- This article investigates the principles of force in Islamic warfare as defined by Islamic jurisprudence. It contrasts these principles with the practices of the Zionist regime.
- It delves into the misrepresentation of Islam’s stance on war, portraying Muslim men as bloodthirsty warmongers.
Prophet Mohammed (saw) was a Military Genius
Mohammed (saw’s) exceptional strategic acumen in matters of warfare in matters of warfare has not only etched an enduring legacy in history but also serves as a subject of meticulous examination by eminent contemporary military historians.
Notably, Richard Gabriel, a world-renowned military historian with a history of collaboration with the CIA and FBI, lauded the tactical prowess of Prophet Mohammed (saw) in warfare. He asserted:
"This tactic of deception used by Prophet Mohammed (saw) (in war) is amongst the greatest tactical deceptions in ancient history!"
Protection or Civilians and non-combatants
The tenets of Islamic law ensure the safeguarding of civilians and non-combatants, mandating that engagement on the battlefield be exclusively directed towards enemy combatants. Deliberate harm to civilians and non-combatants is strictly prohibited during hostilities, a principle succinctly articulated in the verse which asserts:
"And fight in the way of God those who fight against you and do not transgress, indeed God does not like transgressors."
(21.90)
10th-century polymath, Muslim theologian, and scholar, Al-Razi (a. 1209), defines al-muqatilin (combatants) in the following verse:
"They must be taking part in the fighting; anyone who is willing or prepared to fight cannot be described as a combatant, except in metaphor, until they enter into combat.”
Furthermore, if an adversary withdraws from conflict or seeks refuge within Muslim territory, either explicitly or implicitly, they are not to be targeted.
Several Hadiths of the Prophet Mohammed (saw) expressly prohibit the targeting of women, children, the elderly, ‘usafã’ (those employed by the enemy), and ashãb al-sawami’ (monks or religious hermits). The term ‘usafã’ refers to individuals hired by the enemy for noncombatant tasks on the battlefield, such as attending to belongings and animals. Extending this prohibition, attacking medical personnel (both civilian and military) and other noncombatant support personnel accompanying forces is also forbidden, as long as they refrain from engaging in military operations.
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah succinctly restates the Islamic stance on permissible targets during warfare as follows: “Muslims must fight those who attack them, but not those who do not attack them.”
Conversely, this week we observed how the actions of the Zionist regime epitomise this egregious violation against Muslims. IDF soldiers were filmed obstructing paramedics from treating patients and subsequently attacking the patients themselves.
Ethical Armament in Warfare according to Islamic Jurists
Following October 7th, Human Rights Watched urged Israel to cease using white phosphorus, particularly in populated areas. Lama Fakih, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch, emphasised the risks, stating, ‘Any time that white phosphorus is used in crowded civilian areas, it poses a high risk of excruciating burns and lifelong suffering.’ White phosphorous is burns down to the bone, worsen wounds, enter the bloodstream, and lead to organ failure, often with fatal consequences.
The distinguished Hanafi jurist al-Shaybäni (d.805) permitted the use of poison-tipped arrows because they were more effective in defeating the enemy.
We discern a profound disparity between the precision of an arrow striking a combatant and the indiscriminate targeting of non-combatant women and children with white phosphorus powder. This practice, carried out by Israel in Palestine and Lebanon, is a grave concern highlighted by Human Rights Watch.
Protection of property
Jursits al-Shäfi’i(d. 820) and Ibn Hazm (d. 1064) adjudicated that inflicting harm upon living property, such as horses, cattle, and bees, for purposes other than sustenance, constituted torture, which is unequivocally prohibited in Islam. Jurists did however authorised the targeting of enemy horses when employed by warriors in combat, as these animals were considered military assets in such contexts.
On the contrary, in February, Dr. Yehoshua Shakdi, Chief Scientist of Israel, issued an order for the killing of a thousand stray dogs due to their recurrent attacks on the IDF.
Prohibition Against Enemy Mutilation
One of the numerous Prophetic Hadiths that forbid the mutilation of enemies includes the following:
“Do not loot, do not be treacherous and do not mutilate” [“lã taghlu wa la taghdur wa lã tumathilu”].4 The prohibition of these three acts exemplifies the principle of humanity in the context of armed conflicts.
In a staggering contrast, Israel beheads children.
Treatment of prisoners
During the battle of Badr, The Prophet instructed for the prisoners to be treated well, saying: “Observe good treatment towards the prisoners.”
In stark contrast, Palestinian prisoners are subjected to naked torture while Israeli civilians film them, callously finding amusement in their suffering.
Handling of Deceased Remains
“If Muslims do not bury the dead bodies of their enemy, the bodies will decompose or be eaten by beasts, which would be tantamount to mutilation,” as affirmed by the Andalusian jurist Ibn Hazm (d. 1064). Furthermore, it is reported that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) used to bury dead bodies without adverse distinction.
On the other hand, on May 8th, Palestinian Civil Defence worker, Rami Dababesh told the BBC how:
“We’ve extracted martyrs, many of whom are decomposed and completely unidentifiable,” as he stood by a line of white plastic body bags at al-Shifa.
“We’ve found corpses of women, children and individuals without heads as well as torn body parts,” he added.
Four mass graves have been uncovered at the site, with Palestinian search teams saying that several hundred bodies have been found.
