Wrong approach to peace

Wrong approach to peace

US, Israel ignore leading scholar’s insights about Muslim attitude to
peace deals
Yoram Ettinger

Policy makers in Israel and the United States are premising the
Annapolis Conference on foundations that have led to a series of bloody

collapses in Oslo, Cairo, Hebron, Wye, Sharm el-Sheikh, Camp David 2,
and the disengagement. They are formulating the conference on the
assumption that Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has adopted a
mentality of peace, thus granting yet another victory to the simplistic

world of delusions in the Mideast’s complex reality.

Professor Majid Khadduri, may he rest in peace, from Johns Hopkins
University in the US was the world’s leading authority on Arab
definitions of peace and war, and he noted that they view peace as a
tactical means for achieving their strategic objective – defeating the
enemy. Peace constitutes a temporary break in the ongoing war against
the enemy and/or infidel.

Khadduri’s book, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, clarifies the
meaning of the amazing 1,400-year sequence – since the 7th century - of

wars, terrorism, and the violent violation of agreements, alliances,
and conventions between Arabs, between Muslims, and between Arabs and
non-Arabs.

The insights in the book include the following: “If a catastrophe had
befallen the Muslims, (they) might come to terms with the
enemy…provided that the Muslims should resume the Jihad after the
expiration of the treaty…treaties must be of temporary duration, for in

Muslim legal theory the normal relations between Muslim and non-Muslim
territories are not peaceful, but warlike…If the (leader) entered a
treaty which he was incapable of fulfilling, the treaty was regarded as

void…the Prophet Muhammad has set the classic example by concluding a
(628 A.D.) treaty with the Makkans, known as the Hudayabiya Treaty
(whereby) a peace treaty with the enemy is a valid instrument if it
serves Muslim interests…the Prophet and his successors always reserved
their right to repudiate any treaty or arrangement which they
considered as harmful…Muslim authorities might come to terms with (the
enemy), provided it was only for a temporary period…a temporary peace
with the enemy is not inconsistent with Islam’s interests….”

Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas’ textbooks, religious clerics, newspapers, and

official TV and radio stations resonate with Khadduri’s theories day
and night while preaching for the “liberation” of Jerusalem, the
Galilee, Jaffa, Ashdod, and the Negev desert, the destruction of the
Jewish State, glorification of suicide bombers, and Jihad. The
Palestinian educational system, which promotes deep hatred, supports
the main conclusion from Professor Khadduri’s book: The
Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not over the size, but rather, is about

the existence of a Jewish State located in a region defined as an
“Islamic estate” by the Arabs.

‘No permanent compromise is permitted’
Khadduri adds that “Jihad, reflecting the normal war relations between
Arabs and non-Muslims” and says it was “a product of a warlike people.”

He says that while the “concept of Jihad underwent certain changes,
these changes did not imply abandonment of the Jihad duty, it only
meant the entry of the obligation into a period of suspension – it
assumed a dormant status, from which the (leader) may revive it at any
time he deems necessary…No (permanent) compromise is permitted with
those who fail to believe in God.”

The Annapolis conference is premised on the notion of “land for peace”
and the “two state solution,” which constitute a timeout that would
enable the Arab side to improve its positions in this constant war –
just a phase in realizing Jihad’s objectives.

The continued disregard to Khadduri’s theory, which predicted the
lessons of the last 14 years since Oslo, gives Israel’s enemies an
adrenaline boost, radicalizes Arab expectations and demands, pours oil
instead of water on the terror fire, inflames passions in the Middle
East, brings Israel closer to an all-out war under worse conditions,
adds friction points with the US, and minimizes the chances of peace.

This is not the way to prepare a peace conference!

Yoram Ettinger is an expert on Middle Eastern and American affairs and
a former envoy in the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C

Rabbi Jonathan Ginsburg