However, I also note that the main, unresolved question regards the group's authocratic approach to governance and the fact that it has yet to prove that it is actually willing to tolerate real, political opposition and to engage in some form of power-sharing (END)

Looking ahead, I conclude somewhat optimistically, given HTS' remarkable development in recent years and its repeated willingness to adjust its policies based on public dissent (5/6)

Yet, this was largely restricted to what we call "non-maximalist" demands, f.e. release of prisoners, lifting of roadblocks, etc. When protests demanded more far-reaching changes, HTS tended to act repressively. Still, even in these cases, they sometimes made concessions if protests continued (4/6)

Especially after breaking its ties with al-Qaeda in 2016, HTS has been relatively flexible in terms of addressing public dissent. On several occasions, we could document that they fulfilled the demands voiced by protesters in large-scale, public demonstrations (3/6)

My argument is based on previous, joint work with Isak Svensson Nanar Hawach Luís Martínez Lorenzo & Daniel Finnbogason for our 'Confronting the Caliphate' book (lnkd.in/eu4mccSb), for which we studied hundreds of anti-HTS protests & conducted interviews with Syrian activists (2/6)