On The Permissibility Of Muslim Military Personnel Within The U.S. Armed Forces Participating In The War Operations And Related Efforts In Afghanistan And In Other Muslim Countries

This question presents a very complicated issue and a highly sensitive situation for our Muslim brothers and sisters serving in the American army as well as other armies that face similar situations.

All Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorize the innocents, and those who permit the killing of non-combatants without a justifiable reason. Islam has declared the spilling of blood and the destruction of property as absolute prohibitions until the Day of Judgment.

Hence, whoever violates these pointed Islamic texts is an offender deserving of the appropriate punishment according to their offense and according to its consequences for destruction and mischief.

COPYRIGHT_IO: Published on https://www.islamopediaonline.org/permissibility-of-muslim-military-personnel-within-the-us-armed-forces-participating-in-the-war-operations-and-related-efforts-in-afghanistan-and-in-other-muslim-countries/ by Aaliyah Azeena on 2022-10-13T12:32:46.452Z

It's incumbent upon our military brothers in the American armed forces to make this stand and its religious reasoning well known to all their superiors, as well as to their peers, and to voice it and not to be silent. Conveying this is part of the true nature of the Islamic teachings that have often been distorted or smeared by the media.

If the terrorist acts that took place in the U.S. were considered by the Islamic Law (sharia) or the rules of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), the ruling for the crime of "hirabah" (waging war against society) would be applied to their doers.

Therefore, we find it necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support.

They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and punish them appropriately, so that it could act as deterrent to them and to others like them who easily slay the lives of innocents, destroy properties and terrorize people.

On the other hand, the source of the uneasiness that American Muslim military men and women may have in fighting other Muslims is because it's often difficult if not impossible to differentiate between the real perpetrators who are being pursued, and the innocents who have committed no crime at all.

The noble Hadith mentioned above only refers to the situation where the Muslim is in charge of his affairs. He is capable of fighting as well as capable of not fighting. This Hadith does not address the situation where a Muslim is a citizen of a state and a member of a regular army.

In this case, he has no choice but to follow orders, otherwise his allegiance and loyalty to his country could be in doubt. This would subject him to much harm since he would not enjoy the privileges of citizenship without performing its obligations.

The Muslim (soldier) must perform his duty in this fight despite the feeling of uneasiness of "fighting without discriminating." His intention (niyya) must be to fight for enjoining of the truth and defeating falsehood. It's to prevent aggression on the innocents, or to apprehend the perpetrators and bring them to justice.

It's not his concern what other consequences of the fighting that might result in his personal discomfort, since he alone can neither control it nor prevent it. Furthermore, all deeds are accounted (by God) according to the intentions. God (the Most High) does not burden any soul except what it can bear.

In addition, Muslim jurists have ruled that what a Muslim cannot control he cannot be held accountable for.

The Muslim here is a part of a whole, if he absconds, his departure will result in a greater harm, not only for him but also for the Muslim community in his country - and here there are many millions of them.

Moreover, even if fighting causes him discomfort spiritually or psychologically, this personal hardship must be endured for the greater public good, as the jurisprudence (fiqhi) rule states.

Furthermore, the questioner inquires about the possibility of the Muslim military personnel in the American armed forces to serve in the back lines - such as in the relief services' sector and similar works.

If such requests are granted by the authorities, without reservation or harm to the soldiers, or to the other American Muslim citizens, then they should request that.

Otherwise, if such request raises doubts about their allegiance or loyalty, cast suspicions, present them with false accusations, harm their future careers, shed misgivings on their patriotism, or similar sentiments, then it's not permissible to ask for that.

To sum up, it's acceptable God willing for Muslim American military personnel to partake in the fighting in the upcoming battles, against whomever, their country decides, has perpetrated terrorism against them.

Keeping in mind to have the proper intention as explained earlier, so no doubts would be cast about their loyalty to their country, or to prevent harm to befall them as might be expected.

This is in accordance with the Islamic jurisprudence rules which state that necessities dictate exceptions, as well as the rule that says one may endure a small harm to avoid a much greater harm.

This fatwa was issued by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi (Grand Islamic Scholar and Chairman of the Sunna and Sira Council, Qatar), Judge Tariq al-Bishri (First Deputy President of the Council d'etat, Ret., Egypt), Dr. Muhammad S. al-Awa (Professor of Comparative Law and sharia, Egypt), Dr. Haytham al-Khayyat (Islamic Scholar, Syria), Mr. Fahmi Houaydi (Islamic Author and Columnist, Egypt), Sheikh Taha Jabir al-Alwani (Chairman of the North America Fiqh Council, Sterling, Virginia).

It was published in The Washington Post on October 11, 2001. The inquiry was presented by Mr. Muhammad Abdur-Rashid, the senior Muslim chaplain in the American Armed forces prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. In his question he states that the goals of the (war) operations are:

• Retaliation against those "who are thought to have participated" in planning and financing the suicide operations on September 11th, against civilian and military targets in New York and Washington (he then detailed the consequences of these operations.
• Eliminating the elements that use Afghanistan and elsewhere as safe haven, as well as deterring the governments which harbor them, sanction them, or allow them the opportunity for military training in order to achieve their goals around the world.
• Restoring the veneration and respect to the US as a sole superpower in the world.

Furthermore, he concludes his inquiry by mentioning that the number of Muslim military personnel in the three branches of the American armed forces exceeds fifteen thousand soldiers.

Hence, if they refuse to participate in the fighting, they will have no choice but to resign, which might also entail other consequences. Finally, he asks if it is permissible for those who can transfer to serve in different capacities other than direct fighting.