1

Islam and WarIslam and WarChapter 2 – The Islamic View of Peace

Introduction About the Author Review of Chapter 2

◦ Peace Defined◦ Islamic Divergence Regarding Achieving Peace

Classical/Sunni View Shia (Shiite)/Reformist view

◦ Comparisons with the West Conclusion

OverviewOverview

Credentials:◦ Graduated Old Dominion University in 1976◦ D.Min. in 1980 from Columbia Theological Seminary◦ Received his PhD in Ethics from University of Virginia 1985◦ Distinguished Research Professor in Religion and Ethics at

University of Florida◦ Books:

Human Rights and the Conflict of Cultures (co-authored;1988) Just War and Jihad (co-edited;1991) Islam and War: A Study in Comparative Ethics (1993) Arguing the Just War in Islam (2007)

Interests/Specialties:◦ Comparative religious ethics; political ethics; religion and war

John KelsayJohn Kelsay

Throughout most of this chapter, the topic of peace and achieving peace is viewed in context of a [religious]-politico-military doctrine or in sociological terms

Possibly leans towards Christian teachings, which may cause prejudice against other forms of religion, vilifying them

Does not cite references for very key points where there is much contention

May not speak Arabic

Possible/Known Biases; ShortfallsPossible/Known Biases; Shortfalls

What is peace?◦ It is the absence of conflict (within/amongst?)◦ A just social order

First bias revealed:◦ Perspective is embedded in a [religious]-politico-military

doctrine and/or sociological terms

How is peace achieved?◦ There are two methods for achieving peace:

Conflict avoidance through compromise and assimilation Conflict avoidance through justice and creating social order through

force

Peace Peace DefinedDefined

Evidence of both methods in Islamic teachings:◦ Avoid conflict with brethren, anyone else is fair game◦ Establish social order through force whenever necessary◦ Kelsay implies that it is the obligation of all Muslims to

spread Islamism (territory); force is a necessity

Second and third biases revealed:◦ Vilify Islamism◦ Turns admonitions to individual Muslims into calls to all

Islam

The Islamic Way (Kelsay’s The Islamic Way (Kelsay’s View)View)

Classical/Sunni view (majority):◦ He legitimizes the Sunni view through its own history◦ The “Law of Nations,” (NOT CITED)

1) Human responsibility to God (Allah); Natural religion 2) Human frailty; God’s mercy; 2 choices

Heedlessness or Submission 3) Submission and Heedlessness as institutionalized political

entities Submission = Territory of Islam = Soft power approach Heedlessness = Territory of war = Hard power approach

4) The Jihad as “Holy War” The intersection of the Territories of Islam and war The struggle to extend the boundaries of the territory of Islam

The Sunni Way (Kelsay’s View)The Sunni Way (Kelsay’s View)

A quick detour (so as not to look too biased?)◦ Jihad doesn’t always mean “holy war” or even “war”◦ Jihad as internal struggle to live in the ways of Allah

In heart = Oneness with God and ways In tongue = Missionary endeavor In hand (or sword as Kelsay sees it) = doesn’t clarify, but

emphasizes Islam’s inclination for sword use Conditions for war

◦ 1) Just cause◦ 2) Declaration of Muslim intentions◦ 3) State authority; not individuals◦ 4) Islamic values/LOAC; war is last resort

The Sunni Way Cont’d (Kelsay’s View)The Sunni Way Cont’d (Kelsay’s View)

Quick history lesson:◦ The cause for Islamic divergence; Sunni vs. Shiite

It comes down to leadership Shiites believe that God divinely appoints an Islamic leader, an Imam The last Imam was the 12th, an infant who disappeared in 874c.e. The 12th Imam will appear again one day and establish social order All other leaders (caliphs) since then have been usurpers

Shiite/(Sunni) Reformist view (minority)◦ Shiites associated with Sunni caliphs because some form of order

was better than none, until the Imam’s return◦ Increasing Islamic territory not sanctioned, until Imam’s return◦ Only defensive lethal force is acceptable, but the defense could

be “preemptive strike”

◦ Kelsay’s Emphasis: they would wage war if the Imam were here

The Shiite/Reformist Way (Kelsay’s The Shiite/Reformist Way (Kelsay’s View)View)

Iran (largely Shiite) as an example:◦ The Iranian Revolution - justified◦ The formation of an Islamic republic - justified◦ Iran displaying hostility towards West - justified◦ War with Iraq - justified

Iran originally held to Islamic values in war

Egypt’s Mahmud Shaltut as example of Sunni reformist◦ Fighting justified only in cases of defense

Other Sunni views ID’d as militant or fundamentalist

The Shiite/Reformist Way Cont’d (Kelsay’s View)The Shiite/Reformist Way Cont’d (Kelsay’s View)

Western “just war” doctrine◦ Military ethics of Roman philosophical and Catholic origin

How do they compare?

◦ * US’s use of the A-bomb being the exception◦ ** The US Civil War being an example◦ ** Militants are of the fundamentalist variety

Comparisons with the WestComparisons with the West

Cause West Sunni Shiite

Religion Never In order to expand In defense of

Proportionality Mostly* IAW Islamic values IAW Islamic values

Discrimination Mostly* IAW Islamic Values IAW Islamic values

Authority Always Always Always

Militants Rarely** Never*** Never***

QUESTIONS?QUESTIONS?