The fairness of the case means not the inevitability of armed conflict

As we believe that possessing the cultural right does not necessarily mean the clash of civilizations:

We also see that the fairness of the case does not mean the inevitability of the armed conflict.  Similarly, just cases do not, of necessity, mean that they are to be won by any means whatsoever.

It is out of wisdom that right holders keep their rights. It is also wise to attempt to keep their record clear and spotless. They should be discreet enough to avoid all that can waste their rights, harm the just nature of their cases and harm their reputation.

It is prudent for right holders to take the right choice in defending their equitable case. The convenience of this option depends first of all on its legitimacy. Second, it depends on its compatibility with real world. It should be capable of safeguarding interests and fencing off mischief in the best way it can.

Inevitability means a sole-way approach. This leads to the inability of this approach to deal with the ever-changing world of reality. Thus, the belief in the inevitability of the armed conflict means that there is no other legitimate alternative in the policy that heeds reality (Islam) and accomplishment of the best for Muslims and Islam. This goes counter to the guidance of the Prophet (PBUH) and overlooks many of the orders, directives, Prophetic options like patience, reconciliation, co-existence, alliance and the like put by Allah for Muslims.

The inevitability of the armed conflict is to deem the role of the mind annulled. It is to be noted that mind is the axis of the Islamic Law policy and the jurisprudence of comparison. Allah Almighty urges us to safeguard interests and fend off the evil. If any disagreement erupts, the approach that safeguards the most interests and fends off the worst of evils is to be adopted. This is not to be applied but through mental processes relying on the rules and objectives of the Islamic Law and taking the facts of real world into account.

To say that armed conflict is the sole way, is to state that the cases of Islam do not come victorious but through the use of force. Yet, the Prophet (PBUH) did establish the greatest state on the face of earth in Medina by means of the right call, wisdom, good admonition, his patience, forgiveness and tolerance.

The most serious result of assuming the inevitability of armed conflict is the lack of resilience in thinking and failing to catch up with the upgrades that never come to an end. He, who locks himself in the idea of the inevitability of armed conflict, cannot catch up with the upgrades at his time. He cannot even take a baby step towards the future till he gets rid of this belief and adopts methods that can push him forward. By this, he may catch up with what he has missed. If not, the case would be beyond despair.

Armed conflict can be one among other options, still not the sole option. It is not always the best way of defending Islam and advocating its causes. There are many incidents proving this in the history of Islam in the past and nowadays.

Revolting against the ruler: lessons to heed

We searched through the records of history and the lessons to heed therein. We also read thoroughly the history of the Islamic movements: old and contemporary ones. Through a comprehensive and studied evaluation of our history, specifically the periods of bitter fighting in which we engaged in the eighties and nineties of the nineteenth century, we conclude that the armed revolution against the rulers in the Muslim and Arab countries is highly dangerous. It has serious consequences and devastating results.

Based on our long experience and the experiences of those before us and those still to come, we stress that the armed rebellion against those rulers is a battle off the proper field. This can cause the religion to disappear, the rights to be neglected and man's dignity to be disrespected. It can also lead to the prevalence of injustice.

We have gone through the history of the rebellion against rulers and regimes. We pondered long on their results: good and bad. In one of the incidents, Al Hussein bin Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and all his family were killed. They were abandoned by people though he is the master of the Paradise youth.  Reading this incident, we were overpowered with the pangs of pain and sorrow visualizing the city of the Prophet (PBUH) vulnerable. Blood was shed in the medina and body organs were dissipated here and there. Further, the swords of Yazid’s army were beheading the people of Medina with no mercy. Our hearts broke reading about the eminent Companion Abdullah Ibn El Zubair, the son of Asmaa and grandson of Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with all of them. It rendered our hearts to read about his crucifixion and the pilgrims’ mutilation of his dead body.

We read about the pilgrims getting killed in the Sacred House of Allah, the Ka’ba, while it was being showered with catapult shells. We actually saw the map of the Islamic world smeared with blood and dyed with its purple color in Algeria, and the city of Hama.

We sought guidance in the light of historical lessons and the wisdom precepts therein. From those, we learned a lot. We learned that most of those who rebelled against the rulers in old and present times are the pick of youth: the elite amongst men. Besides, the aim of their rebellion was to maintain usurped rights and alleviate injustice. However, neither lawful rights were established, nor injustice was eased. For a measure, these youth never came back to their Call or even their homes and families. Some of them got killed, others became homeless and a third group was dumped in prisons.

All this suffering never rendered Islam stronger or more immune. Nevertheless, it left Islam helpless and weakened by its inflicted wounds. The religion was aching for its children. However, it was not even capable of defending itself, let alone fighting his real foes and enemies.

As a result, we believe that armed combat between Muslims incurs but great losses on Islam, Muslims and all Muslim countries. Add to this the fact that armed combat is the number-one reason for the super powers interference in the Muslims' affairs and messing with Muslims' destiny. Armed combat became more of a pretext for interference after the new laws enacted by America. By these laws, America can well intervene with our affairs. An example of these laws is the law protecting religious and ethnic minorities as well as the resolutions about dealing precipitous blows against any state or group that does not comply with the demands of the American administration or goes counter to its interests. This is called "the war against terrorism".

Implementing sovereignty regulations is the job of rulers:

For us, enforcing sovereignty regulations; such as war declaration, executing penalties, and implementing the non-Muslims' poll tax; is not the business of individuals or groups. It is rather a right exclusive to the Muslim ruler: whether pious or not. He who contends with the ruler on this right is a usurper of the ruler's office, task and right.

The impartial Islamic Jurisprudence allotted these duties to the rulers because they are the ones most capable of putting them into force. Also they implement them in the best way congruent with what Allah wills and the Islamic Law aims at. They master in this regard by virtue of the authorities they enjoy, their regal and judicial abilities, the advanced instruments they deploy and their implementation powers.

Back to About Us