Ethics of War and Peace in Medieval and Contemporary Islamic Tradition - Research Paper Example

Ethics of War and Peace in Medieval and Contemporary Islamic Tradition Introduction This research paper discusses ethics of war in Islamic and Western traditions. The basis of the research paper is a brief overview of the main theories of war of Western and Islamic tradition. Furthermore, this research paper defines the main ethical principles of the war in Islamic tradition. Moreover, this research paper presents a discussion of common points between Islamic and Western traditions basing on considerations of Qur’an, the sunna (in Islamic tradition) and St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and others’ writings (in Western tradition). The outline of the research paper is the following: A) Introduction B) General discussion: 1) Western theories of war and peace: a brief overview; 2) The main sources of Islamic ethics of war and peace; 3) War and Peace in the Qur'an; 4) War and Peace in the Sunna; 5) The Grounds for War: from medieval age till nowadays; 6) The Conduct of War; 7) Parallels between jihad and Just War; 8) Modern jihad as alternative to Western theories of war and peace. C) Conclusion. Western theories of war and peace: a brief overview Ethics of war…from the first look this expression sounds crude. Can deaths of innocent people be justified? There is a Just War Theory of Roman philosophical and Catholic origin representing ethics of war. The main claim of this theory is that any conflict is developed with regard to philosophical, religious or political justice criteria and occurs in the result of certain conditions. The first outstanding person, who talked about ‘just under certain conditions’, was Cicero. Christian medieval theory and its supporters Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas also mentioned ‘just under certain conditions’. Another representative was Francisco de Vitoria who “criticized the conquest of America by the Kingdom of Spain” (Holmes 1989). Later on Thomas Hobbes had destroyed theory of Just War as he introduced the works on classical republicanism. Whether Christian principles or a secular foundation underlies in the Just War theory is hard to define at once. At first, let us pay our attention to the fact that one of the Catholic Church’s teachings justifies military defense in case: Inevitable damage on the nation by the aggressor; Inefficiency of other means involved in a struggle with the aggressor; Nation’s belief in success; Arms used in the war shouldn’t be graver than the aggressor’s ones (Holmes 1989). Thus on the one hand, the Church doesn’t reject a possibility of war under certain circumstances for the favor of the nation. Nevertheless secular humanists claim that universal ethics is a basis of war ethics. In one way or another, Just War theory has been developed for distinguishing between “justifiable and unjustifiable uses of organized armed forces” (Hoffman 2006). Nowadays the main attention is paid to the appropriateness of armed force involvement (jus ad bellum) and the level of acceptability in using such force (jus in bello). The former concern evokes a vivid discussion in the international society nowadays. The main sources of Islamic ethics of war and peace Islamic ethics of war may seem to be unrealistic. It is rarely possible to find a non-Islamic individual, who justifies their strategies or military means. It is possible to give the following example: in order to resolve Iran-Iraq during People's Islamic Conference in Mecca and Baghdad, where scientists together with Muslim activists took part, the participants came to the common conclusion: jihad, i. e. Just War (Holmes 1989; Holmes 2005). Jihad can be hardly understood by the Westerners. To tell the truth, even Muslims themselves have long been negotiating about the issues of war and peace and jihad, respectively. Regarding modern Islamic discourse of war and peace, historical events, a process of decolonization etc, Muslim intellectuals have started to express common points of view on jihad. Though certain debates are still echoed in Islamic world, processes of globalization and international relations’ development have shifted from jihad, in comparison with the Medieval Age (Holmes 1989). Moreover, it is relevant nowadays not only to reconsider and reinterpret Islamic considerations about jihad, but also try to find out something positive and alternative for Western theory of war and peace. Two main sources of Islamic ethics are Qur'an and practice (sunna) of the prophet Muhammad. Let’s turn our attention to these two sources and to considerations of the grounds of war and the means of war in the Medieval Age. Moreover, it is interesting to find out common features between Islamic and Western traditions, i.e. between jihad and Just War. The main controversy about jihad occurs on the basis of juristic historical definition of war and peace and not philosophical or ethical sources. Once legalistic tradition is acknowledged to be a leading one, ethical tradition is not taken into account. In the medieval period a poor ethical explanations on theory of war and peace existed next to well-developed legal treatises of Jihad (Kelsay & Johnson 1991; Firestone 1999; Silverman 2002). Legal principles and laws of Islamic states in the medieval period were anarchistic, making an emphasis on maslaha mursala (general interest) and darura (necessity) justifying actions of state’s rulers. Thus essential political issues of that period remained uncovered and ethics was not applied to specific situations. War and Peace in the Qur'an Islamic history of the end of the fourteenth century has the following lines: “wars and different kinds of fighting have always occurred in the world since God created it” (Qur’an). Ibn Khaldun comments on war that it is “natural for human beings; no nation, and no race is free from it”. Islamic law and laws of war and peace are thought to be derived from the one source, Islam. Qur'an is a valuable and highly-esteemed by Muslims comment on the prophet Muhammad and his actions and life. There are no direct ethical considerations in Qur’an, but there is a systematic approach to ethics. Qur’an explains different reasons for human’s desire to war. First of all, Qur’an propagates in-born innocence and compliance of God’s commandments by Muslims. Human society erodes an innocent nature of an individual during all his life. Secondly, people should be striving for the absence of conflict’s reasons and a desire to reach true peace (salam). God propagates only peace for humanity. The third reason is man’s ability to act in a wrong way. There always exists someone who is able to break God’s commandments. Once Adam disobeys God, humans find themselves "enemies to each other" on earth (Qur’an 2:36, 7:24). Thus the root of evil is in immoral behavior of humans. Nevertheless God treats humans mercifully. Humans are victims of Iblis's cunning nature. Social pressures enable groups of people to act wrongly and to disobey laws of God. Thus a lot of people being guided by their delusions should be enlightened by prophets. Thus when humans commit sins they transgress against their own souls. It is even possible when the whole nation rejects God, exposing violence and oppression, moral anarchy undermines the higher moral code. Moreover, in order to reach salam it is necessary to obey God’s laws and live in compliance with his instructions and guidance. Human agency should be developed in order to eliminate the effects of anarchy and establishment of divine law. Muslim faith and Muslim principles must never be undermined and thus Muslims are ready to protect their divine laws and morals. Thus the use of force is justified in case it is used in order to preserve peace in the world. The true believers are those "who, whenever tyranny afflicts them, defend themselves" (Qur’an 42:39). Generally speaking, believers fight against non-believers and those who undermine their faith. There are the following lines in Qur’an: "Tumult and oppression (fitna) is worse than killing" (Qur’an 2:191). Thus Qur’an justifies military force usage in the name of believers’ essence preservation: "Fighting is prescribed for you, even though it be hateful to you; but it may well be that you hate. something that is in fact good for you, and that you love a thing that is in fact bad for you: and God knows, whereas you do not" (Qur’an 2:216). If to compare Islamic issues on war and peace with Christian possibility of Just War, in Islamic tradition there is a predetermined suggestion that wars are permissible if they are in the name of God. If to consider these issues from a perspective of idealistic realism, societies exist in constant balance between war and peace; constant tensions exist. Nevertheless in Qur’an there is a claim that humans are able to fight against evil. War and Peace in the Sunna Another source of Islamic ethics is sunna of the prophet Muhammad. The ethics of war and peace can be also found there. Pre-Islamic Arab culture had different ethics of war and peace. An unpredictable character of results of the war was a challenge for pre-Islamic society. The Prophet is an Arab chivalry. His ethics of war and peace can be found in his writings, actions and biography. Thus there are no facts signifying his positive attitude towards war. He was a supporter of ‘non-violent resistance’. In spite of the fact of tensions among Meccan Muslims, the Prophet appealed to patience of the nation and strength against opponents and their attacks. The Prophet speaks about a great forgiveness and doesn’t propagate revenge. When the Prophet lived in Medina, jihad gained a military context. Muhammad Haykal, on the other hand, claims that: "This peaceful show of strength by Islam does not at all mean that Islam, at that time, forbade fighting in defense of personal life and religion, or to put a stop to persecution. What it did really mean at that time, as it does today or will ever do was to condemn any war of aggression" (Wells 1996; Yoder 2009). Pre-Islamic customs were really broken by Abdallah ibn Jahsh acted against a prohibition of fight in the forbidden period. At this point also ambiguous considerations about Islamic hostile moods occur. The Grounds for War: from medieval age till nowadays In the medieval texts jihad was described as legally justified struggle of Muslims against unbelievers. Jihad was perceived as a justified means of Islamic empire expansion after the death of the Prophet. Jihad was not intended to protect nation against aggression and occupation. It was more self-defense for Muslims, the means of salvation of innocent in-born essence of the believers. The war was a moral duty either of male or female; it was named fard 'ayn. Islam was considered to be a salvation for all nations and thus the believers had to besiege and capture non-believers. Therefore medieval ages were marked by a hostile interpretation and connotation of jihad. It is an interesting fact that there are essential differences between medieval Muslims with their aggressive moods and contemporary Muslims, who consider jihad to be means of self-defense only (O'Brien 1981). Jihad could be justified in medieval ages only legally. A ruler is the only one who could make a decision whether to conduct a war or not. Fundamentalists are supporters of jihad as means of combating of social and international oppression: “Jihad is for the fundamentalists an instrument for the realization of political and social justice in their own societies, a powerful tool for internal reform and one required by the Qur'an's command that Muslims enjoin the right and forbid the wrong" (Qur’an 3:104). A concept of modern jihad differs greatly. Modern rulers of western countries are considered to be enemies and oppressors of Muslims. A common point between fundamentalists and modern Muslims is that jihad enforces human rights. Jihad is considered to be sacred if it protects human rights and humanity. These claims echoed in Western tendencies to protect human rights on the international level. The Conduct of War The war conduct should not involve transgress means: "And fight in God's cause against those who wage war against you, but do not transgress limits, for God loves not the transgressors" (Qur’an 2:190). Therefore Muslims are not noncombatants. They can involve means which are necessary at a specific situation. There is no need to exceed the limit necessary to overcome an aggressor. Modern Muslim discourse on war and peace, ius in bello issues are not properly considered. Medieval theory of war and peace in Islamic world is not relevant nowadays. Means of war conduct such as enslavement or killing of prisoners is not relevant anymore. In order to discuss modern theory of war and peace in Islam, it is possible to consider Iran-Iraq War. Fight against enemies is justified, but destruction of dwellings of civilians is not. Moreover, another important issue of ius in bello is the usage of weapons of mass destruction. None of Muslim scholars has developed a concept of Islamic world’s attitude to chemical and biological weapon. Nevertheless it is a well-known fact that Iraq has used chemical weapon several times. On the one hand, Qur’an defines Muslim’s attitude to nuclear weapons in the following way: "Hence, make ready against them whatever force and war mounts you are able to muster, so that you might deter thereby the enemies of God" (Qur’an 8:60). Thus Muslims should have a positive attitude to nuclear weapons. On the other hand, Muslims would involve nuclear weapons only in case their enemies had nuclear weapons in their arsenal. Parallels between jihad and Just War In this research paper is an attempt to draw parallels between the Islamic jihad and the Western Just War. It is possible to claim that there are a lot of similarities between Islamic and Western theories of war and peace. At first, jihad was perceived as a legitimate ground for war. Jihad and Just War have another common feature: both of them are directed on elimination of warfare and peace enhancement. In the medieval ages, Muslims had to propagate divine law involving both peaceful and military means if necessary: “No war was jihad unless it was undertaken with right .intent and as a last resort, and declared by right authority” (Qur’an). Nowadays the majority of Muslims reject the possibility to propagate Islam by forced means. Furthermore both jihad and Just War propagate involvement of the least amount of force. Both, jihad and Just War are simultaneously adapting demands of international society for security and realities of the modern world. Islamic ethics of war and peace is constantly interpreted in a different manner nowadays. There is an attempt to find out common points or even alternatives with western theories of war and peace. It is an interesting idea to think about positive moments in Islamic theory of war and peace. For example, three basic claims such as aggression commitment prohibition; fighting for self-defense only; non-combatants immunity are interesting points for western theory of war and peace (Johnson 2002). Westerners might have hostile moods towards Qur’an propagation of killing, fighting of people, but it is necessary to take into account the context of such kind of actions: oppression and tortures provided by aggressor. Thus, in reality these lines in Qur’an are directed on defenders of the nation and civilians. Moreover, next to propagation of forceful means, Qur’an tells about forgiveness and compassion. Only harsh actions of enemies and aggressors can evoke the most radical measures taken by the Muslims (Sorabji 2006). Modern jihad as alternative to Western theories of war and peace Modern Muslims and especially current jihadi movement claim that their strategies are based on the Islamic just-war tradition (Kelsay 1999). Therefore if to take into account principles of Muslims, American government should have given a response to the events of September 11 with regard to the ideology of the Just War. In such a way Kelsay draw parallels between jihad and Just War. He considers this fact to be an alternative for future negotiations between the Western and the Muslim world. Actually, this new stage of relations began on September 11 when the Western world started to think over a fight with terrorism. Of course, American scholars, academics and intellectuals such as Francis Fukuyama, Robert P. George, Samuel P. Huntington and others have claimed that it is necessary to fight with jihad in reference to the principles of Just War. This group of outstanding thinkers wanted also to find ‘brothers and sisters in Muslims societies’ (Elshtain 1991). Kelsay is one of the intellectuals, who want to find common points between Islam and West. Finally, it was found out that Islam is poorly studied by the international society. Generally one or two pieces of Islamic history are taken into account, but there are no works dedicated to comparative analysis of Just War and jihad. Nevertheless on international level all military issues are discussed in accordance with the principles of justice. On the international level, presidents often appeal to Just War theory and its terminology during their speeches. This tendency is a modern one and is not typical of previous years. Thus, for example, Prof. of social science Michael Walzer claims that in the 50s there were ‘realist’ scholars who didn’t consider war and ethics together. They differentiated these two concepts and saw nothing in common between them (Orend 2000). Western Just War theory is rooted in The City of God, an attempt of St. Augustine to correlate Christian principles and principles of the immoral world. St. Augustine appeals to Christ and his peaceful function in the world and philosophical traditions of “pacifism and realism and claims that war is not always a criminal act, nor inevitable and amoral” (Cornell 2004). War could be a means to reach justice (Maldonado-Torres 2008). St. Thomas Aquinas and Hugo Grotius provide the following considerations about war: a conduct of war should be non-excessive; “prisoners should be guaranteed their rights’ protection; noncombatants should be granted immunity; civilians should have the right of self-defense and there are also illegal wars, such as wars with religious basis, aggression and conquest “(Kochan 1999). Therefore there is an exact theoretical basis for war and peace in the Western world, but Islamic theory of war and peace has a lot of interpretations, making an emphasis on both pacifistic and warlike ideas. The definition of jihad in the Qur’an proves once again that there is no exact definition of this phenomenon: “jihad means more than war. It means striving, doing the right thing, going the extra mile, convincing, persuading and, if necessary, fighting” (Bonner). Nevertheless there are exact similarities between Just War theory and Islamic theory of war and peace: “noncombatant immunity, just cause, legal authority of those who have the right to call for the use of force” (Coates 1997; Cook 2001). Another similarity between Just War and jihad is war conduct in case of emergency. Walzer invented a term ‘supreme emergency’ for this type of war. For example, in case of “indiscriminate bombing” of German cities during World War II, military actions were justified. Islamic law has similar claim: “Necessity overrides the forbidden” (Qur’an). Western theory is currently oriented on discussion of crisis, like genocide, thus there appears a necessity to use military force. A vivid discussion is actually around the concept of emergency. Who defines it? Who has the authority to launch military actions in case of emergency? In Islamic tradition, there is a belief that Muslims are in a state of urgent situation, introduced by bad rulers and intrusion of Western culture into Muslim world. Thus Muslims are obliged to put all their efforts and to fight (Miller 1992). Military conflict with the United States is justified by bin Laden and his supporters as necessary measure taken in order to fight with "satanically inspired supporters allying with them" (Steinhoff 2007). Nevertheless, these ‘inspirations’ for military actions are strictly criticized by Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a famous and outstanding person, as wrong actions, caused by misinterpretation of Qur’an and confusing of militant and civilian goals (Maguire 2007). Another supporter of peaceful interpretation of Qur’an is Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naim. This Professor of law has studied Muslim world for a long time and reached the following conclusion: “…jihad is no longer tenable as an Islamic doctrine; …the core issue is whether the use of force is legitimate other than in self-defense” (Qur’an). The professor appeals to Muslim society to adapt international laws and interpret Qur’an not as a military doctrine of fight with unbelievers, but as a doctrine of sympathy and forgiveness. Kelsay considers ideas of jihad and Just War to be a perfect ground for cross-cultural dialogue between Western and Islamic worlds. Conclusion A discussion of ethics of Islamic theory of war and peace is a relevant topic nowadays. A vivid interest to jihad can be explained by its dualistic nature: theoretical basis of Qur’an and the sunna. Different interpretations of Islamic theory of war and peace are a perfect condition for finding common points between Western and Islamic theories of war and peace. Concerning Western theories, it is interesting to note that there are a great number of parallels with Islamic theory of war and peace. It is better to consider Islamic theory of war and peace not from perspective of doctrine of fight with unbelievers, but as a doctrine of forgiveness and sympathy. Unlike Islamic theory of war and peace during medieval ages, contemporary Islamic society propagates no aggression and fight with unbelievers, but rather self-defense and protection of Muslim religion. Therefore Islamic theory of war and peace can be a starting point of cross-cultural dialogue between Islamic and Western worlds. Works cited 1. Cahil, L.S. (1994). Love your enemies: Discipleship, pacifism and Just War theory. Augsburg Fortress Publishers. . 2. Coates, A. J. (1997). The Ethics of War. Manchester University Press. 3. Cook, M. et al. (2001, November 14). Terrorism and ‘Just War’. The Christian Century, 118, 1+. 4. Cornell, D. (2004). Defending Ideals: War, Democracy, and Political Struggles. Routledge. 5. Elshtain, J. (Ed.) (1991). Just War Theory. New York University Press. 6. Firestone, R. (1999). Jihad: The Origin of Holy War in Islam. Oxford University Press. 7. Hoffman, R. J. (Ed.) (2006). Just War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Prometheus Books. 8. Hofman, B.(2006).Inside terrorism. NY: Columbia University Press. 9. Holmes, R. L. (1989). St. Augustine on the Justification of War. In On War and Morality. Princeton University Press, 114-145. 10. Holmes, R. L. (1989). On War and Morality. Princeton University Press. 11. Holmes, R. L. (Ed). (2005). War and Christian Ethics: Classic and Contemporary Readings on the Morality of War. MI: Baker Academic. 12. Johnson, J. (2002, June). Jihad and Just War. A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life, 1+. 13. Kelsay, J. & Johnson, J. (1991). Just War and Jihad: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives on War and Peace in Western and Islamic Traditions. Greenwood Press. 14. Kochan, M. et al. (1999). The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude Seventh-Twentieth Century. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. 15. Maguire, D. C. (2007). The Horrors We Bless: Rethinking the Just-War Legacy. Fortress Press. 16. Maldonado-Torres, N. (2008). Against War: Views from the Underside of Modernity. Duke University Press. 17. Miller, R. B. (Ed). (1992). War in the 20th Century: Sources in Theological Ethics. John Knox Press. 18. O'Brien, W. V. (1981). The Conduct of Just and Limited War. Praeger. 19. Orend, B. et al. (2000). Michael Walzer on War and Justice. McGill-Queen's University Press and University of Wales Press. 20. Silverman, A. L. (2002). Just War, Jihad, and Terrorism: a Comparison of Western and Islamic Norms for the Use of Political Violence. Journal of Church and State, 44, 1+. 21. Sorabji, R. & Rodin, D. (Eds.) (2006). The ethics of war: shared problems in different traditions. Ashgate. 22. Steinhoff,W.(2007).On the ethics of war and terrorism. Oxford University Press. 23. The Official Quran reference. Retrieved from: http://www.isearchquran.com/ 24. Wells, D. A. (1996). An Encyclopedia of War and Ethics. Greenwood Press. 25. Yoder, J. H. et al. (Eds.) (2009). Christian Attitudes to War, Peace, and Revolution. Brazos Press. Read More