Syrian leader signs constitution that puts the country under an Islamist group's rule for 5 years
The nation's interim rulers have struggled to exert their authority across much of Syria since the Islamist former insurgent group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS, led a lightning insurgency that overthrew longtime President Bashar Assad in December.
Former HTS leader Ahmad al-Sharaa is now the country's interim president — a decision that was announced after a meeting of the armed groups that took part in the offensive against Assad. At the same meeting, the groups agreed to repeal the country's old constitution and said a new one would be drafted.
While many were happy to see an end to the Assad family's dictatorial rule of more than 50 years in the war-torn country, religious and ethnic minorities have been skeptical of the new Islamist leaders and reluctant to allow Damascus under its new authorities to assert control of their areas.
Abdulhamid Al-Awak, one of the seven members of the committee al-Sharaa tasked to draft the temporary constitution, told a news conference Thursday that it would maintain some previsions from the previous one, including the stipulation that the head of state has to be a Muslim, and Islamic law is the main source of jurisprudence.
But Al-Awak, a constitutional law expert who teaches at Mardin Artuklu University in Turkey, also said that the temporary constitution includes provisions that enshrine freedom of expression and the media.
The constitution will 'balance between social security and freedom' during Syria's shaky political situation, he said.
A new committee to draft a permanent constitution will be formed, but it's unclear if it will be more inclusive of Syria's political, religious and ethnic groups.
Al-Sharaa on Monday reached a landmark pact with the US-backed Kurdish-led authorities in northeastern Syria, including a ceasefire and a merging of their armed forces with the central government's security agencies.
The deal came after government forces and allied groups crushed an insurgency launched last week by gunmen loyal to Assad. Rights groups say that hundreds of civilians — mostly from the Alawite minority sect to which Assad belongs — were killed in retaliatory attacks by factions in the counteroffensive.
A key goal of the interim constitution was to give a timeline for the country's political transition out of its interim phase. In December, Al-Sharaa said that it could take up to three years to rewrite Syria's constitution and up to five years to organize and hold elections.
Al-Sharaa appointed a committee to draft the new constitution after Syria held a national dialogue conference last month, which called for announcing a temporary constitution and holding an interim parliamentary election. Critics said that the hastily-organized conference wasn't inclusive of Syria's different ethnic and sectarian groups or civil society.
The United States and Europe have been hesitant to lift harsh sanctions imposed on Syria during Assad's rule until they are convinced that the new leaders will create an inclusive political system and protect minorities. Al-Sharaa and regional governments have been urging them to reconsider, fearing that the country's crumbling economy could bring further instability.
Also Thursday, an Israeli airstrike struck an apartment building in a suburb of the capital, wounding three people, one of them critically, Syria's state media and a paramedic group said.
Israel's military said that the airstrike on the Damascus suburb of Dummar targeted what it called a command center of the militant group Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The military alleged that the command center has been used to direct attacks against Israel and vowed to 'respond forcefully' to the presence of Palestinian militant groups inside Syria.
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a statement that 'whenever terrorist activity is organized against Israel,' al-Sharaa 'will find air force planes circling above him and attacking terrorist targets.'
A Palestinian Islamic Jihad member at the scene of the airstrike in Syria told The Associated Press that the apartment that was targeted was the home of the group's leader, Ziad Nakhaleh.
Ismail Sindak said the apartment had been empty for years, adding that Nakhaleh isn't in Syria. Asked whether anyone was killed in the strike, Sindak said that 'the house was empty.'
By AP's Gaith Alsayed and Kareem Chehayeb. Abdelrahman Shaheen contributed to this report from Damascus.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
16 minutes ago
- UPI
Texas state House ready to pass redistricting bill despite Dems
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott will sign the redistricting bill that the state legislature is ready to pass. File Photo by Francis Chung/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- Texas state House Republicans are about to pass their redistricting bill Wednesday as the session reconvenes at 11 a.m. EDT Wednesday. Texas Republicans will pass the bill, encouraged by President Donald Trump, which will likely give the state an extra five Republican seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, after weeks of protests from Democrats in the state House. Because of their minority in the House, Democrats have no way to block passage of the redistricting bills. They have vowed to fight in the courts to prevent the new maps from being used. In the first special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott, Democrats fled the state for two weeks so that the House wouldn't have a quorum. Once the session timed out and Abbott called a new special session, Democrats returned to the state and a new battle ensued. Once Democrats came back to the capitol in Austin, they were not allowed to leave the chamber without a "permission slip," a police escort and 24-hour surveillance to ensure they don't leave the state again. One lawmaker, Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, spent Monday night in the capitol building, refusing to sign the paper. She said she plans to stay until Wednesday's session. Since then, several other Democrats tore up their waivers and joined her. "This is a civil discussion and disagreement, and in order to win, the other side is willing to use force -- to use the arms of a state to get what they want. Good guys don't do that," Texas House Democratic Caucus leader Rep. Gene Wu, told CNN. Wu and Rep. Vince Perez, D-El Paso, who signed the waivers, stayed with Collier through Monday night. Wednesday's session is expected to last all day and possibly into the evening, as there must be time to consider the map, consider amendments and have several votes. "It's going to be a long day," Rep Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, told the New York Times. The new state map introduced last month has been revised. It would still add the five seats but also strengthen already-Republican districts by adding Republican voters to those districts. The state's current districts, passed four years ago, are already being challenged in court, and a ruling is expected this fall. "Please pass this map ASAP," Trump posted on social media Monday. "Thank you, Texas!" Republicans have 25 of the state's 38 seats. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has already begun the process of redistricting the state to counteract Texas' efforts. Other Republican- and Democrat-led states have vowed to get in on the process.
UPI
16 minutes ago
- UPI
Texas redistricting sets course for partisan arms race
1 of 5 | Texas Republicans, led by Gov. Greg Abbott, are near passing a new congressional map that could spark a redistricting war between Republican and Democrat-led states. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- Texas Republicans are near passing a new congressional map that could spark a redistricting war between Republican and Democrat-led states. President Donald Trump called on Texas Republicans to add five more seats in U.S. Congress before the 2026 midterms. Democrats in California are preparing to respond with a redistricting plan of their own. More states are discussing joining the fray in retaliatory efforts to make partisan changes to district maps. Republicans hold a 219 to 212 majority in the U.S. House. "Trump's pressure on Texas is likely to set up a redistricting war, where states including California seek to counteract Texas and Trump tries to pressure more states like Missouri to draw more Republican districts," Richard Hasen, professor of political science and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA Law, told UPI. "It hurts representation when fairer districts are being replaced with noncompetitive districts drawn to give one side maximal advantage." Redistricting normally coincides with the release of the decennial census at the end of the decade. It is rare for redistricting to take place mid decade but it is not unheard of. State legislatures will redistrict mid decade due to court cases holding up past plans, sometimes for multiple years. Texas Republicans' plan Texas lawmakers are holding a special session to approve their plan which, in theory, will add five more congressional seats for Republicans. The state senate approved the plan last week in a 19-2 vote along party lines. Democrats in the state's House of Representatives left the State Capital earlier this month and refused to return, blocking the legislature from having a quorum and passing the redistricting plan. The special session was initially called by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in response to the deadly flood in Hill Country, Texas, in July. State legislators were to meet to discuss emergency preparedness measures and releasing emergency funding for the affected communities. Abbott has called a second special session to finish passing the new map, with a vote slated for Friday. Emergency management related topics are also on the docket for the week, including relief funding. If passed and signed by Abbott, the redistricting plan reshapes the state's congressional districts to give Republicans an advantage among voters in five additional districts based on voter turnout in the past two general elections. Republicans hold 25 of Texas' 38 congressional seats. California Gov. Newsom responds California Gov. Gavin Newsom plans to call a special election to pass a ballot measure in the fall if Texas and Abbott pass their redistricting plan. Redistricting in California could counteract the Republican advantage created by Texas' new congressional map by swinging five seats for Democrats. The legislative package to create a new map in California has a trigger provision, meaning the map will only take effect if other states, like Texas, also redistrict. This means a Republican-led state, namely Texas, needs to enact a redrawn congressional map for California's redrawn map favoring Democrats to become active. The proposal also circumvents California's redistricting commission. California's state constitution grants the authority to redistrict to a redistricting commission. Voters in California granted this power to the commission by a vote in 2010. Newsom's proposal would override the commission when the law is triggered. The bill to authorize this redistricting plan is written to expire in 2030. Unlike Texas, which can pass a mid-decade redistricting plan purely through legislative action, California must change its state law which requires putting a measure before voters. "California will not sit idle as Trump and his Republican lapdogs shred our country's democracy before our very eyes," Newsom said in a statement. "In just six months, Trump's unchecked power has cost Americans billions and taken an ax to the greatest democracy we've ever known. This moment calls for urgency and action - that is what we are putting before voters this November, a chance to fight back against his anti-American ways." More states consider changes There are murmurs that lawmakers in more states are contemplating redistricting in response to Texas and California, including Missouri, New York, Illinois and Maryland, according to Justin Levitt, constitutional law professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. Illinois and Maryland are like Texas in that they do not need to change their state law to commence redistricting. "I don't think we're done with the states that have currently stepped forward. The push to draw as many partisan lines as you can is not Constitutional," Levitt told UPI. "None of this is good for democracy." Cindy O'Laughlin, Republican Missouri senate president pro tem, posted on social media that legislators are always discussing redrawing district maps but lawmakers will follow the lead of Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe. "I know the governor will always consider options to make sure our representation in Washington matches our conservative majority here at home," she posted. "There has been no decision made by the governor (who I just met with) and we will follow his lead of course. He is supportive of Speaker [Mike] Johnson in Washington and the Trump administration." Republicans control six of Missouri's eight congressional seats. New York has an independent redistricting commission like California. Overriding the commission would require a change to the state's constitution. This can be done by a legislative amendment being approved across two consecutive legislative sessions, making it impossible to pass before the midterm elections. The amendment would then need to face the voters. Lawmakers in Ohio are already required to pass new congressional maps ahead of the midterm elections. In 2018, voters approved Ohio Issue 1, changing the requirements to pass congressional redistricting maps as well as the standards those maps must meet. It requires Republicans and Democrats to come to an agreement on district maps, which they have yet to do. Lawmakers must pass a map with 60% approval by Sept. 30, with at least half the members of each party approving it. If they do not, the Ohio Redistricting Commission will be charged with redistricting by Oct. 31. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has not ruled out Democrats in his state redrawing their congressional maps in direct response to Texas' plan. "Texas has basically declared there are no rules and other states are responding saying, 'Well yeah, if you're going to have no rules we're not going to have any rules," Levitt said. "It's a little bit like spinning on the precipice of the Cuban Missile Crisis. If everybody launches, nobody likes the world afterward." How voters will respond Lawmakers in California and Texas are leaning on the results of past elections to determine how effective their new maps will be in generating the results they seek. Levitt said relying on past elections may not predict future results. "Texas is making some assumptions. The plan that they've put forward says that it's going to swing five seats relying largely on the 2020 or 2024 electorate," he said. "That may or may not be the electorate that shows up. President Trump's not going to be on the ballot and if the electorate looks more like 2018, I think the effort is going to be a little less successful." The party that does not hold control over the Oval Office tends to fare better in competitive districts during midterm elections, Hasen said. Democrats flipped two Texas seats held by Republicans in 2018 and held another seat in a competitive district. "The party of the president usually loses seats in the midterm and Trump, at least as of now, has a pretty low approval rating," Hasen said. It is no guarantee that voters in California will approve a measure to allow redistricting. It was the voters who passed the creation of the redistricting commission. Levitt said voters, regardless of party, tend to oppose changes to their elections that they perceive as taking their power away, such as gerrymandering. "Voters reliably hate it," Levitt said. "Voters have reliably taken power away from politicians to choose who the voters are, and returned the power to voters to choose who the politicians are." Voters in New York rejected an effort to modify its redistricting process in 2021, voting down a measure to change its redistricting commission's voting process. Legal recourse The redistricting map that the Texas legislature passed after the 2020 census remains the subject of a legal battle as plaintiffs challenge it on grounds that it dilutes the political power of people of color. The case, Fair Maps Texas Action Committee vs. Abbott, alleges that the map denies voters of color the equal opportunity to elect their preferred candidates as it was drawn using race as a predominant factor to discriminate against them. "The problem is the clock," Levitt said. "Texas has been fighting those claims in court for four years now. For four years they've managed to fight to a draw in court just by stalling." Legal intervention has long been the way to challenge partisan gerrymanders that further quiet marginalized voices. However, a 2019 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court casts a shadow over the redistricting battle that is bubbling in Texas, California and other states. In its majority opinion in the case Rucho vs. Common Cause, the high court ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims "present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts." "The framers were aware of electoral districing problems and considered what to do about them," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. "They settled on a characteristic approach, assigning the issue to the state legislatures, expressly checked and balanced by the federal Congress. At no point was there a suggestion that the federal courts had a role to play." The Supreme Court also weakened legal counters to discriminatory gerrymandering efforts in the 2013 case Shelby County vs. Holder. In that case, the court struck down a formula used under the Voting Rights Act to determine which states and jurisdictions must seek preclearance from the Justice Department to change election laws and voting maps. Sixteen states were subject to preclearance due to their histories of racially discriminatory voting practices. Texas and many other southern states were among those required to seek preclearance. Some jurisdictions in California and New York were also subject to preclearance requirements. Due to these Supreme Court decisions, Levitt is doubtful lawsuits will be effective in stopping redistricting plans from moving forward. "The Supreme Court doing away with the most effective medicine for those problems means that, purely based on timing, it's going to be awfully tough for a plaintiff, even with a good case, to get relief before the '26 elections," he said.
Fox News
38 minutes ago
- Fox News
DHS pulls funding from groups with ‘alleged terrorist ties' after watchdog report
Print Close By Morgan Phillips Published August 20, 2025 FIRST ON FOX: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is reviewing federal security grants for Muslim groups with "alleged terrorist ties" after a new report linked past funding to "extremist" organizations. According to a DHS document obtained by Fox News Digital, 49 projects "with alleged affiliations to terrorist activities" have already been canceled, a move the department estimates will save $8 million. The review primarily targets funding distributed through FEMA's Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP), which provides aid to churches, mosques, synagogues, and other faith-based institutions facing threats of hate-driven violence. The probe follows a report by the Middle East Forum, a pro-Israel conservative think tank, which claimed that more than $25 million in DHS and FEMA grants went to "terror-linked groups" between 2013 and 2023. COTTON CALLS ON IRS TO PULL MUSLIM ADVOCACY GROUP'S NONPROFIT STATUS A DHS official said the department is conducting its own independent review of funding but added, "We take the results of the MEF report very seriously and are thankful for the work of conservative watchdog groups." The report flagged a $100,000 grant in 2019 to the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Virginia, which Customs and Border Protection once described as a "mosque operating as a front for Hamas operatives in the U.S.," according to records obtained by the Investigative Project through the Freedom of Information Act. In response to the MEF's findings, DHS is reviewing all current and future contracts to ensure funds are not awarded to such organizations. Officials said the department is also examining ways to recover unspent funds. Funding for fiscal year 2024 has already been allocated. That includes $94 million for 500 Jewish organizations and another $110 million shared among 600 Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh and Jewish institutions. For fiscal year 2025, DHS said applicants will face tougher requirements to ensure a "robust" vetting process. "We don't want to be empowering groups that could be causing a threat to our community here in the United States," a DHS official said. The Middle East Forum's report also highlighted specific cases of funding that it claims went to groups with extremist ties. It said $10.3 million had gone to the Islamic Circle of North America, which the forum alleges is tied to the South Asian Islamist movement Jamaat-e-Islami. The report further cited $250,000 awarded to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which DHS has accused of having "Hamas ties." Another $750,000, according to the report, went to mosques in Michigan and Texas that DHS described as "outposts for Iran's revolutionary brand of Shi'a Islamism," including the Islamic Center of America and the Islamic House of Wisdom near Detroit, as well as the Islamic Ahlul Bayt Association in Austin. HOUSE COMMITTEE ALLEGES BIDEN ADMIN USED FUNDS TO BACK ANTI-GOVERNMENT PROTESTS IN ISRAEL CAIR told Fox News Digital it has no active federal contracts with DHS. "While our civil rights organization has no active federal grants that the Department could eliminate or cut, and while the government cannot ban American organizations from receiving federal grants based on their religious affiliation or their criticism of Israel's genocide in Gaza," a CAIR spokesperson said, "it's important to note that Kristi Noem's Department of Homeland Security is embarrassing President Trump by making decisions based on the ravings of the Middle East Forum, an Israel First hate website." FEMA has previously worked with CAIR, holding seminars to encourage participation in the NSGP program. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP But last week, CAIR urged organizations to withdraw from applying for DHS and FEMA grants — including the NSGP — unless DHS drops two new vetting rules. Those provisions require recipients to cooperate with immigration officials and prohibit them from running programs tied to diversity, equity, inclusion, or aid to undocumented immigrants, as well as from engaging in certain "discriminatory prohibited boycotts." Print Close URL
