Arguing the Just War in Islam - Book Report/Review Example

8 April Book Review – Arguing the Just War in Islam Introduction The book by John Kelsay reviews Islamic concept of fighting for religion or Jihad. The author tires to study Islamic sources that lay the basis for Islamic laws known as the Sharia. The sources that make up this law comprises of the Holy Quran and the Sunna or simply the sayings or actions of Prophet Muhammad during his lifetime (Standke 3). The author links Jihad to be equivalent of modern term “just war”. The Sharia lays down parameters and conditions to implement Jihad as per the Quran and the Sunna, but it has been wrongly understood by many and misinterpreted in both the West and the Muslims world. Lately, the Islamic militants have used Jihad as an umbrella to collect Muslims and to organize offensive activities against the non-Muslims. They have tried to justify their actions as per the Sharia, but the author makes an effort to study the Islamic laws and make clear the parameters or conditions which calls for this act. The book is divided into six main chapters. Furthermore, the application of the concepts by the author will be discussed and compared with other theories. Arguments made in each chapter are discussed in detail as under; 2. Sources The author argues that Islam has not been understood clearly by all and different people interpret it as per their own thinking and mentality. The word Islam means submission to God and to follow His teachings. The instructions as per Quran are to do good and in reward achieve heaven, whereas hell in case of bad. Prophet Muhammad was born in Arab and in the initial phase of Islam fought few wars to protect the newly established religion. He inculcated teachings of piety and the fear of God for those who did wrong. The Kaba (cube) at Mecca was chosen as a pilgrimage site and the area was claimed to be for Islam only. The Kaba was under control of non-Muslims and diplomacy was tried. But the city was liberated after a military campaign by the Prophet Muhammad. After Mecca, Muhammad wrote letters to states beyond Arab, inviting them to accept Islam. These were aimed to take rulers out of ignorance and spread teachings of Islam to the people. After Muhammad, the religion spread to Palestine, Turkey, Egypt and some portion of Iraq by military campaigns under his successors Abu Bakr and Umar. The campaigns were based to spread the influence of Islam in regions outside the Arab. 3. Sharia Reasoning After the spread of Islam beyond Arab, it had philosophers and great scientists. The scholars wrote many books on manners and everyday etiquettes. The Sharia or simply Islamic law was made as per the teachings of Quran and Prophet Muhammad. Scholars were well aware of the teachings and judged people as per the law. Quran was read after every prayer and everyone was aware of the instructions of God. The third Caliph after Abu Bakr and Umar was Uthman. He was assassinated by a group of Muslims. He was followed by Ali, who could not negotiate with this group. After Ali, Muslims were divided into group and a generation later, two main sects Shia and Sunni emerged. The Sunnis controlled area of Syria, whereas, the Shias controlled Iraq. The sects divided the understanding of Sharia among Muslims. Furthermore, as Islam expanded to regions where the native language was not Arabic, the Sharia was confined to few who knew the language and were themselves not united on the understanding of the laws as per Quran and Sunna. The laws which are not in Quran and Sunnah are to be decided by mutual consensus. The Quran has always been in its original form and unchanged. It was compiled at the time of Prophet Muhammad, whereas the Sunna was not compiled in any definite form. Different scholars gathered and compiled the Sunna after gathering information and varifying it from different sources. The Sharia law was therefore, compiled and implemented firmly by the twelfth century. It was made to guide people and make them follow the right path as intended by God. People were judged by this law and the society had its system based on Islamic principles. Zakat or giving away 2.5 percent of saving to the needy was implemented along with other laws which made it a complete lifestyle. But as Muslims started spreading towards Spain and the Subcontinent, the empires started implementing the Sharia law in a different way. As the Muslim empire grew more, emperors in different areas declared their territories as non-Muslim states. Groups were being formed to fight against those who refused to abide by the Sharia law. Later, the British occupation of the Subcontinent bought forward the right for Muslims to free their land of foreign occupation and to fight against the foreign intruders. The Ottoman Empire also fell and was divided. It was considered as the main hub of Muslim culture and governed the complete Muslim empire as per the Islamic Sharia law. The Ottoman was equivalent of the Vatican City. Its fall created a gap and the Sharia reasoning was democratized in different areas. Different countries implemented Sharia at different levels. 4. Politics, Ethics and War in Pre Modern Islam The Quran justified military action as well as the Sunna of Prophet Muhammad. Therefore, as per Muslims, it is their right to secure their homelands to be free to practice their religion in a way intended by God. As per the Sharia law, the Muslim ruler of a state is responsible to declare war and each Muslim is supposed to fight for the religion. This can be imposed when their homeland is under threat and their land is under threat of foreign occupation. Furthermore, the ruler can also initiate a war against Muslim groups who have become rebel and are fighting against the state or even another Muslim army. The ruler is chosen by the people and represents the Muslim community under his state. He is responsible for protection and implementation of laws as per the Sharia. Muhammad made clear the rules about cheating, treachery or targeting of children and also the innocent in between the fighting areas to be unharmed. Quran guides the warriors to fight in the way of God, and not to exceed the bounds. Direct or intentional killing of innocent is not allowed. The noncombatant society is not to be harmed during the war. These are similar to modern day ethics of human rights. The author takes into account the Ottoman Empire and its way of war. The most noticeable thing is the respect towards etiquettes of war. The blind, slaves, children and servants were unharmed. Women and children who did not take up arms were left alone. Muslims were not supposed to fight against each other, whether in different armies. Al Mawardi was the first of the Caliphate from the Ottoman to practice war as per Sharia, but his successor Al Sulami was not always concerning Shaia reasoning. He produced the book of Jihad, which evoked Muslims to fight against any incursion and laid emphasis on the Muslim leaders to not tolerate any invasion on their land. The Crusades started and every Muslim was officially ordered to fight against the incursion. These were perhaps a defensive or imposed wars. Furthermore, collective Muslim system working through different states can be seen by an example. Syria was attacked by the Franks and all Muslims were called in to aid the fight against this incursion. So the Sharia reasoning in brief calls for a unity among states and the ruler to declare war against any foreign incursion of even rebel groups against Islam. Furthermore, states are to aid each other at time of need. Jihad is declared by the ruler and it is an individual duty to fight against any incursion, but to remain in limits and to respect the ethics of war. 5. Armed Resistance and Islamic Tradition Since the last three centuries Muslim societies have been under stress. Non-Muslims have the military power and many of these societies have practiced Jihad in one way or another to fight against the influence of non-Muslims. The Islamic scholars use the justification to protect their lands from foreign invasion so as to keep Muslim traditions alive and the freedom to practice their religion. Jihad, when declared is the responsibility of individuals and in turn the uprising increases as public groups gather Muslims to fight in an organized manner. The author gives an example of Palestinians. Hamas is involved in gathering people to fight collectively against Israel forces. The Arab states were also involved on basis that Muslim states need to help others at time of invasion from any other foreign power. Furthermore, groups like Al Qaida and Egyptian Islamic Group by Al Zawahri are just few of the example of groups organizing to fight against non-Muslims invading their fellow states. This idea gradually increased in magnitude and Muslims now are in large numbers organized and fighting against the US forces. The US is being targeted for committing war crimes and violating war ethics. The idea that the US is invading the Muslim land and hindering their freedom to practice religion continues to spread and the Muslims justify war by declaring US as enemy of the God and the Muslims. Osama Bin Laden argued that the Saudi government is supporting US and they are indirectly helping the country which is involved in committing war crimes and imposed war on Muslim states. He organized people under the same idea and the teachings of Jihad included in the fundamental Sharia law to fight against any invasion, motivated large amount of Muslims. He made Muslim countries an arena for Jihad operations because he was getting support from the Muslims under the argument that seemed to justify the Jihad operations against the US. But these operations targeted innocent people, whether Muslims or non-Muslims. His actions were against the teachings of Quran and the war ethics taught by the Sharia law. His argument that those killed in World Trade Centre attacks were a mere exchange for the ones killed in Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya and Afghanistan was not supported by Islamic scholars and his actions were announced to be illegal as per the Sharia law. 6. Military Action and Political Authority Militant groups have organized resistance against non-Muslim forces for decades and call for Muslims over the world to aid in their cause. Though, the groups are seen by some to be political entities and their declaration of Jihad is not considered to be state announced. Muslims, therefore, had a mixed opinion about the matter. Rulers like Ayatollah Khomeini on the other hand declared state Jihad against the US in case of any incursion. His speeches motivated Iranians and they were organized under state. That is why any incursion against Iran would mean every Muslim in the state to participate in the war against the US. The Islamic teaching as per the Sharia instructs to deal in peace and to provide equal rights to all including Jews, Christians and other living under the Muslim government. The Islamic militant groups on the other hand invite these non-Muslims within the state to accept Islam. They cannot be forced to accept and military action is not allowed as per the laws. But they are recruiting on the basis of the argument that non-Muslims are threatening their freedom and the land which is sacred to them. They highlight the unequal behavior of non-Muslims towards the Muslim states to be suppressive and hurting the pride of Islam. The fact remains that as per the Sharia law only the ruler of the state can declare Jihad. The militants’ claims are controversial. Though the Muslim rulers are criticized but they are chosen as per the people and Quran states the same about rulers. That is, the rulers are chosen among the people and they represent the society. Muslim democrats are to take into account the modern political arguments and democracy has been a major agenda in Muslim societies as per the Sharia. The Iran revolution and more importantly the 9/11 attacks represent a major shift in Islamic militancy. The groups have declared Jihad on their own decision and the Muslim democrats have differences among opinions. 7. Application If we consider the main principles of the Sharia law, these can be compared to many of the theories presented about just war. Furthermore, the laws to some extent coincide with many actions by other historic societies. First, Islamic Sharia law supports democracy. Plato talks about philosopher king being most effective in governing a society. The Muslim societies in the eleventh and twelfth centuries had philosopher kings and the laws were made and discussed during that time (Bregman 13). Muslim societies were at the peak of Sharia reasoning. However, the situation now has changed and as discussed above the Muslims are not satisfied with their democrats for not representing their societies as per the Sharia. They are accused of looking after their own interests, misusing power and the resulting governance is exactly opposite to the concept of philosopher king by Plato. To further look into the issue, as per concept of Hierocles concentric circles, each individual is to take care of his family and then extending forward as the circles increases to state and consequently the complete mankind. Similarly, in Islamic society as per the Sharia, the Muslims are responsible first to their families and then the state. The states are responsible for taking care of humanity inside and out of its parameters towards other states. Muslim states have the responsibility as per Sharia to protect and aid others. Though, this requirement of unity cannot be seen in Muslim societies as well as states. Theories of Augestine coincide with the Sharia, that is, wars should be as few as possible and against injustice and must only be defensive. He lays three conditions for justified war that are the authority of the ruler, a just cause and rightful intent to avoid evil. These conditions coincide perfectly with the parameters of the Sharia law. In a similar way Aquinas double effect concept coincides with the Sharia banning intentional evil and setting bounds for warriors, though any unintentional acts are permissible. The Sharia law partially agrees with Machiavelli’s political morality and Bodin’s sovereignty theories (Rosenthal 107). The law has never justified the use of unethical means in war. The society has to move along with political interests, but there are certain bounds put in place by the law. These bind the ruler to move as per the ethics of Islamic teachings. Furthermore, Islam encourages rulers to take physical part in war when Jihad is declared. The CuisusRegio theory is also not supported by the Sharia. Rulers can invite, but not force their own religion or belief, in particular to people within their own states. The ruler also has a choice to choose war and its magnitude. Historic accounts have suggested that Islamic armies went to war with more than required efforts. It is also contrary to Sun Tzu’s least effort theory. The Islamic ruler is responsible to avoid the war, but if it is inevitable or imposed, he can choose the effort required to solve the issue. The most interesting theory that can be applied to Muslims and the Sharia is perhaps the Martin Luther’s papal sovereignty. The Muslims have demonstrated in the past with the overthrowing of the Ottoman Empire (Ankerberg and Caner 54). Presently, the Muslim states have their own sets of laws and the Sharia is not used by states to judge or govern people. Small groups have resisted the state rulers and declared Jihad as per their own philosophy and thinking of the Sharia law. The Clausewitzian dictum seems to be applicable to the current political situation of the Muslim rulers (Bayman 40). Iran-Iraq war and other issue indicate political agendas behind military use. Though, this is against the teaching of Islam and the Sharia. 8. Conclusion The book presents an interesting insight into development of Islamic Sharia law and its history. The author has included verses from Quran and the Sunna. Early development of the Sharia was very interesting to read and presents an unbiased opinion on the development of argument about just war in Islamic societies. Justification for Jihad by militant groups is proved to be against the teachings of the Sharia. The author has given examples along with very well organized development of justification for Islamic fundamentalist groups and the States as well. Overall, the book is an interesting read and must be read to clarify the teachings of Islam and the formation of its law through time. Works Cited Ankerberg, John and Emir Caner. Islam and Jihad. Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 2009. Print. Bregman, Jay. Synesius of Cyrene. California: University of California Press, 1982. Print. Standke, Corinna. Sharia – The Islamic Law. San Francisco: GRIN Publishing, 2008. Print. Rosenthal, Erwin. Political Thought in Medieval Islam: An Introductory Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958. Print. Bayman, Henry. The Secret of Islam: Love and Law in the Religion of Ethics. California: North Atlantic Books, 2003. Print. Read More