For more background, please refer to the Syrian Islamic Council, which was published yesterday.

The effort to establish the Syrian Islamic Council (SIC) as the central Syrian religious authority within the opposition has proved to be contentious, arousing hostile reactions on the part of individuals who failed to secure positions on the board or in the council at large. One of the most vocal of these detractors was Salafi television preacher Adnan al-Aroor, who accused the SIC of harboring pro-regime and pro-Shia figures.

The animosity of the notoriously Saudi-aligned al-Aroor toward the SIC must be situated in the broader context of the SIC’s distance from Riyadh and alignment with the Qatar-Turkey axis. The League of the Ulema of Sham (LUS), which constitutes one-third of the council’s board, and the SIC held their inaugural meetings in Doha and Istanbul, respectively. The SIC meeting was organized with the support of the Humanitarian Relief Foundation, an NGO associated with Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party.

In a November 2013 interview with the Turkish news agency Anadol, LUS Vice President Sheikh Osama al-Rifai stressed that “except for Qatar and Turkey,” the so-called Friends of Syria, an alliance of largely Gulf and Western countries, is “plotting against the Syrian people.” Likewise, Sururi Salafis, activist Salafis who differ from their quietist counterparts in their acceptance of contentious politics, are distrusted by Saudi Arabia and, accordingly, enjoy cordial relations with Qatar. Therefore, in the struggle between Riyadh and Doha for control of the Syrian opposition, the establishment of the SIC clearly weighs in favor of the second contender.