Luring Muslims into wanton violence and
wars in the name of Jihad is against Islam
By Ahmad T. Momoh
Special to USAfricaonline.com
USAfrica The Newspaper, Houston
NigeriaCentral.com
The
Black Business Journal
How, for
instance, can the attack on the World
Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001, which
innocent lives including Muslims were wasted and property worth
billions of dollars destroyed be supported or justified as a form of
Jihad? How can the activities of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the
invasion of Kuwait by Iraq and the resultant crises be accepted as a
form of Jihad? And how can the Palestinian Intifada or uprising and
the Hamas or Hezbollah guerilla warfare be justified as Jihad? Are
these conflicts meant to win more souls for Islam? Can the frontiers
of Islam be expanded in an atmosphere of insecurity and wanton
destruction? How do Muslims benefit from these wars? The truth of the
situation is that there are other hidden motives behind these
conflicts other than the desire for Jihad, and the whole world must
join hands to uncover the hidden motives and find a lasting solution.
The call for Jihad is commonly used as a cover and a bait to attract
or lure Muslims into these fratricidal wars. This is an unacceptable
approach.
For some time now, the world has witnessed a manifestation of one
form of violent crisis or the other which directly or indirectly
involved many adherents of the Islamic faith either as aggressors or
as victims. Most of the flash points of violence in the world today
are in places of either dominant Muslim population or where a
minority Muslim population is pitched against the existing social
order. For example, the Middle East conflict involving Israel and
Palestine, the Chechnya crisis in the former Soviet Union, the Kosovo
episode in the Balkans, the Kashmir rebellion along the Indian and
Pakistan border, the instability in the
Persian
Gulf, centered around Iraq and Iran, the frequent uprising in
Indonesia, the civil war in Sudan, the Sharia question in Nigeria,
the guerilla uprising in Algeria, the Somalia-Ethiopia crisis in the
horn of Africa, and more recently the unprovoked attack on the World
Trade Center and the Pentagon in the USA, which has been linked to
the activities of the al Qaeda organization-an Islamic organization
harbored and nurtured by the Taliban Government in Afghanistan. The
activities of various Islamic organizations like the Hamas, the
Hezbollah, the GIA, the Islamic Jihad and the al Qaeda or any other
organization, which claims allegiance to the Islamic faith have been
a source of threat to world peace.
These crises have not only caused untold hardship and fear in the world, they have resulted in wanton destruction of lives and property. They have turned married women into widows, little children into orphans and have brought misery and destruction to many families. They have ruined many state economies, turned citizens into refugees and have caused terror, hatred, and suspicion in the minds of various people.
There is no doubt that these crises vary with respect to their causative factors. However, a common element among them is the dominant involvement of Muslims and the frequent reference to some of them as religious wars or Jihad. Of course there are other boiling points without Islamic connection across the world such as the Sabastistia guerilla activities in Mexico, the activities of the Drug Cartel in Colombia, the Irish Republican Army crisis in Northern Ireland, and the Ruwanda-Burundi crisis, the civil war in Sierra-Leone, the Angola civil war, and the Liberia episode all in Africa but they are not characterized as religious wars by the combatants involved. They are a function of socio-ethnic, political or economic dysfunctionalism in the countries affected.
The frequent characterization of the conflicts involving Muslim nations as Holy wars or Jihad is not only of fundamental concern to both Muslims and non-Muslim world wide, but it has raised a number of fundamental questions about Islamic idealism and principles. At the middle of the gulf war or Desert storm operation, the aggressive Iraq re-named the war 'the mother of all battles or a Jihad or holy war, which he expected every Muslim to be involved in. The Taliban government in Afghanistan has chosen the same style in the current crisis. According to the Taliban, this is a holy war or Jihad that must be fought by every Muslim. The Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, and the GIA of Algeria have all named their struggles as Jihad and they have made references to the Islamic injunctions to support their claim. The question then is does Islam as a religion, encourage or prescribe the application of violence, terror or war as a weapon of dispute resolution?
Is Jihad permissible in Islam? If yes what is the Islamic true definition of Jihad and how do the ongoing arm struggles involving Muslim populations in the world fit into the Islamic definition of Jihad? Thirdly, is Jihad synonymous with arms rebellion against existing social order? Why do the protagonists of these conflicts find it convenient to label them as Jihad?
In an attempt to answer these questions, some analysts, politicians and scholars of international affairs are quick to articulate the view that Islam as a religion, supports and encourages Muslims into the application of violence, terrorism, and arms rebellion as a legitimate means of resolving societal dispute or conflict. Within the context of these crises therefore, Muslims are portrayed and frequently referred to as either extremists, fanatics, terrorists, fundamentalists, separatists, militants or even murderers. This is an untenable, unjustifiable, and unsustainable simplistic generalization or conclusion. A conclusion, which at best, is a product of either outright ignorance or deliberate mischief. How can it be accepted that Muslims are generally pro-terror or pro-violence, when Islam as a concept does not only mean peace but as a religion, Islam is founded on the basic principles of peace, tolerance, and brotherhood.
This is not to argue that religion and violence are strange bedfellows. The application of violence as a means of redress is not a new phenomenon in religion. The first recorded violent episode in religion was the murder of Abel by his brother Cain for reasons of envy and hatred. Yet the lesson of Cain and Abel episode was to teach mankind that violence and envy were social evils, which must be avoided, and a sin, which will attract God's punishment. It is also true that in the early days of Islam, battles were fought against those who sought to prevent Islam from existence, but such battles were not only conducted as the last resort but they were fought purely and essentially as a means of self defense, a concept which today, forms the cornerstone of the fundamental objectives and directive principles of foreign policies of sovereign nations. The religious crusades of the 10th century period also underscore the vulnerability of religion to violence in a situation where passion and intolerance override rationality. The lessons of these early conflicts are clear reminders to us about the evil effect of violence and the need to uphold the virtues of tolerance, mutual respect, truth, and justice as a means of promoting world peace.
Islam as a religion condemns the application of violence, force, or terror or the threat of terror in dispute resolution. Islam is a religion or system of belief, which derives its name from the Arabic word 'Sallam', which means peace. As a religion, it means peaceful submission to the command of Allah (God) as espoused in the Holy Qur'an and practiced by prophet Mohammed (Peace be Upon Him). The Islamic holy book, known as the Qur'an is the final authority on what is permissible or prohibited for Muslims. Of the 114 chapters of this holy testament, there is nowhere the notion of violence or terrorism is prescribed as a means of advancing the cause of the religion or of resolving the fundamental differences or conflicts in societies.
Instead, the use of force, violence, or terrorism against individuals, groups, or nations or as a means of advancing the frontiers of the religion, is condemned (see Qur'an chapter 2 verse 256 and chapter 10 verse 99). Also condemned, is the act of murder or killing of innocent souls (Q5 V32 & Q4 V93). Islam on the other hand extols and prescribes tolerance, perseverance, and patience even in difficult circumstances (Q3 V200). Islam enjoins Muslims to be loyal and obedient to existing state laws and duly constituted authorities (Q4 V59). Islam supports secularism and recommends peaceful co-existence with people of the other faith (Q60 V8) and (109 V 6).
Islam recognizes diversity and the right of people to live the life of their choice without intimidation. On the issue of Jihad, Muslims are encouraged to engage in Jihad for the propagation of the religion, but not as a revolt or uprising against authority or people of different faith or opinion. Jihad as defined in the Qur'an ch.9 v20, & ch.22 v78 means striving or exerting efforts for religious propagation. Muslims are enjoined to strive with their energy, wealth, knowledge, and good conduct towards propagating their religion and winning new members into the righteous path of God.
It also involves public campaigns or enlightenment designed to cultivate dedicated and well informed Muslims in a manner similar to evangelism in Christian faith. Thus, the basic characteristics of a legitimate Jihad are: it must be invitational or persuasive not coercive (Q3 V104 & 10 V 99), secondly, it must be based on sound knowledge, reasoning, and convincing argument (Q16 V 125), and its goal must be to win new members into the righteous path of God and expand the brotherhood of believers. Jihad is therefore not equivalent to or synonymous with wars, holy or unholy, killing of innocent souls, and wanton destruction of property and public facilities. There is a clear distinction between Jihad and fighting for self-defense, which is a universal principle supported by Islam and many other belief systems. The elements of Jihad as illustrated above were clearly manifested in the examples provided by the prophet of Islam. For example in the cause of Islamic propagation, the prophet did everything possible to avoid confrontation or wars with the avowed enemies of Islam. His migration from Makkah to Medina known in Islam as the Hijrah was one of the major steps he took to avoid wars.
The treaty of Huddaybiyyah in Feb. 628 AD was signed by the prophet as a strategy to avoid wars and by that treaty he demonstrated the power, wisdom, and legitimacy in the use of peaceful negotiation and collective bargaining as the preferred tools for conflict resolution. Any Jihad that falls below these standards is unacceptable. Thus the form of Jihad or holy war by the use of force or violence or terrorism being advocated today by some segments of the Islamic world is in clear violation of the tenets of Islam and the example of prophet Mohammed. Therefore, any invitation to such conflict or use of force or violence against innocent people, nations, and government must be resisted and rejected.
This is because the conflicts we are being called upon to embrace as Muslims go far beyond and against the limit or standard of Jihad set by Allah and exemplified by the Prophet. The conflicts of today cannot pass the test of a valid Jihad. How, for instance, can the unprovoked attack on the World Trade Center in New York which innocent lives including Muslims were wasted and property worth billions of dollars destroyed be supported or justified as a form of Jihad. How can the activities of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq and the resultant crisis be accepted as a form of Jihad? And how can the Palestinian Intifada or uprising and the Hamas or Hezbollah guerilla warfare be justified as Jihad? Are these conflicts meant to win more souls for Islam? Can the frontiers of Islam be expanded in an atmosphere of insecurity and wanton destruction? How do Muslims benefit from these wars? The truth of the situation is that there are other hidden motives behind these conflicts other than the desire for Jihad, and the whole world must join hands to uncover the hidden motives and find a lasting solution. The call for Jihad is commonly used as a cover and a bait to attract or lure Muslims into these fratricidal wars. This is a dirty and unacceptable approach.
It is true that most of the protagonists of the said conflicts are Muslims, but they represent a very infinitesimal percentage of the over 1.5 billion Muslim population in the world. If the objectives of these senseless conflicts were for Islam to move forward, the efforts as well as military, financial and material resources being wasted on them should have be applied to building schools, providing jobs, awarding study scholarship and bursaries, building places of worship, providing shelters and promoting the general well-being of Muslims in the world. The majority of the world's Muslim populations are peace lovers and they appreciate the need for a peaceful world that guarantees their safety and freedom to practice their faith. So far, from these conflicts, they have been turned into losers not winners. They have been turned into refugees along and beyond the borders of their homeland. They have gained nothing.
In the meantime, the United States of America, especially the
victims of the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon as
well as the victims of all other conflicts being perpetrated in the
world in the name of Jihad, deserve the sympathy and assistance of
the world Muslim leaders for the unprovoked destruction visited on
them by those who claim to be fighting Islamic cause. World Muslim
leaders must, offer their support and solidarity with any legitimate
means designed to stamp out this sinful act of aggression, while
non-Muslims should disabuse their minds of any impression that we are
witnessing a wave of Jihad. This is not Jihad, simple. The world
cannot afford the luxury of a world war, which from all indications
is the sinister motive of those clamoring for Jihad. Because they
realize that Jihad is a concept, which readily arouses the emotions
and sensibilities of Muslims, they find it convenient to hide under
the term to perpetrate their nefarious and evil plans, while hoping
to draw the support and sympathy of the broad spectrum of Muslims, in
order to escalate the crisis. They have failed woefully in this plan
for as the saying goes, you can fool some of the people some of the
time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time. This game,
indeed, is up. Islam has drawn a clear line of distinction between
peace and violence and Muslims are enjoined to opt for peace and not
violence as an effective tool for resolving disagreements and
conflicts and for promoting a world of peace and harmony.
Momoh, based in Austin, Texas, has recently joined as a special
correspondent and columnist for USAfricaonline.com.
This, his first column for USAfricaonline.com and USAfrica The
Newspaper, is copyrighted and archiving on any other web site or
newspaper is unauthorized except with a written approval by
USAfricaonline.com
Founder. December, 2001
ARINZE: Will he be
the FIRST
BLACK AFRICAN
POPE?
By Chido Nwangwu
These views were
stated during an interview CNN's anchor Bernard Shaw and
senior analyst Jeff Greenfield had with Mr. Nwangwu on
Saturday November 18, 2000 during a special edition of
'Inside Politics 2000.' USAfrica
The Newspaper voted the "Best Community
Newspaper"
in the 4th largest city in the U.S., Houston. It is in
the Best of Houston 2001 special as chosen by the editors
and readers of the Houston
Press,
reflecting their poll and annual rankings. (USAfrica's
founder Chido Nwangwu, left, with then U.S. Ambassador
Carrington at the U.S. embassy, Nigeria)
COUNTERPOINT:
Problems with Momoh loose use of the concept of
Jihad. By 'Osu Kanu Okoro
Osama
bin-Laden's goons threaten Nigeria and Africa's
stability
What
has Africa
to do with September 11
terror?
Africans
reported
dead
in terrorist
attack at
WTC
September
11
terror and
the ghost of things to
come....
Will
religious conflicts be the time-bomb
for Nigeria's latest transition to civilian rule?

AFRICA
AND THE U.S. ELECTIONS
Beyond U.S.
electoral shenanigans, rewards and dynamics of a democratic
republic hold
lessons
for
African politics.
![]()
CONTINENTAL
AGENDA
Bush's position on
Africa
is "ill-advised."
The position
stated by Republican presidential aspirant and Governor of
Texas, George Bush where
he
said that "Africa will not be an area of priority" in his
presidency has been questioned by
USAfricaonline.com Publisher Chido
Nwangwu. He added that Bush's "pre-election position was
neither validated by the economic exchanges nor
geo-strategic interests of our two continents."
Nwangwu,
adviser to the Mayor of Houston (the 4th largest city in the
U.S., and immigrant home to thousands of Africans) argued
further that "the issues of the heritage interests of 35
million African-Americans in Africa, the volume and value of
oil business between between the U.S and Nigeria and the
horrendous AIDS crisis in Africa do not lend any basis for
Governor Bush's ill-advised
position which
removes Africa from fair consideration" were he to be
elected president. By Al Johnson
LITERATURE
Since 1958, Achebe's "Things Fall Apart" set a
standard of artistic excellence,
and more. By Douglas Killam.
Johnnie Cochran
will soon learn that defending Abacha's
loot is not as simple as his O.J Simpson's case.
![]()
Steve
Jobs and Apple represent the future of digital
living
USAfrica
FORUM
IN THE HOUSE OF MANDELA:
A SILLY CRY FOR REPARATIONS
By Prof. Chimalum Nwankwo
Nelson
Mandela, Tribute to the
world's political superstar and Lion of
Africa
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela's
burden
mounts with murder charges, trials
Why Bush should focus on dangers facing
Nigeria's return to democracy and Obasanjo's
slippery slide
Acts of Cowardice.
By Jonathan Elendu,
contributing editor of
USAfricaonline.com.
USAfricaonline.com
is
listed
among the world's leading web sites by the international
newspaper, USAToday.
Recent
and continuing crises regarding Sharia in northern Nigeria
and security of lives in Nigeria highlight the other issue
whether the Obasanjo's government has failed to enforce
basic human rights of all Nigerians? See the
USAfrica
Special reports.
Sharia-related
killings and carnage in Kaduna reenact deadly prologue to
Nigeria-Biafra war
of 1967.
Is Obasanjo really up to
Nigeria's challenge and crises?
By USAfricaonline editorial
board member, Ken Okorie. His commentary appears
courtesy of our related web site, NigeriaCentral.com
Investigating
Marc
Rich and his deals
with Nigeria's Oil
DIPLOMACY
Walter
Carrington:
African-American
diplomat who put principles above self for Nigeria
DEMOCRACY'S
WARRIOR
Out of
Africa.
The
cock that crows in the morning belongs to one household but
his voice is the property of the neighborhood. -- Chinua
Achebe, Anthills of the Savannah. An editor carries on
his crusade against public corruption and press
censorship
in his native Nigeria and other African countries. By
John Suval.
September
11
terror and the ghost of things to come....
Shred of all polite, fine talk, the terroristic
events of September 11, 2001, in New
York, Washington DC., and Boston raise many questions. Among
them: Are those wanton terror and wholesale visitation of
murder and mayhem the ghost of things to come into the U.S
as we glide into the so-called new world order? Whose order,
really, is it?... Are those the signatures of a world gone
awry, the continuing cannibalization
of our world, our so-called
civilization?
By Chido
Nwangwu, Founder
& Publisher. See DETAILS