Skip to main content

Chemical or Conventional Weapons! Does It Matter?

On August 21, 2013, the Tyrant of Damascus, Bashar Al-Assad, exterminated more than 1400 Muslim civilians with chemical weapons after failing to break their will. Such brutality immediately sparked words of condemnation from world powers, especially the West. America was initially very vocal in calling for a military strike then quickly backed away towards a political solution where the Assad regime would surrender the chemical weapons. Why now has America taken a strong stance against the Syrian regime? Why was it standing still when hundreds of thousands were being killed in the last two and a half years?
The lives of those hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children killed before the chemical weapons attacks are no less valuable than the ones killed with chemical weapons.
What has caused great urgency for the US and Europe is that currently the revolution forces have come closer to triumph and victory, while the Assad regime is on the verge of collapse. The sudden collapse of Assad would create an unfavorable situation to the US and Europe. General Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, explains the US view of the Syrian massacres and the reason for US involvement: "Syria today is not about choosing between two sides... It is my belief that the side we choose must be ready to promote their interests and ours when the balance shifts in their favor. Today, they are not" Dempsey leaves no doubt that the real concern of the US is not the plight of people, rather it is the interest of the USA, which Dempsey stated in his own words "a regime in complete alliance with the US and its agenda in the Middle East".
America's main concern is who should or should not lead Syria after the collapse of Assad's regime. In his speech on September 10, President Obama further clarified America's position when he stated "the day after any military action, we would redouble our efforts to achieve a political solution that strengthens those who reject the forces of tyranny and extremism." What Obama means is that America would bring together the Assad regime with representatives from the opposition, of America's choosing, guaranteeing a "resolution" that would keep the current regime with minor face changes. So what has caused Obama and Kerry to drastically switch their position from a military strike after hyping for weeks that it was the only solution? It is clear that the Muslims in Syria do not want just a change of faces; they want to completely replace the regime. By choosing the path of a political process, America has bided more time for the Assad regime. It also bought itself more time to garner support amongst the opposition with the purpose of creating a viable, "moderate" opposition.
The reality of war in Syria is not about the use of chemical weapons or conventional weapons. It is a revolution that was launched under the banners of Islam for the removal of the US installed regime of the Assad family, which has caused mass suffering, pain, destruction, imprisonment, and killing of tens of thousands of people over the course of 40 years. Any involvement by America, or the West, would only continue this suffering.
Muslims must not ask for America's help. Nor should they seek protection from any non-Muslim nation. Allah سبحانه وتعالى has forbidden us from seeking such help:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا الْكَافِرِينَ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِنْ دُونِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَتُرِيدُونَ أَنْ تَجْعَلُوا لِلَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ سُلْطَانًا مُبِينًا
"O you who believe! Do not take the disbelivers as friends rather than the believers. Do you want to give Allah clear proof against you?"
(Al-Nisa, 4:144)
It is further supported by the saying of our noble Prophet Rasul'Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم:
لَا تَسْتَضِيئُوا بِنَارِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ
"Do not seek light from the fire of the polytheists."
(Baihaqi)
فَإِنَّا لَا نَسْتَعِينُ بِمُشْرِكٍ
"We do not seek help from the polytheist."
(Ahmed and Abu Dawud)
The solution for Syria will not come from the East or the West. The sufferings of people of Syria will not be resolved by democracy or capitalism. The people of Sham will only get relief with the Islamic State. Only the Islamic State will give them honor and security. Indeed, only Islam will resolve the problems in the Middle East and the world; only Islam will replace tyranny with justice. Muslims should only work for the establishment of the Islamic State and support those who are working for its establishment in the Muslim World.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ
"O you who believe! Respond to Allah and to the Messenger when He calls you to what will bring you to life!"
(Al-Anfal, 8:24)
Hizb ut-Tahrir America
07 Dhul Qi'ddah 1434 AH
12/09/2013 CE

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran