A promising development in post-Assad Syria is the commitment of the Islamist groups that ousted Bashar al-Assad to fostering inclusive political institutions. So far, they have not excluded any political or social groups from participation. This approach, rooted in pragmatism and political calculation, has the potential to promote long-term stability.

Despite this positive momentum, a significant challenge remains: some Islamic groups or religious authorities may push for a religious government, arguing that Islamic tradition mandates absolute obedience to political leaders, with no historical precedent for consultation or democratic consent. To counter this notion, I propose an alternative interpretation of Quranic teachings on governance—one that justifies inclusive and participatory politics in Islamic societies.

Since the late 19th century, Muslim intellectuals and scholars have debated whether Islam is compatible with democratic institutions. Historically, Islamic societies have been governed by authoritarian and despotic systems. The Sultans of the Ottoman Empire, the Caliphs of the Abbasid Empire, the Shahs of the Safavid Empire, and numerous other rulers exercised absolute power, legitimized in part by Islamic institutions and religious authorities (Ulama). In the 20th century, as European colonial rule in the Middle East came to an end, these absolute regimes transformed into authoritarian republics and monarchies. In some cases, such as Iran, religious clerics assumed control, establishing Islamic republics that remained authoritarian.

While some Muslim countries, such as Turkey and Malaysia, have made strides toward democratic or semi-democratic governance, they have done so without explicitly drawing from Islamic teachings. Consequently, many political movements seeking to govern in the name of Islam assume that, according to early Islamic traditions and the Quran, rulers should wield absolute power. They justify authoritarianism using Quranic teachings and Hadith, particularly a specific verse from Surah Nisa verse 59, which calls for obedience to Allah, the Prophet Muhammad, and “ulu’l-amr”—interpreted as rulers and political leaders.

If one relies solely on this verse and similar passages, an authoritarian system appears consistent with Islam. Under such a system, once a ruler assumes power, he remains in control and can transfer authority to his successor without input from ordinary citizens. However, this call to obedience is not the sole Quranic guideline on governance. Two other key verses provide an alternative foundation for political organization in Islamic societies.

The first is Surah Al-Hujurat, 49:13: “Human beings, we created you all from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another. Verily the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is the most God-fearing of you. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware.” This verse underscores the fundamental equality of all human beings, implying that all citizens of an Islamic society should enjoy equal political rights.

The second relevant verse is Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:30: “Remember (when) your Lord said to the angels: ‘I am setting on the earth a vicegerent.’ The angels asked: ‘Will you set therein one who will cause disorder and corruption on it and shed blood, while we glorify You with Your praise (proclaiming that You are absolutely free from any defect and that all praise belongs to You exclusively,) and declare that You alone are all-holy and to be worshipped as God and Lord?’ He said: ‘Surely I know what you do not know.’”

The usage of “vicegerent” suggests that all human beings share political responsibility as God’s representatives. This duty implies active participation in governance and decision-making.

Combining these teachings leads to several key conclusions. First, all citizens in an Islamic political system should have equal political rights. Second, as representatives of God, they have a duty to participate in governance. No individual has the right to deny another’s political rights, nor should anyone accept political oppression.

The most critical function of any political system is leadership selection and transition. Since Islamic belief holds that only God can appoint a ruler, and divine will is not explicitly revealed, the logical alternative is a collective decision-making process among humans. This necessitates a system where leadership selection occurs through broad participation, and when consensus is unattainable, majority rule (50% plus one) becomes the most Quranically sound mechanism for governance.

Islam’s call for obedience to rulers (Surah Nisa verse 59) is thus conditional upon legitimate selection. The primary source of political legitimacy in an Islamic society must be majority approval. Leadership transitions should also be subject to majority support. While majority rule is a core component of democracy, it alone does not constitute a fully democratic system. The Quran does not explicitly address individual freedoms, such as religious liberty, which are also fundamental to modern democracy. However, it does reject dictatorship and oligarchy, emphasizing the importance of collective governance.

By grounding political participation in Islamic teachings, post-Assad Syria’s new leaders can reinforce their commitment to an inclusive and democratic political system—one that is both pragmatic and deeply rooted in the principles of their faith.