The unprecedented visit would establish a new phase in relations between the two countries, and move Damascus to the American axis, after more than fifty years of being thrown into the embrace of (the late) Eastern Axis, in which the features of breathing life into it began to appear again, based on the (BRICS) window and the geography of (Shanghai).

The visit’s agenda has two axes, the first (announced) and will include signing (agreements) such as Damascus joining the international coalition to fight ISIS, and discussing the details of the security agreement with Israel. As for the second (secret) axis, it will include (understandings) the secret of which is not known to those (those who are firmly rooted in knowledge) but rather Trump, Al-Sharaa and their inner circle.

Expectations indicate that these understandings will revolve around the role that Damascus can play in the region, which – perhaps – will include seeking help from the human reservoir of foreign fighters and jihadi organizations in Syria, in any upcoming confrontation, whether it is with Hezbollah in Lebanon, or with the Popular Mobilization Forces and their allied factions in Iraq, should the need arise.

The political future of Al-Sharaa as president of Syria after the end of the transitional period will also be part of these understandings, as the American support provided to Al-Sharaa so far is (conditional support) on two matters: the first is achieving American interests and preserving Israel’s security, and the second is forgetting the idea of ​​(jihadism and Islamism) and involving the other Syrian components in governance and absorbing them in one way or another, and consolidating stability in Syria.

What is noteworthy is that until now, despite the clear American support given to Al-Shara, there are authorities in Washington and Tel Aviv who still view Al-Shara with suspicion and suspicion, and wonder whether (Al-Shara) has actually changed intellectually, or is he (political – pragmatic – clever) and practicing (profound strategic deception)? Believing that granting full legitimacy to it may represent a dangerous precedent that encourages other extremist movements to adopt violence as a means of gaining power and then work to gain international recognition later.

The political future of Al-Sharaa after the end of the transitional period revolves around two options. The first is for Al-Sharaa to rehabilitate itself internationally, and the security and economic conditions in the country will improve, allowing for true presidential elections to be held under international supervision, in which Al-Sharaa will succeed based on his real popularity among the Syrians, some of whom see him as an outstanding leader, liberator, and victor, while some other components see him as a (modified) version of the previous Assadist-exclusionary regime.

The second option is for an international-regional conviction to be formed that Al-Sharaa remaining at the helm of power after the transitional period is unacceptable, especially if it turns out that he has not changed fundamentally and continues to exercise authoritarian rule, and has not succeeded in curbing the extremist trend in his regime. Here, Washington and other capitals are pressing to remove Al-Sharaa from power quietly, and to support a moderate Sunni figure, or a figure who enjoys international standing or the support of a broad trend of the opposition.

The logical question posed in some think tanks is: Will Al-Sharaa surrender if America and its allies decide to abandon him? The answer confirms that Al-Sharaa is a stubborn fighter and will not surrender easily, and removing him from the equation will not be easy. Rather, his cost is very high, as the man possesses internal strengths, represented by his well-armed organization, and external strengths through strong regional alliances, which enables him to thwart any future change, in which he and his movement are not a part. Active in it.

After nearly a year of President Shara’s rule, views on him are still different. Some see it as a historic opportunity to end Syria’s complex crisis, while others see it as a latent threat that may explode later. What will happen in the next few months – starting with the results of the Washington visit – will determine which of the two views is closer and more correct.

Therefore, to this day, Syria still stands at a dangerous crossroads. It will either complete its transformation towards a stable state with all its diversity under a leadership capable of development and adaptation, or it will slide again into a power struggle, if one party to the equation feels that it will emerge as a loser, and there are no sure guarantees for anyone in a region full of surprises and fluctuations.