Terrorism

By Muhammad Mahmud 

My fellow Muslim brothers and sisters, I think you will not support the US government’s atrocities meted on the Afghans over the years. However, I know that some of you see nothing wrong with anything western and nothing good with anything the West abhors. Therefore, let me address certain misconceptions and, at the same time, point out what some of YOU seem not to take into consideration. 

Of course, people rely on the West to define who a terrorist is. There is no doubt about that. Before the West labelled the Taliban, a terrorist who, in the whole world, regarded them as one? The western media dictates who is to blame and who is to be sympathised with. The Palestinian struggle with the Zionists’ forces of occupation is a prominent example. The Muslim Brotherhood is also labelled a terrorist group even as they chose to follow the democratic way to pursue Islamic sharia. The same happened to Algeria’s Islamic Salvation Front. 

But let’s use some reasons others deploy regarding the Taliban as a terrorist organisation to prove why people rely on the west to define who a terrorist is. Your argument is often that “many of us see them as terrorists because they are deliberately and indiscriminately killing Muslims and other innocent civilian population.” Now the question is, which of these atrocities hadn’t the US army meted to the “Muslims and other innocent civilian population”? So why do you think that the Taliban fighters are terrorists while you regard the US army as liberators? 

On the other hand, why would America’s violation of the practice of Prophet Muhammad’s rule of engagements not bother you people but the Taliban’s violation bother you to the extent of opposing them and (impliedly) supporting America? You are supposed to oppose both sides if that is the case. I think you are probably, struggling with some misconceptions here, and you are not alone. 

1- That Taliban, having declared that they are following the footpath of the Prophet, shouldn’t deviate from his teachings. This is entirely true. But are we only to oppose Muslims who violated Islamic teachings on the sanctity of lives, or is that also applicable to everyone?

2- Having violated the Prophet’s teachings on the rules of engagements by killing the innocents, the Taliban are to be opposed against the Americans who did not claim to be Muslims. Because the Taliban are portraying Islam in a bad image, this is a big misconception. 

First, it should be clearly noted that even if a Muslim group violated Islamic teachings on the rules of engagements, that does not entirely disrobe them of their status as Muslims. On the contrary, we condemn that act and disassociate ourselves and our religion from that very act and continue to consider them as Muslims. A few examples will suffice here. 

During the time of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW), Khalid Bn Walid (RA) violated the rules of engagements in one of the wars. It was so grave to the extent that when the report reached the Prophet, he openly condemned and disassociated himself from that act and even supplicated that “O Allah, I disassociate myself from what Khalid did.” But the Prophet did not declare him a terrorist or even ostracised him. 

In another incident, some Muslims killed someone during a war after declaring that he was now a Muslim. When the report reached the Prophet, he became outraged and rebuked them. However, he did not declare them as opponents for violating the rules of engagements; instead, he criticised that very act and chastised them for doing that. 

There were many reports of violations of Islamic rules of engagements even during the wars fought by the Ummah’s most pious generations, yet that is put into context, and a larger picture is considered.

During the Jihad of Dan Fodio, Sheikh Muhammad Bello narrated how some people violated the rules of engagements and how Sheikh Dan Fodio chastised them and disassociated himself from that act. Yet, they continued to be part of his army.

Therefore, from the Islamic perspective, we can condemn and accuse the Taliban of violating Islamic rules of engagement, but that doesn’t mean that we should support non-Muslim armies who perpetrated the same or worst atrocities on fellow Muslims. There is a stark difference between the two factions Islamically.

It is almost a consensus among the Muslim scholars that whenever non-Muslim armies invade any Muslim country, it is a wajib [compulsory] for all to fight and chase them out. 

Now a non-Muslim army invaded a Muslim country, some people jubilated, and the Muslim troops chased them out, we jubilated. Then those who jubilated the invasion started accusing us of supporting “terrorism”, how do you think we would respond?

Malam Muhammad writes from Kano. He can be reached via meinagge@gmail.com.

By Salisu Yusuf

Almost 20 years since the September 11 attacks in the U.S. and the subsequent occupation of Afghanistan, the last Friday’s swift vacation of Bagram Airbase by the U.S forces, the situation in Afghanistan gets worst. The country is becoming more divided; social strife grows, and citizens become more disenchanted. Hostilities between the Hazara Shia minority and mainly Pashtun Sunni majority increases. All over the country, people feel less secure in groups and individually as each one is afraid that the rival militia may attack them. The hitherto communal Afghanistan is fast turning individualistic, especially as a result of Talibans’ follies, misrule, the failure of the sectarian/tribal leadership, the role of Ulama and by the Russian occupation in the 70’s and ’80s, as well as the U.S’s so-called war on terror.

I have never seen a religious sect that clings to power and unorthodoxly turns to folly like the Taliban. They have crossed religious, ethical lines. They ask their members to attack hospitals, with women under labour, children receiving natal care, and other defenceless people receiving treatment. In one instance in 2020, they struck a maternity hospital belonging to the international organisation Medicines Sans Frontiers in Kabul. They gruesomely murdered 24 victims, including impoverished women, children, and babies. A week-old baby was among the dead; another two-week-old baby survived though his mother could not. There has not been a worse unnatural disaster!

Moreover, coordinated, reciprocal attacks by both Sunni and Shia militants are on the rise. I have not seen thoughtless sects like the two groups in Afghanistan/Pakistan axis, where each group asks its members to attack the other while performing obligatory prayers in mosques! And when such attacks are carried out, while the victims’ relatives nurse them and mourn other fatalities, the attackers get euphoric as they believe that they have fulfilled a religious duty. Outrageously they think that should if they die in the process, they would directly go to paradise – as if it belongs to their fathers!

 In addition to such senseless attacks, the Taliban has stepped up on a campaign against girl-child education. As a result, hundreds of innocent girls have been killed on their way to schools because, to them, girls’ education is a deviation from the norm. 

In one such horrendous attack, the vocal Malala Yusafzai is lost to the West. The girl was 11 when she’s shot in the head on her way to school. The girl’s crime was pleading to the Taliban to let girls pursue their educational careers. As the saying goes, the rest is history. Malala is now an Oxford University graduate in philosophy, politics and economics. 

Malala is lost to the West with her two young brothers. Pakistanis could only watch her on T.V. addressing the U.N. Assembly, celebrating her birthday, or receiving Nobel Prizes. If she had not been shot, she would have been in Pakistan, and a practising Muslim, whose talent might have been used in teaching and aspiring young girls. Girls like Malala could have been used to heal the growing social division between Sunni and Shia; alas, she’s lost to Europe.

More painful is the list of Nadia Nadim. A more intelligent and talented girl who’s also lost to the West. Nadia’s father was also killed by the Taliban when she’s a child. Under a false identity, the girl fled Afghanistan on a truck at just 11 years. She’s currently living in Denmark, studying reconstructive surgery. Nadia, like Malala, is lost to the West. Her colossal talent would have been more beneficial to Afghanistan because she’s a prospective scientist. Nadia speaks 11 languages. She also plays football for the Danish National Team, scores 200 goals, making her a celebrity.

If Nadia’s father lived, she would have been left to pursue her career, would have been in Afghanistan practising Islam. She could have been a medical doctor, possibly assisting thousands of Afghan women in need of medical care. But, alas, she’s lost to football, playing a celebrity role, her beauty being explored, etc. 

The above are a few lessons to Nigerian youth who sympathise with terrorist groups like Boko Haram. Such groups are in for regression rather than progression.

While the so-called Doha Peace Conference between the Afghan government and Taliban is in progress, the country is hotly on the brink of another civil war. The Taliban is advancing towards Kabul, inciting more antagonism while the country suffers from brain drain; indeed, it’s Talibans’ folly, but Western gains.

Salisu Yusuf teaches at the Department of English, Federal College of Education, Katsina. He can be reached via salisuyusuf111@gmail.com.