The New Syria: A Dive Into Trump’s Meeting With Syria’s New Leader, Ahmad Al-Sharaa

In one of the most unexpected geopolitical developments of 2025, the U.S. President Donald Trump met with Syria’s new leader, Ahmad Al-Sharaa, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The summit, held on May 14, marks a turning point in U.S. involvement in the Middle East — both in diplomatic orientation and strategic ambition. The meeting signals not just a thaw in relations between Washington and Damascus, but also the launch of a new chapter in American Middle East policy that redefines allies, boundaries, enemies, and economic interests.

The figure at the center of this dramatic shift, Ahmad al-Sharaa, is himself a paradox. Once branded a terrorist by the U.S. government, with a $10 million bounty on his head for leading the Al-Nusra Front — al-Qaeda’s former affiliate in Syria —  Al-Sharaa now presides over a fragile coalition attempting to steer Syria out of the rubble of a long and devastating civil war.

After the downfall of Assad’s regime in late 2024, Al-Sharaa capitalized on power vacuums and brokered uneasy alliances with tribal leaders, former regime defectors, and even Western-backed moderates. His transformation from jihadist commander to pragmatic reformer has been accompanied by symbolic gestures aimed at the West — including condemnations of extremism, proposals for democratic reforms, and offers to collaborate with U.S. counterterrorism initiatives.

Yet, many remain skeptical. Human rights groups point out that Al-Sharaa’s forces have been implicated in “abuses during the war”. While he speaks the language of reform, the institutional checks, political inclusivity, and civic guarantees remain lacking. Critics argue that “the U.S. has traded long-term stability and accountability for short-term influence”. Meanwhile, other experts believe that Al-Sharaa has sincerely transformed and -despite the temporary chaotic actions in Syria- he’s on the path to building a prosper and developed Syria, where all its people can play a role.

Trump’s decision to meet with Al-Sharaa — and more importantly, to lift U.S. sanctions on Syria — represents a major reorientation of American policy. After decades of diplomatic isolation, Syria is being brought back into the U.S. sphere of influence, largely through the mechanism of economic incentives and regional deal-making.

In Riyadh, Trump painted a glowing picture of Al-Sharaa, calling him a “strong and visionary leader” and reportedly referring to him as “young, attractive, and media savvy”. The US president appears eager to recast himself as a peacemaker in the region — a narrative that not only appeals to his voter base at home but also elevates his international stature at a time when he’s eyeing another term in office. Critics warn that this “normalization at all costs” strategy could embolden other regional strongmen to leverage conflict for legitimacy. But Trump has framed the meeting as a “win-win” — opening Syria to Western capital, checking Iranian influence, enhancing the American influence in the Middle-East, and creating a new ally in a volatile region.

Economic interests are central to this rapprochement. Syria, devastated by over a decade of war, represents both a humanitarian crisis and a massive reconstruction opportunity. According to Trump’s aides, the U.S. has already drafted proposals for public-private partnerships in sectors ranging from energy and construction to telecom and agriculture. Meanwhile, a multi-billion-dollar energy deal involving Qatari gas, Turkish infrastructure firms, and American engineering giants is also in motion. The plan, reportedly backed by the Gulf sovereign wealth funds, could deliver up to 50% of Syria’s power needs within five years. This pivot to economic diplomacy suggests that Trump sees reconstruction not as a post-conflict duty, but as a market-driven project in which American corporations can outbid Russian or Chinese competitors — all while reshaping the region’s political order.

The role of Gulf monarchies in orchestrating this shift is essential no doubt. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar have spent years seeking to draw Syria out of Iran’s orbit and into the Sunni Arab consensus. Al-Sharaa’s willingness to align with Gulf powers has made this moment possible. Riyadh, in particular, is emerging as a diplomatic broker and financier. The summit hosted in the Saudi capital was reportedly the product of months of back-channel negotiations involving Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), Qatari officials, and former Trump advisor Thomas Barrack.

The U.S.-Syria thaw is not without consequences. Chief among the concerned is Israel, which views the legitimization of Al-Sharaa as “a strategic risk”. Although Al-Sharaa has signaled openness to diplomatic normalization with Israel, he has yet to take concrete steps — and his past rhetoric suggests a more ambiguous posture. A senior Israeli official, speaking anonymously to Haaretz, described the Riyadh summit as “a reckless gamble that endangers Israel’s northern border”. Meanwhile, Iran – long Assad’s primary patron – has condemned the meeting as an “imperialist scheme.” Tehran’s influence in Syria has received a massive blow and Iran is still trying to digest what happened. But in any case, Iran’s influence does not seems to be back to Syria at all. Besides, Al-Sharaa’s pivot toward the Gulf-West axis may further isolate Iran in the whole Levant region.

To conclude, Donald Trump’s meeting with Ahmad Al-Sharaa is more than a diplomatic photo-op; it’s a calculated gamble that the future of the Middle East lies not in the old paradigms of alliances and enmities, but in economic integration, expanded influence and transactional politics. If Al-Sharaa delivers on his promises, Syria could emerge as an impressive case study in post-conflict transformation, and the US will score a new achievement in its bigger Middle East strategy. Such a scenario will also wipe-out a decent part of the US failure memories in Iraq and in Libya. Still, the big question remains: How much Israel would be comfortable with such a winning scenario in Syria?