DEFINING ISLAMIC WAY OF WARFARE AND ITS COMPARISON WITH
AL QAEDA DOCTRINE
A thesis presented to the Faculty of the U.S. Army
Command and General Staff College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF MILITARY ART AND SCIENCE
Military History
by
MAJOR INTEKHAB HAIDER KHAN, BANGLADESH ARMY
M.S., Bangladesh University of Professionals, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2011
Fort Leavenworth, Kansas
2012-01
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources,
…show more content…
DiMarco, Ph.D.
, Member
Willburn Edgar Meador, Jr, MA
, Member
Dennis Burket, MBA
Accepted this 8th day of June 2012 by:
, Director, Graduate Degree Programs
Robert F. Baumann, Ph.D.
The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student author and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to this study should include the foregoing statement.) iii
ABSTRACT
DEFINING ISLAMIC WAY OF WARFARE AND ITS COMPARISON WITH AL
QAEDA DOCTRINE, by Major Intekhab Haider Khan, 85 pages.
With the rise of Al Qaeda and like-minded militant groups, there have been many discussions and misrepresentations of the term Islamic way of warfare. It is important to understand that anything, to be qualified as Islamic, has to have a reference from the core sources of Islam, i.e. the Quran, and the practices and sayings of Prophet Muhammad
(PBUH). This research is focused to define an Islamic way of warfare based on these fundamental sources, with a view to identifying whether Al Qaeda is truly Islamic or not.
This thesis identifies that Islam does not dictate minor tactical matters of warfare, rather focuses its guidance on warfare in two broad categories: the just cause for waging war, and limited restrictions on conduct during the war.
The legitimate defense of a nation and the responsibility of the Security Council to take actions in the course of maintaining peace within its areas of influence. With the establishment of United Nations and the modernization of war and its materials; the theories and doctrines of the past also needed to evolve. The modern Just war theory in composed of two principles: jus ad bellum, the right to conduct war, and jus in bello, the correct conduct within war. Each principle also has its own set of criteria to follow. Jus ad bellum contains six: Just cause, right intention, proper authority and public declaration, last resort, probability of success, and proportionality. (Orend, 2006)
1. Summary of the Islamic worldview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
War has been designed to show a ghastly frame that sets out for propaganda, defeats, and victories. Involving multiple aspects, war exhibits a product of both human choice and human actions. “And a person's definition of war often expresses the person's broader political philosophy, such as limiting war to a conflict between nations or state. Alternative definitions of war can include conflict not just between nations but between schools of thought or ideologies.” (Moseley, Alexander.
Fawaz Gerges, who has done extensive research on Al-Qaeda, has described the themes of development on Al-Qaeda. During the early 1990’s the ideology of Sayyid Qutb [3] had a large influence on the objectives of Al-Qaeda. Qutb stood for the concept of hideous schizophrenia [4], and believed that it has been forever implemented into western societies. Gerges states that it was not until 1996 that Al-Qaeda shifted its focus on the “near enemy” to the “far enemy”. This change in ideology was expressed in the 1996 declaration written by Bin Laden. It was a way to inform Al-Qaeda’s vast network the slight change in ideology, and served to express the newly support in the principles of hideous
This theory would categorize the wars as just and unjust, respectively. The Just War Theory has its roots in philosophy and has four major components. For a war to be considered just, the country must have the right to go to war, have a just cause, with just intentions, and it must be the last resort. These guidelines are set into
What is known today as modern-day Turkey, was once one of the most powerful empires in the world. They referred to this imperial state as the Ottoman Empire. The Purpose of the empire was to expand their territory, and spread their Islamic teachings. With this they had created a thirteenth century empire led by Osman, the founder of the Ottoman Empire. Osman surrounded himself with strong solders who specialized in ambushes, and hit and run tactics, they referred to these highly trained soldiers as “Janissaries”. The empire they built was the largest and most dominant of the Muslim empires.
Al Qaeda uses this imagined war as a rallying cry to convince a small minority in the Muslim world to join its cause, as well as a justification for its actions – casting them as a “defensive jihad” against the enemies of the faith. In situations when the faith is attacked, according to Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, “each Muslim has an individual obligation to join the battle … this must be done by all Muslims,” and as Todd Helmus writes, “Al Qaeda thus calls Muslims to Islam 's defense.” (121)
War must be waged in accordance with the purpose of establishing justice, expressing the “right intention”.
One can scarcely turn on the television, or the radio, or open up a web browser without the mention of Islamic terrorism or unrest around the world. Though the United States and the rest of the world may not be engaged in a protracted religious war, for radical Muslim fundamentalist they are. Bernard Lewis brings to light possible reasons for the issues facing the world dealing with Islamic terrorism. The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror explains these issues in historical context as well as how some of the actions professed in the name of Islam and claim to
“For war, as a grave act of killing, needs to be justified.” These words were written by Murray N. Rothbard, dean of the Austrian School and founder of modern libertarianism, who spent much of his academic career trying to determine what, exactly, defined a “just war”. In fact, for as long as humans have been fighting wars, there have been quotations referring to the justification and moralities of wars and how warfare can be considered fair and acceptable to each society’s individual standards. While the time and place of each war differs, the reality of the devastation of battle may be found warranted by those fighting using these just war standards to vindicate their actions.
It was once a word unfamiliar to American ears. But in recent years it has become all too familiar. The actions of Muslim militants and terrorists have seared the word into American consciousness.
However, Jihad’s age old association with violence was nearly unavoidable. Struggle can rather easily be translated into a call to conduct an external Jihad for the Islamic faith. For example, a verse in the Qu’ran states, “go forth, light armed and heavy armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah” (Church 111). This verse clearly pairs Jihad (“strive”) with external violence (“go forth, light armed and heavy armed”) (Church 111). Indeed, violent Jihad was an obvious necessity because the Muslim community had always been a religious and political faction. Many lost their lives to spread and defend the newfound faith in Arabia and eventually to locations far beyond. Jihad’s association with violence and religious duty made it an ideal expression for Muslims to justify “lesser Jihad,” or the notion of external conflict, centered on the idea of spreading the faith (Church 112).
In light of recent events in the global community, one word that is used frequently but rarely truly understood is the Islamic word Jihad. Jihad has become a very volatile word, so it is necessary that those who use it should understand exactly what it means, what it entails, and what significance it has in current global events.
This essay intends to define and give an overview of the ‘Principles of War', the philosophers that coined these principles and with examples from the various countries that used and have their own perspectives on the ‘Principles of War'.
I certify that this literature review is my own work and contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any degree or diploma in any institute, college or university. Moreover, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference is made in the text of the dissertation.