War on Terrorism and Jihad
M. A. Hussain
Hundreds of books and articles have been written by the scholars, academicians, media men
and experts on Jihad. They treat Jihad as merely a theological concept. However, Jihad is an
ideology like the war on terrorism. As war on terrorism ideology hides that it has anything
to do with Muslims and globalization of the free market under American dominance.
Theological concept of Jihad hides that jihad unleashed under Mohammad during 7th century,
had anything to do with politics of resource war and Islamic imperialism.
Jihad is to Islam what war is to imperialism. Historically, Jihad and Islamic empire were
made for each other. It is Jihad (and Islamic fiscal regime) alone that is peculiar to Islam and
has not been borrowed from Judaism and Christianity. Rest of Islam is plagiarized Judaism
and Christianity. Like the war on terrorism, Jihadi demonology has been used to loot, plunder
and conquer countries and enslave women.
Quran said to be a great miracle could only convert less than 100 followers in 13 years in
Mecca. It was when Mohammad used his sword, indeed a “hard power” and war booty to
spread the word of God that Islam could establish as a world religion. The doctrine of Jihad
took birth as a structural necessity for emerging Muslim community in Medina. The problem
Mohammad faced was to preside over the transition of a city into a state; he lacked resources
for such a transition. Except sheer rhetoric and empty sermons, Mohammad had nothing to
offer to Meccan’s and had no solution to the problems of nomadic and pastoral existence
Arabs were pursuing. These had become the basis of their economy as Kabah the idol temple
of tribal deities was turned into a marketplace and a trade center, that was the reason that
could not renounce pagan customs and rituals. Mohammad made this transition possible
through Jihad, looting of the wealth of non-Arab cities and crisis ridden empires in
decadence. This way the desert dwellers amassed tremendous wealth through Jihad forays. It
brought into existence an Islamic empire and that can be taken as its “butterfly effect".
In Mecca Mohammad confined himself only to giving sermons and preaching, dawa, what is
in fact, soft power. With jihad ideology, Islamic holy warriors conquered vast empires
without much resistance as Americans got an easy victory in crisis ridden Iraq. Like the war
on terrorism, Jihad is based on the principle that the end justifies the means. It gives moral
justification for the destruction of the envied other, and looting and plundering resources of
enemy. Narcissism, lust and greed are the kernel of Jihad. This was the ideology that turned
traditional tribal raid gzawa into a global war, and its success reflected the decadence of the
ancient world order, not the strength of Islam. The epistemological basis of jihad is that there
can be no peace unless and until hakimiyyat of Allah (sovereignty of Allah) is established on
the earth. Same is true for war on terrorism; world leadership belongs to America and there
can be no peace in the world unless American supremacy is not established over the entire
Jihad’s eschatological assumption is that God is on the side of Muslims and all the acts of
infidels are Stannic. Moral ground of Jihad (and the war on terrorism) is that the truth and
falsehood, good and bad right or wrong has to be decided on the battlefield. Those who have
turned war on terrorism into a holy war understand that UNO endorsement is needed to
scaralize the war. They make it sure that UNO sides with America and the world is duped
into believing that war on terrorism is purported to promote freedom and democracy.
Jihadi’s convince their foot soldiers that those who fight for the cause of God will get amply
rewarded right in this life and those who fall on the battlefield will go into paradise. They
give money to relatives of sucide bombers and a ticket to heaven. Similarly anti-terrorism
worriers have to convince their war allies that nations participating UNO sponsored war shall
Unless the unbelievers either understand God's message and voluntarily convert to Islam or
submit to Allah’s authority by submitting to those who claim that they act in accordance with
God’s will, otherwise there can be no dialogue with them but war. Both Jihadis and
proponents of war on terrorism claim that those who will win on the battlefield will impose
their truth and supremacy over the loser. Those who will lose war against Jihadis will have to
submit to Allah or get enslaved and annihilated. In case of war on terrorism they have to
submit to UNO resolutions. The losers own nothing and their lives may be spared if they
prove of any use to the Muslims. Everything belongs to the winner, Muslims, even the wives
of the losers. Jihad and war on terrorism justify plunder, pillage and loot of the resources of
their enemy and indulging in the worst humiliation of the captured prisoners of war,
depriving losers of war right to live and human dignity.
Jihad as an ideology is better understood if it is compared with Bush’s war on terrorism.
There is a lot of similarity in seemingly incomparable historical events. Globalization under
Arab tribalism and free market may appear to be parallel lines that will never meet.
However, the world saw the parallel lines meeting in Baghdad during Iraq's war: Shia Iraqis
taking war booty of fallen Sunni enemy in a very peaceful manner and the world's most
powerful armies guarding Iraqi oil ministry leaving the rest of Iraq as war booty for their
local (Shia) allies. Likewise, it is not difficult to find dhammis in capitalist new world order.
There are plenty of them, for example working people and other marginalized segments of
society. However, the dhammi status astonishingly fits to Palestinians, whose human dignity
and the right to life is being violated on the daily basis; exactly in the same manner dhammis
are being treated in Shariat run countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Ironically
Palestinians are being given the similar treatment as Mohammad gave to the Jews of Medina.
The comparison between the two ideologies can be done without demonizing Mohammad as
the author of Jihad doctrine and Bush as the leader of free market fundamentalism and
without turning to anti-Americanism and Muslim bashing.
Islam had been a vehicle of globalization of the ancient world same as democracy and
freedom is being used as an ideology for globalization of the capital. Ancient Globalization
was presided by Islam and in turn shaped by it. Earlier Arabs used to raid each other for their
survival needs that were governed by tribal norms. Islam gave them an ideology to turn such
raids into a world war, into a great appetite for material wealth and women. It is Jihad that
has turned the desert dwellers into a world power. Allah provided all the rules, regulations,
and justifications for such an imperialist war. It resulted in a violent dismantling and
intolerance towards everything that was non-Arab and old in view of Arab invaders, no
different than the present-day globalization.
Like Bush’s war on terrorism is linked to free market and supply lines of oil resources,
Mohammad cashed in on the envy among Arabs to make their own town the market place
like Kabah. Mohammad sold the concept of Jihad to Arabs as a solution to all of their
problems of scarcity of material resources. The sameness of the two ideologies is astonishing.
These are few of the similarities:
Bush talked of highly valued concepts like democracy and freedom, but in practice, he took
away the freedom of Iraqis to organize themselves as a nation-state and the Iraqis struggle for
democracy in their own country. Mohammad talked of peace for the whole mankind, but he
enslaved Jews, took their wealth and wives, slaughtered his captives in cold blood. Poor
Jihadis were supported by wealthy Meccans who bought horses and other things used in war
for them, thus they were beneficiaries of jihad forays without sacrificing their sons. Likewise
Bush got support of wealthy Americans, and they took full advantage of Iraqi oil resources,
while poor Americans sacrificed their sons during Iraq war where there was no terrorism but
oil. Mohammad desperately wanted the wealth of the Jews of Medina to bribe his followers,
and lest he might have been betrayed by them as a loser after he was forced out of Mecca for
fear of his life.
Jihad was impelled by resource war and imperialist appetite. Likewise the war on terrorism
aimed to capture the oil resources of Iraq. Both Bush and Mohammad were driven by envy
of the other. Mohamed and his army were penniless and envied wealthy Jews, Bush's oil
hungry America envied rich oil resources of Iraq. Bush took advantage of infighting among
Shai's and Sunnis. Mohammad took advantage of the hostility of Medina tribes against Jews
and envy among Arab tribes of Kabah as a trade center. Both Jihad and the war on terrorism
are the pre-emptive war doctrines. Saddam did not commit any aggression against America.
Jews of Medina did not commit any act of aggression against Mohammad. On mere rumors
that they were in a league with Meccans, hostilities against Jews were justified
Similarly, Bush justified war on Iraq on concocted intelligence reports that Saddam possessed
weapons of mass destruction. Bush promised his allies oil contracts and share in war booty,
so did Mohamed who told his followers, "those who lagged behind will say, when you sent
out to take booty, let us company you." (Sura 48 verse 15) Mohamed as well as Bush bribed
his allies to ask for their cooperation. Mohamed gave 100 camels to the tribal chief of the
Banu Thaqif to convert to Islam and in another battle during Khyber campaign, Mohamed
offered a share of the booty to the Ghatatan tribe and thereby dissuading them from helping
the local Jews, with whom they were allied.
Jihad excludes the idea of peace but authorizes temporary truces as a long-term strategy,
Bush excluded all roads to peace, and negotiability but accepted temporary truces as a longterm strategy. Mohammad laid siege of the Jewish tribes of Medina cutting off the supply of
food and water. Bush imposed no fly over zone over Iraq and economic sanctions that
resulted in death of innocent Iraqi newborn babies for the want of medicines.
Ayoub, M. M. ( 2003). The Crisis of Muslim History, Oneworld publications.
Bamyeh, M. A. (1999). The Social Origins of Islam, University of Minnesota Press.
Boldeman, L. (2007). The Cult Of The Market, ANU E Press.
BONNER, M. ( 2006). Jihad in Islamic History, Princeton University Press.
Cook, D. (2005). Understanding Jihad, University Of California Press.
Crone, P. (2004) Meccan Trade and The Rise of Islam, Georgia’s Press.
CRONE, P. & Martin Hinds (1986), God's Caliph, Cambridge University Press.
Dashti, A. (1985). Twenty Three Years, (F. R. Bagley, Trans.) Taylor and Francis.
Madelung, W. (1997 ). The Succession to Mohammad, Cambridge University Press.
Vlahos, M. (2009). Fighting Identity, Praeger Security International.
Wansbrough, John E.,(2004) Quranic Studies, Prometheus Books.
(Urdu translation : www.slideshare.net/yangburz/documents)