Violence and Muslims
By Mohammad Nejatullah Siddiqi 

How violence affects human life? Under what circumstances Islam tolerates violence? When does Islam allow violence to shape into an armed struggle and in this situation what are the Islamic ethics of war?  When does violence become terrorism?   Does Islam allow terrorism in any situation?   This essay analyzes these and similar questions.  However, it is not possible to deal with any one of the above questions in a detailed academic manner as that will need volumes.   The main reason for discussing this topic is the current environment.  Muslims are the target of violence and terrorism in many places and in many other places Muslim themselves are using violence and terrorism.  Is it permissible for Muslims to engage in such activities?  Is there any benefit of using such means?  Can Muslim prevent violence against them by counter violence?

The American and British aggressions globally, the Hindutva aggressions in India, and anti-Muslim environment elsewhere in the world have disturbed Muslims everywhere.  They have become concerned about future course of events.  Under these circumstances what steps should be taken to better the fate of Muslims as well as that of the humanity in general. This essay essentially answers this question.

Ethics and violence

In essence violence is an unethical act.  In a civilized world that values ethical principles violence is used to punish criminals in order to prevent them from doing such acts again and also to eliminate crime.  Violence may also be permissible to defend one self from other’s violence.  Except these situations, violence is not allowed otherwise.  One may use dialogue, persuasion, communication, and information to achieve an objective but not violence.  There is no place for violence in achieving religious objectives because violence is an instrument of coercion and in Islam:

There is no compulsion and coercion in regard to religion.  The right thing has been made distinct from the wrong thing. So whoever rejects taghoot (the anti-God) and believes in God has taken a firm support that never gives way. And God hears everything and knows every thing (Al-Quran- 2:256).

Islam is based on compassion, love, tolerance, gentleness, and forgiveness.  Violence, destruction, and cruelty are against its nature.  God says:

O Prophet! Adopt the way of leniency and forbearance; enjoin what is good and avoid useless discussion with the ignorant people (Al-Quran-7:199).

Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, instructed to use gentle ways and told that harshness and violence do not help in achieving things. Another saying narrated by Ayesha (wife of the Prophet) says that the Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

“God is kind, and likes kindness; for kindness, God rewards what He never gives due to violence or through any other means.”

This statement of the Prophet is recorded in the Sahih of Muslim in which it is further reported that the Prophet said to Ayesha: “Be kind and avoid violence and indecency. Kindness makes a situation best and unkindness makes it worst.”

This is why Islam prohibits offensive violence and discourages violence even as a defensive means. The Qur’an says:

And O Prophet! Goodness and evil are not equal. Counter evil with what is best.  You will see that he, with whom you had enmity, has become your closest friend. But none can attain to this quality except those who endure with patience, and those who are people of great good fortune (Al-Quran- 41:34-35)

There is no denial that violence has a place in religion, for example to defend one-self or to punish a criminal.  However, there should be an effort by Muslims to use violence to the least and present the real picture of Islam to the people, the Islam that consists of love, kindness, and forgiveness.    That is why the Qur’an has presented such examples too where violence could have been used but it was not used.

And tell them accurately the story of the two sons of Adam.  When the two offered their sacrifices, the offering of the one was accepted but that of the other was not accepted [by God].  The later said, “I will kill you.” The other answered, “Allah accepts the offerings of the pious people only. Even if you stretch your hand to kill me, I shall not lift my hand to kill you, for I fear Allah, the Lord of the universe; I would rather prefer that you should bear the burden of my sin as well as your own sin, and become a dweller of Hell; this is the just retribution of the inequity of the aggressors.”  Even after this his evil soul prompted him to slay his brother without the slightest compassion; so he killed him and became one of the losers. Then God sent a raven that began to scratch the ground to show him how he might hide the corpse of his brother.   Seeing this, he cried, “Woe to me!  I have not been able to do even as this raven has done and so devised a plan of hiding the corpse of brother.”  After this he became very remorseful of what he had done.

That was the way We [God] prescribed this for the children of Israel: “He who killed any person, unless it be a person guilty of manslaughter or of spreading chaos in the land, should be looked as though he had slain all humankind, and he who saved one life should be regarded as though he has saved the lives of all humankind.”   But the majority of them went on committing excesses in the land even after Our messengers came to them one after the other with clear directions (Al-Quran-5:27-32)

These verses state that the son of Adam did not use violence even to defend himself.   The verses also point to the condition that justifies taking a human life.  It clearly states that killing people who are not guilty of murder or creating chaos in a land is the gravest crime.  These verses are followed by those describing the severe punishment for people who create chaos on earth, violate rule of law, and fight against God and His prophet.

Permission to kill

It should be clear that violence that results in the loss of human life is permitted only in very specific situations.  Let us now look back at the Muslims living in Makkah along with the Prophet, peace be upon him.  As long as Muslims lived in Makkah, they were not permitted to use violence to kill even though they were constantly subjected to violence.  Some times this violence was very inhuman and caused the loss of human lives such as in the case of Somayyah who was killed as a result of torture by the non-believers.  One might think that in the beginning Muslims were very small in number and quite weak.  But even around the sixth year after the prophecy of Muhammad, peace be upon him, when many influential and powerful persons, such as Umer al Farooq and Hamzah bin Abdul Muttalib had embraced Islam and were seeking permission to deal with force against the tyranny of the non-believers in Makkah, Muslims were not allowed to use violence.  Instead they were asked to migrate to Ethiopia and thus more than 100 Muslims migrated to Ethiopia.1

Muslims were allowed to use violence after they were established in Medinah under the rule of Prophet Muhammad. When the enemy targeted Muslims, attacked their land, and some Muslims who still remained in Makkah were tortured, then God permitted them to use force in these words:

Permission (to fight) has been granted to those against whom war has been waged, because they have been treated unjustly, and God is certainly able to help them.  These are the people who have been expelled unjustly from their homes only for the reason that they said, “Our Lord is Allah.” (Al-Quran-22:39)

And fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, and do commit aggression for God does not like the aggressors. (Al-Quran-2:190)

This war that Muslims were permitted to fight was not an offensive war to occupy other people’s land; this was a war to defend Muslims and to prevent such attacks in the future.   The aggressors were not only attacking Muslims in Madinah but they were targeting Muslims elsewhere too and forcing people not to accept Islam.  Thus the purpose of fighting a war was to end ‘aggression’ and to make the obedience of God possible for every one who desires so:

And keep on fighting against them [the attackers of Muslims] till there is no more tribulation2 and God’s way is established then if they desist from it, there should be no more hostility except against those who had been guilty of cruelty and brutality (Al-Quran-2:193)

Why should you, then, not fight in the way of Allah for the sake of those helpless men, women, and children who, being weak, have been oppressed, and are crying out, “Our Lord, deliver us from this habitation whose inhabitants are unjust oppressors, and raise a protector for us by Your Grace and a helper from Yourself (Al-Quran-4:75).

Qur’an has made it clear that after creating human beings and giving them life and death, God has put them in a test to see who acts on good and who does evil.

He Who created life and death so that He can try you (humans) and see which of you is best in deed.  He is All-Mighty as well as All-Forgiving (Al-Quran-67:2)

This environment that fulfills God’s purpose of human creation is disturbed by tyranny and aggression because some people forcefully try to prevent others from choosing a way of life.  Islamic jihad, on the one hand, is to defend Muslim’s life and property, and on the other, it is also to liberate oppressed people from the tyranny and aggression of oppressors.  Thus one major objective of Islamic jihad is to restore human freedom and their right to choose.

Use of violence as means to punish for crimes, or to defend Islam and Muslims, or to regain human freedom and right to choose is permitted only to the extent that it is necessary.   Else, it becomes a tyranny and aggression itself, which is strictly forbidden. Use of violence for any other purpose is not permitted by Islam, in particular the violence that results in destruction of human life.

O Prophet, say to them, “Come, I will recite the limits that your Lord has set for you.”  He has enjoined that you should not set up anything as a partner with Him, and you should treat your parents kindly, and you should not kill your children for fear of poverty for We provide sustenance for you and will provide sustenance for them also, and you should not go near indecent things whether they be open or hidden., and you should not kill any living being whom Allah has forbidden to kill except for a just cause.  These are the things that He has enjoined on you so that you may use your common sense (6:151)

Do not kill any soul whose killing has been forbidden by God, except with justice; and if one is killed unjustly, We have granted the right of retribution to his guardian.  So he should not transgress the limits in retaliation, for he shall be helped (17:33).

The last of the above quoted verse from the Qur’an allows violence to repel violence, but the Qur’an has not made violence as the only course nor does it give people the right to take the law in their own hands.  It is evident from the laws concerning capital murder as well as from the above verse of Chapter 17 that even for murder one cannot take the law into his/her own hands.  Instead, it would be the responsibility of the  state to ensure that justice is done.  This is the general policy of Islam, it does not encourage violence in response to violence.  Islam encourages taking such actions that eliminate violence altogether in future and teaches forgiveness instead of revenge_:

The recompense for evil is a like evil, then whoever forgives and seeks reconciliation, his reward is with God.  God does not like the wrongdoers.  And those who avenge themselves after they have been wronged, cannot be blamed, for those should be blamed who oppress others and commit excesses in the land without any right.  For such people there is a painful torment.  However, the one who is patient and forgiving, these indeed are the works of great courage and resolution (Al-Quran-42: 40-43)

One must also recall the story of the good son of Adam as narrated in the second chapter of the Qur’an (2:28-32) and which has been discussed earlier. While Islam allows the use of violence in response to aggression and tyranny, it reminds people that for the fulfillment of God’s mission it may be advisable to adopt a course other than resorting to violence.  This point is emphasized in both Chapter 2 (28-32) and Chapter 42 (40-43).   The discussion should not be limited to whether Islam permits violence to quell violence, it should be broadly concerned with whether the mission of God and the purpose of human life can be better achieved by using violent means or by avoiding it as much as possible.  Chapter 42 (Al-Shura’) was revealed in Makkah after Hamzah had already become Muslim and before Umer accepted Islam.   Muslims at that time were suffering from extreme form of violence and aggression but they were not allowed by God to use violence in return.  They were only allowed to resort to violence when they had established their state in Madinah.  This was done to ensure that use of violence would be within the limits prescribed by Islam and within the Islamic ethical parameters. 

Violence and terrorism

When some individuals or groups, who are not themselves in power but live under the jurisdiction of some other authority, resort to violence to defend themselves, sooner or later their use of violence turns into what may be characterized as terrorism.   Terrorism is to kill without discriminating between the belligerent and non-belligerent among the ‘enemy’. Destruction of innocent lives, in particular those of the children, women, the invalids and the elderly, destruction of property, and inhumane ways of killing people are categorically prohibited by Islam.

Let us now analyze the current situation.  On the one hand there are nation states with huge armies and all sorts of state-of the-art technology and weapons to kill human beings. On the other hand there are individuals and groups who cannot get even ordinary weapons without the permission of their governments. They cannot raise an army, they cannot openly organize even a militia. They cannot choose the time and place of a battle.  Their efforts against their own governments or against any foreign governments have to be a secret and they cannot follow all the ethical guidelines of Islam in dealing with their ‘enemy.’ Circumstances force them to hit the  ‘enemy’ whenever and wherever possible.  They may not reach out to the belligerent and may target the innocent people in a country that they consider enemy They may not get closer to military aircrafts and ships and may target civilian aircrafts and vessels, may not reach to the armed personnel and may target innocent civilians, and they may not reach to the military installations and may target commercial centers.  The mechanics of this counter violence is going to be much different than those organized by governments.  The history of such covert activities and underground missions is indicative of the fact that the leadership of such groups changes quiet frequently and the grip of leadership on the field activities is not very strong.  The limitation of such use of violence against the state-sponsored violence or terrorism is that sooner than later such violence becomes terrorism.  Then the important question is how such groups or individuals who are subjected to aggression and violence can defend themselves.  Before answering this question, let us once more make it clear that there is no room for terrorism in Islam.    As discussed earlier, Islam provides an ethical framework and limits the use of violence.  Following is an authentic narration of a story outlining the ethical context and limitations on the use of violence in Islam.

When Abu Bakr Siddique, the first Caliph, sent an army to Syria under the command of Yazid bin Sufyaan, these were Abu Bakr’s instructions to his army commander:  Do not kill a child, women or elderly person; do not cut and destroy a fruit bearing tree; do not cause destruction of a populated area; do not burn or disperse the honey-bees; do not be dishonest, unfair and unjust in dealing with the property and wealth you acquire during the war; and do not be a coward (Mua’ttaa Imam malik, The book of Ahkaam al-Khilafah; Also see this author’s book on Islam and the Principles of Ownership ( in Urdu), published from Delhi in 1994, page 219).

Destruction of property, wealth, and crops and demolition of buildings are considered creating chaos on the earth, which has been strictly forbidden in Islam. The Qur’an says:

And to Madyan We sent their brother Shu’aib. He said, “O my people, worship Allah, you have no other deity than He.   A clear guidance has come to you from your Lord.  You should, therefore, give full measure and weight, and do not defraud the people of their goods,  nor spread disorder on the earth after it has been set straight.  This is better for you if you are true believers (7:85).

When he (a certain person) gets power, he directs all his efforts towards spreading mischief in the land, destroying harvests and killing human race, whereas God does not like mischief (2:205).

In the last twenty years certain Muslim groups have been waging war against their own governments, or against the United States or Russia, or France, or Britain. This has ostensibly been done in response to aggression or anti Muslim policies. The violent means adopted in response to violence committed by the other party definitely took these Muslim groups into those gray areas fraught with danger---areas from which Islam had asked them to keep away. Innocent people have lost their lives and properties have been destroyed during the violence directed against America, in America itself and in many countries including the Philippines, Indonesia, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia.  In India too Muslims have sometimes used violence to repel violence committed against them. Not unexpectedly, this violence has sometimes taken the form of terrorism.  It clearly violates the limits imposed by Islam on the use of force. It fails to qualify as justified use of violence as it is neither defense nor punishment meted out to a convicted criminal by appropriate authority.

Attacking embassies, airplanes, and tourist buses and hijacking of commercial aircrafts are all acts of terrorism. They involve loss of life by innocent people including children, women and the elderly. They also involve loss of property. This in itself is sufficient ground for prohibition of these acts.  Moreover, these acts have not helped those who carried them out in achieving their goals.  On the contrary, such acts have resulted in a bad image of Islam among common folks in the world.  Some people and groups are carrying out inhuman acts in the name of a religion that teaches kindness, love and friendship and asks for respect of human life even in a state of war.  Media then exaggerates such acts and ordinary people in the world look at Islam as a violent religion.  There could not be a greater loss for a people whose mission is to bear witness for God and work for justice and fairness.

Violence and the current situation

Now that Islam’s position on violence and counter violence is quiet clear, let us look at some specific situations and find out whether Muslims can use violence in those situations or not.  We have four situations:  (1) The persecution of Islamists by Muslim rulers in Muslim majority countries; (2) Those Muslim majority areas that have been occupied by an aggressor and people in such areas are subjected to violence and oppression; (3) Muslim minorities in non-Muslim majority countries where Muslims are subjected to violence; and  (4) The violence against Muslims and Muslim countries by America and its allies.

Egypt is a good example of the first situation.  The violence against Muslim Brotherhood that started in a big way in 1954 continues to date in one form or other. It is a long story that cannot be narrated in this essay.  Egyptian model has been imitated in many Muslim countries.  Islamic groups, however, should not use counter violence to deal with this situation. Instead, peaceful efforts should be made to seek justice and establish peace.  Since scholars have discussed3 this situation in detail, I will skip its detailed analysis.

The second situation is that of the occupied lands that the occupiers are not willing to vacate despite U. N. resolutions and international pressures.  The most apparent example of this situation is Palestine.  Palestinian’s struggle against Israel comes under the defensive use of violence considered permissible in Islam.  Muslims should employ all such strategies that bring an end to occupation and help in getting back their land.  Strategic decisions about armed struggle and use of other peaceful means will obviously be made by those who are involved and who are on the scene.  This is not a controversial issue that one needs to discuss in detail. 

Muslim Minorities

The third situation is that of Muslims living as a minority in a non-Muslim majority country such as in India. What are Muslims in a non-Muslim majority country to do, if they are subjected to violence and their lives and properties are not protected by the government? What if the government appears to be collaborating with the mischief makers, such as in the case of Gujarat violence in India in 2002?Can Muslims use violence to counter violence? 

There is no doubt that the Muslims also have the right to defend their lives, honour, and properties.  The laws in a democratic country allow for defending one’s own life even if the attackers get killed.  Some Muslim scholars, under the pressure of the current situation, have expressed the opinion that it is allowed to take an offensive action as a preventive measure.  In this author’s opinion, however, following strategies are not correct.

·   To attack the attackers even before any such attack, in order to prevent aggression.
·  To use violence against some other people of the same community or country, living at another place, in order to revenge for the excesses done by people belonging to that community.
·  To consider it right to use violence against any person belonging to a community if some members of that community use aggression and violence against Muslims.

The logic behind such thinking, as mentioned above, is that this may prevent violence. It is argued that preventive or preemptive use of force will teach people a lesson and will persuade them not to use violence. It will also discourage the police and government officials from patronizing such violence. Some people also point out to the success of such strategies at few places.  However, one needs to collect significant data from the field and conduct sufficient research before being sure about this preventive theory.  In this essay only the ethical aspect of this approach may be discussed and its usefulness as a successful approach may be analyzed.

In the opinion of this author the third approach i.e. the use of violence to take revenge is totally against the teachings of Islam.  One cannot take revenge of a criminal from an innocent.   Being a citizen of a democratic nation, one has an obligation not to use this strategy.   To violate the rule of law is also a violation of Islamic principles. The rules of war among sovereign nations cannot be applied to the conflict among different groups living in the same country.  As far as the first two of the above approaches are concerned, this author considers them too as against the spirit of Islamic teachings. In response to a group that has attacked Muslims, Muslims cannot attack another peaceful group of that community, neither before the attack nor after it.

If Indian Muslims do not use violence in response to the violence committed against them, then what should they do to stop the violence against them? To answer this question, one needs sufficient thinking and research.4 

Before thinking about this problem one must think about the causes due to which Muslims are facing this situation.  There are some historical causes.  The present generation of Hindus and Muslims cannot do anything about that past, however they may diligently avoid such issues inherited from past that harm the relationship between them and destroy the future of the country.  The knowledgeable people of the country know that the history lessons given to our children in schools and those that are repeated in speeches are spreading hatred and weakening mutual trust.  Mutual hatred and mistrust are dangerous for a healthy future of the nation.  Such things have to be stopped.    But the country lacks the political vision, the legal framework, the role of the   judiciary and that of the media needed to stop this trend. Some people are taking advantage of these loopholes in our system in order to get votes and gain political power in Indian democracy.

To defeat such groups in the political game, it is important that Muslims participate in politics. If Muslims can form political alliance with sensible and peace loving Hindus or participate in the existing political parties on the basis of peace and justice, they may deprive the mischief-makers of the votes.

Political activism is a day-to-day business, but there is a need to operate at a higher level too, that relating to the judiciary, the constitution, the administration and the police force which is responsible for maintaining law and order.

The way minorities in India, specially the Muslims, have been dealt with in the past half century is a testimony that current constitutional guarantees and regulations concerning the safety of the life and properties of minorities are insufficient and ineffective.  Indian democracy has failed to sufficiently protect its minorities.

This deficiency in our system has been pointed out on many occasions by the human right commissions and various commissions instituted to investigate communal riots.5 There is abundance of recommendations that these commissions have brought forward. Had they been implemented, today the Sikh, Christians and Muslims may not have the feeling that the administration has always failed to protect them in difficult times.  To remove this drawback from our system, one needs to pay attention to other institutions of collective living as well as to engage proactively in a continuous effort making.

Media’s role in this endeavor is paramount.  So far Muslims have not invested any significant resource in this venture. Muslims have to overcome this gap.  They have to present a strong case not only through English and Hindi media but through the media in other regional languages as well in order to dispel the stereotypical and hateful picture of Muslims and to present a balanced picture of them.  Muslims have to do this job themselves.  No one else can do it for them.

It is not enough to publish a few newspapers and magazines to present the case of Muslims in media.  While this is important, it is more important   that we remain aware of the current trends, be alert, and wherever and whenever it is possible, use the national and regional media to present our point of view.  This is as beneficial and perhaps more beneficial than having a few Muslim-owned media. 

Television and electronic media are more important than print media.  We are nowhere in electronic media but our presence in this field is essential for our survival.

The roots of our influence in media and politics are in our social relationship.  Hindus and Muslims live separate lives while living in the same country.  We are unaware of each other’s pains and suffering and rarely participate to share them.  As long as we do not learn to live together as neighbors and as people of the same nation, the hate mongers will continue to be successful.  A true Muslim has nothing to do with hatred. Hatred is the biggest obstacle in the way of Islam in India.  The warmongers have no better poison against Muslims than hatred.  Both Islam and reason demand that Muslims enhance and strengthen their social relationships and participate in social and welfare programs including efforts to eliminate poverty and hunger.

Despite participating fully in politics, judiciary, media, and other social programs, Muslims may encounter violence.  In such situations they have the moral and legal right to defend themselves.  Muslims should make advance preparation to deal with such situation.  However, such preparation will be more effective if Hindus are aware of it and support it.  The problem is not to protect Muslims from Hindus or Hindus from Muslims, the real issue is to protect the weak and oppressed from the powerful and aggressors.

Despite all efforts there may still be problems.  As is evident from many commission reports, the basis for terrorism is provided by the frustration, anger and helplessness of the victims who find no recourse in the system.  People can easily find and exploit such frustrated youths to serve their vested interests.

It is prudent to allow the democratic means of expressing anger, dissent and dissatisfaction in order to avoid frustration and helplessness leading to negative sentiments.   Peaceful protests and demonstrations are part of the political norms of a democracy.  Muslims can also use these to express their grievances.  It is better to jointly hold such programs to make them more effective.

Even after all these efforts, the grim situation in refugee camps, the delay in courts, and the waste of precious years of young people in prisons can increase frustration and fuel anger. Muslims have to make legal help available and effective.  The Indian nation has to be kept informed of the plights of those living in refugee camps.  Muslims have to establish more stable institutions to deal with these ongoing problems.

The above suggestions to stop the onslaught of Hindutva aggression and to  protect the Muslim community and the whole country from  the damages it can inflict require unity among Muslims.   The difference of opinions and practices based on different approaches to Islam has nothing to do with Muslims coming together to solve these problems.   This is a matter of Muslims’ survival in India.  The leadership of various religious and political groups of Muslims must realize the challenges of the Hindutva aggression and must launch this campaign, as described above, with one voice and from a single platform.

If Muslims are able to do this, they may also overcome other weaknesses that they have been experiencing since long.   Muslims are poorer than others, literacy rate among Muslims is also lower, overall they suffer from more health concerns than others, and their representation in police, administration, and other important walks of life is much less than others.  Muslim scholars and intellectuals point out to these areas of deficiency from time to time.  This essay is not to focus on these issues in detail but just to point out that Muslim unity can help them work together for achieving other long-term goals too.

American aggression

America has launched a worldwide campaign against terrorism after the attacks on Pentagon and World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. In this campaign the real targets are those individuals and groups who are angry against America or their own governments and who don’t like the expanding American hegemony and are determined to harm Americans and American interests world-wide.  Since America considers a number of countries sponsoring these individuals and groups, America is also after these countries.  Therefore after occupying Afghanistan and Iraq, America is now eying on Iran, Syria and some other Arab and Muslim countries.  At the same time America is also trying to capture and punish people in Pakistan and Southeast Asia who have committed terrorism against it or may be potential terrorists. Consequently, many governments such as those in Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are coming hard on Islamists and their policy and attitude toward religious schools are also changing. Due to these circumstances Muslims all over the world have become very skeptical about America. They suspect that America will go after Muslim and Islamic interests and destroy them in the same way it has occupied Afghanistan and Iraq after September 11^th attacks. They argue that America wants to suppress and wipe out all such groups and trends that it considers harmful for its hegemonic aspirations, especially those countries or groups that keep away from the increasing permissiveness of the American society. In support of their arguments Muslims point to the tightening grip of government on religious schools, institutions and organizations in countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.  All this, some Muslims argue, is happening at the insistence of America.

The entire Muslim world is troubled with American plans and actions; however, Indian Muslims are especially disturbed.  This is because the proponents of Hindutva in India, many of whom are in power these days, have similar plans to deal with Muslims in India.  These people are also after religious institutions; they are surveying the mosques, closely watching over Tablighi (Muslim missionary) activities, and are proposing legislation to stop conversion to another religion. Indian Muslims are afraid that the international campaign of America against terrorism will provide a cover and an excuse to the forces of Hindutva in India to achieve their anti-Islamic goals and objectives.  In this, Muslims suspect, the Israeli intelligence will also help the forces of Hindutva.

It is not possible to objectively analyze all these fears and suspicions of Indian Muslims in this essay.  The discussion may be quite lengthy.  However, America and Islam and the relationship of Muslims globally cannot be understood only in the light of recent events, nor would it be wise to think that all that is happening in the world is only due to American hegemonic plans. We have to analyze various futuristic models and scenarios to understand the interplay of America and Muslims the world over.  This may require many books and essays.  In this essay the author only wants to answer the question raised earlier: can Muslims use violence against America as a counter measure against American aggression and violence? 

In the opinion of this author, it is neither advisable nor allowed by Islam to use violence against America in the current situation.  On the contrary it will only hurt Islam and Muslims.  When America attacks a country unilaterally such as it did against Iraq, the people have a right to defend themselves. But they have to do it within the framework of international law governing two sovereign nations. We can help Iraqi Muslims but we cannot call for an open attack on Americans and American interests any where in the world.  This would be a violation of Islamic teachings.  Not only those acts violate the limits imposed by Islam on the use of force and violence, they are more hurtful to Islam and Muslims than it is to the Americans and their interests.

It is necessary to completely shun violence

In the opinion of this author, Muslims should not use violence against America with the exception of the people of countries occupied by America. 

My reasons are the following:

·         In the current situation Muslims’ use of violence necessarily takes such forms that are prohibited by Islam.
·         The violence committed by few Muslims against America so far has already done enough damage to Islam and Muslims.  On the one hand, media use these events to portray Islam and Muslims as uncivilized, inhumane, and unkind.  This has led to increased misunderstanding of Islam and Muslims among common people.  On the other hand, the U. S. government is able to form an alliance for aggression against Muslims.  In this way these violent activities have helped the extreme right wing Christians in America and the Zionist lobby.
·         Muslims do not have sufficient power to combat American aggression with violence and force. If    Muslims have to confront America, which this author does not consider inevitable, then they should do so in the fields of knowledge, ideology and culture.  Additionally, it is also not right to think that the use of violence will be a deterrent to stop increasing American aggression against Muslims.    So far it has not happened.  The balance of power is so heavily tilted in favor of America that Muslims cannot deter America by use of force and violence.
·         Another reason for strongly arguing against the use of violence is that it has already damaged enough the Muslim society from within.  Their valuable human and material resources are spent on acquiring weapons and conducting covert operations instead of investing in education, media, economic development and other useful projects.

As explained earlier, when an individual or group engages in violence, it has to be done secretly and by violating many laws of the land to which that individual or group belongs. This leads to the emergence of a new leadership of such people who only believe in violence and secret activities. These ‘leaders’ then seek help from those who know how to break laws, engage in smuggling of weapons and some times even in drug trafficking, and how to get fake names and forged travel documents.  Sooner or later such people have to seek cooperation from international criminal groups.  No act of terrorism can be committed without breaking established international, national, and Islamic rules.  This itself makes terrorism a totally prohibited and undesirable act.

This leads to a major internal problem for Muslims: replacing the duly emerged leadership with criminals and those with unIslamic character.  It is desirable as well as beneficial for Muslims’ interaction with non-Muslims that Muslim leadership embodies the ethical principles of Islam and represents Islamic character both in its actions as well as thoughts.  If the leadership has to use force, it does so within the limits imposed by Islam.  It has been experienced during the communal riots in India that when Muslims protect innocent non-Muslims, non-Muslims too stand up to protect innocent Muslims and stand against the members of their own community committing aggression.

Whether it is to combat against the aggression of Hindutva in India, or it is to counter the Zionist, right wing Christian Evangelists, or a group of Americans committed to America’s hegemony, in all cases Muslims’ real weapons are their Islamic character and their ideology in which they firmly believe and that which they want to communicate to the entire humanity.    Whenever Muslims take a violent approach under the pressure of a particular situation, they harm their moral position and Islam’s mission toward human race.

Future strategy

It can be rightly argued that even if violence can be completely shunned, it is not going to change Muslims’ situation.  Whether it is India or the entire world, Muslims have to do much more in order to live with honor and dignity.  Muslims don’t have any control over when others will leave violence, however they can play a significant role in removing this myth from people’s mind that Islam and Muslims are a threat to the world peace.  In Europe and America the environment has become very much anti-Muslim and anti-Islam.  Muslims throughout the world should help the American and the European Muslims in their efforts to remove this misunderstanding.    Muslims can also better the situation by improving their own conduct.  Following are three important points that, if implemented, may significantly improve the image of Islam and Muslims.

Transparency

A lot of misunderstanding about Islam and Muslims are simply due to lack of proper knowledge about Islam and Muslims.  It is difficult to undo the distorted memories of historical events and facts, however it is easier to remove misunderstanding about the present state of Muslim thinking and actions.  What is being taught in religious institutions?  What is being done in the mosques? What is being learnt in Da ‘wah gatherings and travels? One can provide right information to replace ignorance or misunderstanding.  If every one can directly observe and obtain information about Muslim institutions and activities, about management and about finances, and there is no secretiveness, people can themselves see the truth.  Transparency is especially required in keeping the financial records clean and up-to-date.  This will make it clear that funds collected to run an Islamic institution are in fact spent in that institution, and not in financing any act of terrorism.  Having open and audited financial records will also help prevent corruption in Muslim-run institutions. 

Democracy

When only one person has all the power to make decision in an Islamic institution, things cannot be transparent.  Transparency demands that decisions are made in consultation with people concerned.  One of the charges America and its allies have against many Muslim countries is lack of democracy and freedom.  People have no say in the affairs of their countries that are either run by dictators or by kings.    In most Muslim institutions the same model is practiced.  Both in religious institutions and non-religious organizations, leadership is in the hands of very few who continue to be leaders for their entire life.  When they die their sons or people from their families take their place.  Obviously people who become leaders undemocratically cannot care for democratic way of dealing with issues.  In such situations it seems true that Muslims are hostage to their rulers and Muslim institutions and their resources are hostage to the leaders who control these institutions.  It is necessary to liberate both the Muslim common folks and their institutions.

It is strange that the quality that the Qur’an describes as integral part of Muslim psyche (as stated in the Qur’an, Verse 38, Chapter 42, “and those who obey their Lord, establish prayers, and conduct their affairs by mutual consultation.”) is lacking among Muslims and has become an excuse for others to attack Muslim countries and institutions.

Transparency will help Muslims effectively manage and run their institutions and consultations and democratic approach to decision making will help them gain people’s confidence and trust.  If Muslim institutions and organization implement consultation at all levels, it will increase their credibility.  Today the situation is opposite.  This helps the forces of Hindutva in India and internationally it helps America to associate such activities with Muslims that do not reflect the reality.  Unrepresentative leaderships that are running Muslim welfare, religious and educational institutions can easily be blamed for inhuman trends, intolerance, and violence.  Muslim institutions worldwide are easily blamed for such acts.  If Muslim leadership maintains transparency and democratic norms in all its institutions and organizations and if it respects and tolerates common Muslim’s opinions, then it will be easier for others to understand them.  People will know that Muslims’ activities are predictable and people will no longer be afraid of Muslims.

Grass root work

The third quality necessary for any reform or for any mission to be accomplished is the relationship with common folks.  It is important for Muslims to partake in the pain and sufferings of human beings regardless of their race or religion.  It is a fact that whether it is India or the whole world the list of issues specific to Muslims is not very long.   Most Muslims are facing the same issues that their fellow human beings are facing. Poverty, illiteracy, homelessness, illnesses, insecurity are the problems common to Muslims and non-Muslims alike in India, Southeast Asia, and Africa.  Muslims’ suffering may be a little more but they are not altogether different.  To solve these problems effectively, it is necessary to launch common efforts including Muslims and non-Muslims.  Muslims do not create their own islands, instead they consider the entire world to be their home and make efforts for the betterment of the entire humanity.  This approach is especially significant in the current environment of mistrust against Muslims.  Whether it is a neighborhood in America or Britain, or a locality in India, it is important that doubts and suspicions toward each other are replaced by trust, confidence and credibility.  The roots of violence are embedded in an environment of hatred and suspicion.  To eradicate violence, one must change this environment.

It is common these days to establish non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) for social and welfare work.  Some of these NGO’s have gained international respect and credibility and they can independently operate in any country.   Some NGO’s have been recognized by the United Nations as observers.  These NGO’s work for a variety of purposes including safe environment, world peace, human rights watch, eradication of poverty, women’s rights, and organizations against child labor.  The spirit of Islam demands that Muslims enthusiastically participate in these activities.  The current environment of hatred and suspicion also demand that Muslims do not hesitate to exploit any opportunity to strengthen relationship with their fellow human beings.  Like many other countries, Islamic financial institutions in India too have been opened to non-Muslims and some non- Muslims are in fact associated with these institutions, this model should be followed in other Muslim institutions too and Muslims should try to make non-Muslim participation in these institutions more meaningful and extensive.

Final words

Efforts to achieve transparency, development of democratic culture and enhancement of relationship with common people are not presented here as a solution to all the problems Muslims face today. Instead, this program is recommended to minimize the hatred and suspicion that has become widespread.  If this happens, the possibility of initiating more proactive programs will become a reality.  Leaving violence is not the solution to all the problems of Muslims, but it may enable Muslims get rid of many problems that they are facing due to some Muslims’ violent acts.  As far as the question: when will Muslim decline come to an end and how can they start making progress, Muslims are debating these questions for long.  Muslims are also doing many positive efforts in the field of education, training, health care, economics, and politics etc.  Muslims must continue to do these things patiently for as long as it takes to regain their status as the balanced nation.  Muslims must not become victim of the short-term-ism and a narrow vision and must not engage in violence as a solution to any problem. 

The author has made an effort in this essay to convince Muslims that violence is not at all a strategy to deal with Muslims’ issues and problems. It is only a mistake, a big mistake that Muslims must realize and abandon.  They should instead follow the path of righteousness, wisdom and patience.