Naeem's Blog

I scoff at the mere suggestion, reminding myself of the various injunctions of Allah (swt) and His messenger (saw) that not only make certain forms of combat necessary, but commendable. How can any sane Muslim ever consider all forms of war to be criminal, especially when our Creator has stated, "Fighting is prescribed upon you and you dislike it. However, it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you..."(2:216)?

The Prophet took part in many battles and he surely was no criminal! So who are we to suggest that war become a criminal act, worthy of universal condemnation?

Of course, when I bring up the criminality of war as discussed in contemporary forums, I am looking at it less from secular, international standards and more from Islamic juristic rulings. So, in reality, my question may be better phrased - Should war be Haram?

My concern arises from a recent talk given by Mahathir Mohammad on the call to criminalize war (YouTube link).

While he didn't express any earth-shattering points in his short talk, it struck me while listening that war in the 21st century is entirely different from how warfare was conducted in the past. So maybe it *is* time that we reconsider the Islamic ruling on war as its carried out in this day and age.

After all, Muslims universally reject modern-day slavery - not because slavery never existed in Islamic history, but because the form in which it has been practiced in recent history is abominable and would have been deemed inhumane and clearly Haram by our beloved Prophet (saw).

Why can't the same logic be applied to modern warfare?

After giving it some thought, I seriously believe that our perfect model Muhammad (saw) would reject all forms of modern warfare. The indiscriminate killing by missiles and drones, the unfathomable harm caused by multi-ton bombs, the ability to destroy an entire nation in a matter of hours, environmental damage beyond control - all stand in stark contrast to every teaching of the Prophetic concept of war.

Surely some will counter with the verse in the Quran "Make ready against them whatever force and war mounts you are able to muster, so that you might deter thereby the enemies of God" (8:60) as a justification to using modern military equipment, including nuclear.

But the problem with the nuclear deterrence argument is that one must be fully prepared to make good on one's threat. And Islamically, I'm just not comfortable with that possibility.

On the other hand, I understand that traditional scholars, such as Abu Hanifa, justified the usage of flooding or poisoning water sources as legitimate tools in war. But c'mon, the scope of such tactics pale in comparison to the ridiculous damage that can be inflicted by the military arsenal at our disposal in the 21st century.

No, I haven't become a pacifist. I firmly believe that force is necessary to bring about justice and truth. It's just that the current form in which this force is wielded has got me thinking twice about its permissibility in our deen.