-
‘Ismah of the Rasool
This is chapter 32 from the book “Islamic Thought”
The ‘ismah (infallibility) of the prophets and messengers is an issue stipulated by the mind. For the fact that he is a Prophet or a Messenger necessitates he is infallible in conveying from Allah (swt). If there is a defect of the possibility of the absence of ‘ismah in one issue, then this defect would reach every issue; and then the whole prophethood and message would collapse. The proof that a person is a Prophet of Allah (saw) or a Messenger from Allah (saw) means he is infallible in regards to what he conveys from Allah (swt). So his infallibility in conveyance is inevitable, and the rejection of this infallibility is rejection of the message that he brought and the prophethood that he was sent with. As regards to his infallibility from doing the actions that disagree from the commands and prohibitions of Allah (swt), it is definite that he does not commit kaba’ir (major sins) definitely, so he does not commit any of the kaba’ir absolutely. This is because performing a major sin means committing disobedience. Obedience is not partitioned and the disobedience is not partitioned. So if disobedience reaches to the action, then it would reach the propagation (tablaegh), as matter that contradicts the message and prophethood. That is why the prophets and messengers were infallible from committing kaba’ir, the same way they are infallible in propagation from Allah (swt). As regards the infallibility regarding the saga’ir (minor sins), the scholar had different views about it. Some of them said they are not infallible from them, for they are not disobedience; while others said they are infallible for they are disobedience. The true view about that is whatever its performance is considered haram and whatever its performance is considered obligatory, i.e. all the duties (furoodh) and the prohibition (muharraamat), they are infallible regarding them. Thus they are infallible from neglect on the obligations and from committing the prohibitions, whether they were kaba’ir or saga’ir. In other words, they are infallible from anything called disobedience (ma’siyah). Other than that, like khilaf-ul-awla (opposite to what is most appropriate), they are not infallible from them. So, they might do what is opposite to the most appropriate, absolutely, for in all its aspects, it does not enter under the meaning of the word ma’siyah (disobedience). This is what is necessitated by the mind and required by the fact they are prophets and messengers.
Our master Mohammad (saw) is a Prophet and a Messenger. So, like the other messengers and prophets, he is infallible from making an error in what he conveys from Allah (swt). This is a definite infallibility proved by the rational and shar’i evidence. The Rasool (saw) did not convey the ahkam except from the wahy (revelation). Allah (swt) says in the Surah of Al-Anbiaa’:
“Say: I only warn you with the wahy (inspiration).” [TMQ Al-Anbiaa’: 45]
Allah (swt) says in the Surah of An-Najm:
“Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only inspiration that is inspired.” [TMQ An-Najm: 3-4]
The word ‘speak’ (yantiq) is of the generality (umoom) words, so it includes the Qur’an and others. There is nothing in the Qur’an or the Sunnah that specifies it in the Qur’an, so it remains general, meaning that everything he speaks of legislation is an inspired wahy. It is invalid to specify what he speaks to the Qur’an only; it must rather remain general, including the Qur’an and the hadeeth. As regards specifying it in to what he conveys from Allah (swt), in terms of legislation and others, of ahkam, creeds, thoughts and stories, without including the style, and means from drawing plans to battles, or dusting the palm trees or the like, this is because he is a Messenger. Discussion is about a Messenger and study of what he was sent with and not in other than that. So the subject of the speech (of the Messenger) is what specifies. Thus the form of generality remains general in the subject it came with, and it is then considered a form of specification. This is due to His (swt) saying:
“Say: I only warn you with the wahy (inspiration).” [TMQ Al-Anbiaa’: 45]
It is also due to His (swt) saying in Surah of Sad:
“It is revealed to me only that I may be a plain warner.” [TMQ Sad: 70]
It shows that the aim is what he brought of creeds, ahkam and everything he was ordered to convey and to warn with. Therefore, it does not include the use of styles or his natural actions which are of man’s innate nature (fitrah), ie from his natural creations, such as walking, speaking, eating etc. It is specified in the men’s actions and their thoughts, and not in the styles, the means and the like. So, whatever the Messenger (swt) was ordered to convey of what is related to the actions and thoughts of men, is revelation from Allah (swt). The wahy includes the speech and actions of the Rasool (swt) as well as his agreement (sukoot), because we are commanded to follow him. Allah (swt) says:
“Whatever the Rasool brought it to you, take it; and whatever he forbade you from, abstain from (it).” [TMQ Al-Hashr: 7]
And He (saw) said:
“Verily, in the messenger of Allah you have a good example.” [TMQ Al-Ahzab: 21]
Thus the speech, the action and the agreement of the Rasool (swt) are shar’i evidence, and they are all revelation from Allah (swt). Rasool Allah (swt) used to receive the revelation, conveys what the wahy brings to him from Allah (swt), and settles the matters in accordance with the wahy, without deviating from the wahy absolutely. Allah (swt) said in Surat al-Ahqaaf:
“I only follow what is revealed to me.” [TMQ Al-Ahqaaf: 9]
And He (saw) said in Surat al-A’raaf:
“I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord.” [TMQ Al-A’raaf : 203]
This means, I don’t follow except that is revealed to me from my Lord. So he limited his adherence (ittibaa’) to that which is revealed to him from his Lord. All of this is explicit, clear and apparent to be general (a’amm); and what is related to the Rasool (saw) in regards to what he is ordered to convey is wahy (revelation) only. The Legislative life of the Rasool (saw) in explaining the ahkam to the people followed that approach.
So, he (saw) used to wait for revelation in many of the ahkam, such as the dhihar (pre-Islamic form of divorce) and the li’aan (sworn allegation of adultery committed by the wife) and others. He never said of a hukm on an issue, or made any legislative action or made a legislative agreement, except based on a wahy from Allah (swt). The Sahabah would be confused sometimes between the hukm of one of human actions and the opinion regarding a matter, a means or a style, so they asked the Rasool (saw): “ Is that wahy, O Rasool Allah, or it is the opinion and advice”: If he said to them, it is wahy, they kept silent, for they knew it is not from him. If he said to them; it is rather the opinion and the advice, then they would discuss with him, and he might of followed their opinion; as what happened in (the battle of) Badr, the trench and Uhud. He used to tell them in regards of other than what he conveys from his Lord: “You know better in regards of the matters of your dunya,”, as it was reported in the hadeeth of dusting the palm trees. Had he spoken in the matter of legislation without revelation, he would have not waited the revelation so as to say the hukm, and the Sahabah would have not asked him of whether that was a revelation or an opinion; he would have rather answered from himself, and they would have discussed with him without asking him.
Therefore, the Rasool (saw) used not to start a speech, action or acceptance except based on wahy from Allah (swt), and not based on an opinion from him. He (saw) is also infallible from making error in everything he conveys from Allah (swt).
-
Q&A: The American Strategy and the Two-State Solution
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمAnswer to Question
The American Strategy and the Two-State Solution
(Translated)Question:
We know that the American strategy for establishing a Jewish entity in the heart of the Muslim countries has, for the most part, been based on the two-state solution. However, under Trump, this strategy has begun to be abandoned, or at least kept quiet, which has raised questions. For example, Trump said, “When you look at the map, a map of the Middle East, ‘Israel’ is a tiny little spot compared to these giant land masses. I actually said: ‘Is there any way of getting more? It is tiny…” (Sky News, 19/8/2024). Does this mean that America’s two-state solution project is dead and finished, or is it still alive? Thank you.
Answer:
To clarify the answer, let us review the following points:
1- In 1959, at the end of Eisenhower’s term, America adopted its two-state solution project, which can be summarized as “supporting and preserving a Jewish entity and establishing a Palestinian entity alongside it.” Its agents in the region, most notably the Egyptian regime, then began working to implement the project, and for this purpose, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was established. However, Britain, through the Jordanian regime, strongly opposed the project and adopted a secular Palestinian state project dominated by the Jews, similar to the secular state of Lebanon, which is controlled by Christians.
2– All of this was during the time when the West Bank was under Jordanian rule, and Gaza was under Egyptian rule. However, when the West Bank and Gaza, along with Sinai and the Golan Heights, fell under the control of the Jewish entity in a theatrical war in June 1967, the talk was no longer about establishing a Palestinian state, but rather about the withdrawal of the Jewish entity from these occupied territories based on Security Council Resolution 242. Then America put the Palestinian issue aside and began preparing for a provocative war. This was the October War of 1973 to jumpstart the peace process. The Egyptian regime, headed by Anwar Sadat, signed the Camp David Accords in September 1978. According to this agreement, the Jewish entity withdrew from Sinai, while remaining limited in its weapons as a buffer zone protecting the entity’s borders. It remains so to this day, despite the war of extermination waged by the criminal entity in Gaza on the Sinai borders!
3- Then America moved to the northern front, ordering the Jewish entity to invade Lebanon in 1982 to expel the Palestine Liberation Organization from there and force it to recognize the Jewish entity and conclude a peace agreement with it. The head of the organization, Yasser Arafat, signed this on 25/7/1982, in what became known as the McCloskey Document, in which he said: “The organization now recognizes Israel’s right to exist.” In 1988, Arafat announced at the Palestinian National Conference held in Algeria, as well as in a meeting before the United Nations in New York, his acceptance of the establishment of a Palestinian state. Then Britain and its agent, the King of Jordan, agreed to disengage from the West Bank in this year.
4- After that, America held the Madrid Conference in 1991 to proceed with the implementation of its two-state solution project. Then, the Oslo Accords were concluded between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Jewish entity in 1993, for the organization to officially recognize the Jewish entity. Also, the Wadi Araba Agreement (26/10/1994) was concluded between the entity and Jordan, for Jordan to give up the West Bank that was part of it, and then announce its recognition of the Jewish entity. America rose and contained the two agreements to implement its two-state solution project. After the end of Bush’s two terms at the end of 2008, Obama came to power in Washington. He requested direct negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the Jewish entity under American sponsorship on 2/9/2010, hoping that within a year the two-state solution would be implemented. However, the negotiations ended without reaching an agreement.
5- After Obama’s two terms at the end of 2016, Trump came to power in early 2017 and continued his first term, then lost in the elections. Biden succeeded him in early 2021. After the end of Biden’s term, Trump won again and became president in early 2025.
In these two periods—the Trump and Biden periods—a different approach emerged from previous American presidents. Since America announced its approach to the two-state solution, previous presidents had mentioned the solution without going into the details of a Palestinian state. Shortsighted people assumed that the Palestinians would be given a sovereign state in part of Palestine. When Trump and Biden came to power, they delved into some details, stating that what the Palestinians would be given is a demilitarized state, similar to limited, powerless autonomy, dominated by Jews, with some differences between them in the strength and ambiguity of their statements. Here, the questions arose: Has America’s two-state solution project ended, or has it not ended and is still continues? It is worth mentioning that the statement of the Jews about Palestine has no weight except with a rope (help) from the people (America). The American statement is the subject of the discussion:
6- A careful examination of the issue reveals the following:
A- We previously answered a Question and Answer dated 23/2/2017, regarding the two-state solution after Trump began his first term in office, which stated:
[(1- The text of President Trump’s statements as was reported in all the world and local media and as was broadcasted live, as follows:
“American President Donald Trump has written on Wednesday a new perspective in US policy towards the Middle East after he confirmed that the two-state solution is not the only way to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, pointing out that he was open to alternative options if they lead to peace. All the former American presidents have defended the two-state solution, whether Republicans or Democrats” (France 24 website, 16/2/2017) and Trump said, “I look at the two-state solution and the one state solution (…) if Israel and the Palestinians were happy, I would be happy with (the solution) they prefer, both solutions suit me” (Aljazeera Live website, 16/2/2017), the resolution of a single state mentioned by America for the first time through Trump, he did not illustrate, does it means giving self-autonomy to the Palestinians inside the one Jewish state?! Or does it mean a secular state that the Palestinians share in the management of the Jewish state, which is similar to the English project introduced by Britain in 1939 when it brought out the White Book on Lebanon’s formula? Note that the two-state solution is the same American project introduced since 1959, the era of Republican President Eisenhower and it made the so-called international community accept and it discarded the one-state solution introduced by Britain. Whatever the case, what appears from analysing these statements and its indications is that America has not abandoned its two-state solution; the American ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley confirmed this, saying: “First and foremost, the two-state solution is what we support. Anyone who says that the United States does not support a two-state solution would be mistaken … certainly we support the two-state solution, but we also think outside the box … which is needed to attract the two sides to the table, which is what we need in order to make them agree.” (Reuters, 16/02/2017).
This confirms that Trump did not abandon the two-state solution, which is the US State policy since 1959, but he wanted to try another way to put pressure, as his ambassador said (certainly we support the two-state solution, but we also think outside the box …) that it is by considering the use of other methods.] END QUOTE.
B- Trump’s (Republican) statements supporting the Jews accelerated during his first and second terms in office:
* US President Donald Trump announced the United States’ recognition of Al-Quds (Jerusalem) as the capital of “Israel.” Trump also affirmed that the United States supports the two-state solution if it is approved by the Israelis and Palestinians. (BBC, 6/12/2017)
* US President Trump said on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meetings,believes a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would “work best,” adding, “It is a dream of mine to be able to get that done prior to the end of my first term.” (BBC, 26/9/2018)
* US President Trump said,“When you look at the map, a map of the Middle East, Israel is a tiny little spot compared to these giant land masses. I actually said: ‘Is there any way of getting more? It is tiny…” (Sky News, 19/8/2024).
* Earlier, US President Donald Trump reiterated his plan for the United States to control Gaza and deport Palestinians from it, saying he was “committed to buying and owning Gaza…” (BBC, 10/2/2025). Then, ten days later, he declared, “He would not impose a plan to deport Palestinians from Gaza, but rather ‘propose it’…” (CNN, 21/2/2025). This is manipulating words!
C- On the other hand, Biden’s (Democrat) statements have sometimes gone beyond Trump’s in support of the Jews:
* When Trump lost the elections and was replaced by Biden at the beginning of 2021, America returned to talking about establishing a Palestinian state in some form, without specifying how or where. US President Joe Biden stated to reporters on 3/9/2024, “There are several models for a two-state solution, noting that several countries in the United Nations do not have their own armed forces.” Biden is referring to a state for the Palestinians of one of those types, without armed forces, i.e., self-rule or something similar!
* When US President Biden visited Tel Aviv on 18/10/2023, following Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, he met with officials there and said: “Israel must again be a safe place for the Jewish people. If there were not an Israel, we’d have to invent one.” (Al Jazeera, 18/10/2023).
* In a speech he delivered at the White House during the celebration of the Jewish Festival of Lights (Hanukkah), Biden said: “You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.” (Asharq Al-Awsat, 12/12/2023).
7- By contemplating the previous Question and Answer, as well as these statements and positions, it becomes clear that there is no major difference between the positions of Trump and Biden except in some methods that do not change the essence of the issue at all…The United States is the one that is managing this issue on the basis of two states: a state for the Jews in most of Palestine, which it supports financially, militarily, internationally, and even regionally through its agents and followers among the rulers in the Muslim countries.. and a demilitarized (autonomous) state for the Palestinians in part of Palestine with Jewish hegemony over it!! Regardless of the desire of the “Palestinian Authority (PA) and the agent rulers” to call it a Palestinian state, this does not change anything of its reality, as America does not want it to be a sovereign state even over part of a part of Palestine, but rather more like self-rule without weapons except what is necessary for the police within the Jewish hegemony!! Two factors emerged during the presidential terms of Trump and Biden to consolidate a Jewish entity that confirm what we mentioned above, although they were more prominent during the Trump era, and they are:
The first: which is currently taking place today, is strengthening the Jewish entity and providing it with money and weapons so that it remains the major power that is militarily superior to all its surroundings.
The second: normalization, in what Trump called the Abraham Accords; which is the one that he achieved halfway through in his first term and now wants to complete. Therefore, American envoys are touring in the region not only to persuade Saudi Arabia to join the so-called Abraham Accords, but are also laying the groundwork and opening negotiations, which are currently underway between Syria and Lebanon and the Jewish entity. America wants to expand this process to include other agent rulers in the Muslim countries!
In conclusion, America did not abandon the two-state solution, but under Trump and Biden, it has declared the intended state of Palestine to be a kind of self-autonomy dominated by the Jews. Previous presidents, however, mentioned the two-state solution without delving into the nature of the state they envision for the Palestinians!
8- Finally, Palestine is a jewel in the history of the Muslims since Allah (swt) linked it with His Sacred House with one bond, when He took His Messenger (saw) from the Sacred Mosque to the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
[سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلاً مِنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الْأَقْصَى الَّذِي بَارَكْنَا حَوْلَهُ]
“Glory be to the One Who took His servant ˹Muḥammad˺ by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque whose surroundings We have blessed” [Al-Isra: 1]
And made it a good and blessed land. And he attracted the hearts of Muslims to the capital of Palestine (Bait ul Maqdis) by making it their first Qiblah before Allah gave the Muslims their second Qiblah (the sacred Ka’ba) sixteen months after the Hijra. That was before Palestine came under the rule of Islam when the second Caliph, Omar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), conquered it in the year 15 AH. He took it over from Sophronius and he gave him his famous covenant (the Omari Covenant), one of the texts, based on the request of the Christians there, was (that no Jews should live with them there). Then Palestine became a graveyard for the Crusaders and the Tatars. There were decisive battles with the Crusaders and the Tatars: Hattin (583 AH – 1187 CE), and Ain Jalut (658 AH – 1260 CE), and they will be followed, Allah willing, by other decisive battles with the Jews to restore Palestine pure and clean to the abode of Islam.
The continued existence of the Jewish entity in Palestine until today is not due to their strength, for they are not people of fighting and victory, but as Allah (swt) says:
[لَنْ يَضُرُّوكُمْ إِلَّا أَذًى وَإِنْ يُقَاتِلُوكُمْ يُوَلُّوكُمُ الْأَدْبَارَ ثُمَّ لَا يُنْصَرُونَ]
“They can never inflict harm on you, except a little annoyance. But if they meet you in battle, they will flee and they will have no helpers” [Aal-i-Imran: 111].
Their survival is due to the failure of the rulers in the Muslim countries. The Muslims’ misfortune lies in their rulers, for they are loyal to the kaffir colonialists, the enemies of Islam and Muslims. They see and hear about the Jews’ occupation of Palestine, their brutal crimes, and their various massacres, yet it is as if they neither see nor hear.
[صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْيٌ فَهُمْ لَا يَرْجِعُونَ]
“They are ˹wilfully˺ deaf, dumb, and blind, so they will never return ˹to the Right Path” [Al-Baqarah: 18]
They have prevented armies from supporting their brothers and sisters in Gaza until today, and the martyrs are multiplying and the wounded are increasing… and the rulers are watching what is happening, and the best of them is the one who counts the martyrs under the name of the dead and then counts the wounded as if he is a neutral party, although he is closer to the Jews! They are placing the “seats of power” above their country and their people! Even though, this Ummah is the best nation brought forth for humankind, it will not remain silent for long, Allah willing, regarding this tyrannical rule by these Ruwaibidha (insignificant ignorant (rulers)). the Messenger of Allah(saw) gave us the glad-tidings of the return of the Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly-Guided Caliphate) after this oppressive rule as stated in Musnad Al-Imam Ahmad and Al-Tayalisi on the authority of Hudhayfah ibn Al-Yaman: «… ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكاً جَبْرِيَّةً، فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ، ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا، ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةٌ عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ نُبُوَّةٍ»“…Then there will be oppressive rule (ملكًا جبرية) for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah on the method of Prophethood.’ Then he (saw) was silent.” Then Muslims will be honoured and the kuffar will be humiliated.
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And on that day the believers will rejoice * at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful” [Ar-Rum: 4-5]
The strange thing is that the Kuffar, especially the Jews, realize this more than many Muslims today. The Jews realize that the Khilafah will lead to their destruction. Their Prime Minister said in a press conference broadcast live by the media, including Al Jazeera, on 21/4/2025: “We will not allow the establishment of a Caliphate on the shores of the Mediterranean.” He added, “We will not accept the presence of a Caliphate state here or in Lebanon, and we will work to guarantee the security of Israel.”
Nonetheless, it will be established, Allah willing, against their will, and will remove them from this pure land, especially since Hizb ut Tahrir, the party devoted to Allah (swt) and true to the Messenger of Allah (saw), is the one leading the effort to establish the Khilafah with men who have been true to their covenant with Allah, and who are assured of Allah’s victory:
[وَاللّٰهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَى أَمرِهِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ]
“Allah’s Will always prevails, but most people do not know” [Yusuf: 21]
10 Rabii’ Al-Awal 1447 AH
2/9/2025 CE -
Essentials of Political Understanding and Policymaking – Part 3
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمPrerequisites for Political Understanding and Policymaking (Part 3)
The Role of the Map in Political Understanding
(Translated)It has been said that a politician who does not know the world map does not know politics; the world map and its knowledge are essential to political understanding.
Map-related information is not limited to knowing the location of the country to which the particular event under investigation relates. Instead, it extends to understanding the country’s location on the map, the nature of the geography related to the country, the nature of its borders, its connection to oceans, its connection to important geographical features, and understanding the demographic situation in terms of population number, population density, the nature and characteristics of the population, and its possession of energy and technology.
It is worth noting that there is an intersection between the political and strategic features of a country’s location. Political features help a country to carve out an important international position, and help the analyst understand the political issues and events related to the country. Understanding the strategic features of a country’s location on the map is useful in military analysis, and for the country’s military position to be strong. The intersection is due to the fact that the political strength of a country is linked to its military strength.
Understanding a country’s location requires several factors, including whether it is a continental state, an oceanic state, or a combination of both. A continental state is one whose geographical location is on land, with its borders surrounded by land, land-locked, with no access to the sea. An oceanic state is one located in the ocean, and therefore its borders are surrounded by ocean waters. A country that combines both is one that has a continental mass, that is, a large portion of land, and coasts open to oceans or seas.
A continental state’s strength is continental, meaning its power is linked to the strengths of the land, in terms of terrain, transportation and trade routes, and land power. An oceanic state’s strength is oceanic, due to its openness to sea routes, the ability of its fleets to transport and wage war, its broad trade horizons, and its extensive ability to communicate with other peoples. Therefore, the continental state lacks peripheral projective power, and its ability to carve out an influential international position remains less than that of more peripheral states. As for those states that possess both characteristics, having a continental mass and an oceanic mass, their ability to carve out an advanced global position is high.
Continental countries include those located in the centers of continents, such as Afghanistan, Chad, Niger, Bolivia, and Paraguay. Oceanic countries include Britain, Australia, Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia. Countries with both characteristics include the United States, Spain, Turkey, India, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Yemen, ash-Sham, Iran, Pakistan, France, Italy, Germany, and China. Russia’s continental mass is large, but it is connected to frozen waters, making its use of the oceanic aspect very costly. Therefore, it has made tremendous efforts throughout its history to reach warm waters, and continues to do so, in order to take on the oceanic dimension.
A country’s location on the map remains a decisive factor in determining its global weight, whether through its ability to connect to other countries, or its location on key international communication routes. Not all oceanic countries are made equal; those connected to important geographic features are more likely to assume a high global weight. Important geographic features include islands, straits, isthmuses, and locations overlooking international shipping lanes.
Islands are of great importance in several respects. If a country’s borders extend to include an archipelago of islands in a significant region, and it controls the surrounding sea, it gains global influence. Therefore, Japan sought to control the Pacific Ocean, and its attack on Pearl Harbor was perhaps motivated by its desire to control the Pacific Ocean. Had it achieved this, it could have easily assumed the position of the number one country. If the islands are not on trade routes, their location can be considered if it is important for influencing other countries. They can be controlled and used as military bases, such as the Solomon Islands in northeastern Australia, and the Socotra Islands in southern Yemen opposite the Horn of Africa. Peninsulas, such as Crimea, are also included in the list of islands.
International maritime transport takes routes across the high oceans, and if a situation compels it to change its route, this is not at all difficult. However, when shipping routes pass through straits, they are indispensable routes, as the route is often restricted through these straits. Britain’s control of Gibraltar and the Bab al-Mandab made this a tool for its global influence when it was the leading power there. The Taiwan Strait, through which 500,000 commercial sea voyages pass annually (Asharq Al-Awsat, 21 August, 2023), prompted America to turn it into a zone of influence and friction with China, by winning over the ruling regime in Taiwan to its side. The Bosphorus Strait made Istanbul an internationally influential region, prompting the Allies to grant it special status in the Treaty of Lausanne, which stipulated the demilitarization of the Strait, along with the Dardanelles, the Sea of Marmara, the Turkish islands, and some Greek islands.
An isthmus is a thin strip of land connecting two larger areas of land. Its location on international shipping routes makes it a port and embarkation point for ships at either end, or it may prompt the country administering it to dig a canal connecting the two ends of the isthmus. Examples of these are the Suez Canal, the Panama Canal, and the Kiel Canal. Prior to the opening of the Panama Canal, the Isthmus of Tehuantepec was the shortest route between the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific Ocean.
It is clear that if continental countries do not have access to the oceans, they will be forced to rely on intermediary, more peripheral states that occupy a place between the continent and the sea. Even those countries with little global influence are viewing this issue with concern. Ethiopia, for example, concluded an agreement with the breakaway Republic of Somaliland in 2023 to grant it access to the Red Sea.
The nature of geography related to a state encompasses several fundamental elements, including its area, the nature of its borders, its domestic, internal terrain, and its natural structure. As for the nature of a state’s borders, there is no specific law governing the nature of borders, whether chosen or imposed by a state. It is natural for a state to have defined itself by natural boundaries, such as mountain ranges, river courses, and seashores. Borders may have been drawn pursuant to agreements with neighboring countries, or as a result of expansion or contraction due to wars. However, since the emergence of the new world order, nationalistic borders have taken on a sacred character, and the issue of expansion has become a matter of global abhorrence, or in need of justification that reflects a popular will for annexation or secession. Among the geography related to borders is the type of population centers located on the border. Some borders border two countries and separate two peoples, while others border two countries and separate a single people into two parts, each part belonging to a separate state. This helps us understand the stability and permeability of borders due to the connection or separation of the two peoples on either side of the border. Border geography includes knowing the countries bordering the border and knowing their international status, which opens the door to competition, dispute, war, dependency, or taking over vital territory.
The natural structure is related to the nature of the country’s environment and the resources contained within its geography. A country’s surplus water resources are vital to its water security, and the depletion of groundwater reservoirs is a risk indicator. Oil and mineral wealth is an important factor in countries, enabling them to achieve self-sufficiency in energy and industry, and even enhancing their ability to influence others through these resources. Marine mineral and fish resources are an important factor in their wealth and food security. The nature of the soil, in terms of the vastness of fertile land, and the contrasting expanse of deserts, influences a country’s position in terms of the true strength of its economy, or in other words, its productive capacity. This even influences the nature of its people.
The area of a country, as in the vastness of the area, has a value in several aspects — one of which is the connection between the vastness of the area and the population, another through the connection between the area and the wealth, and another through the strategic depth of the country. This last aspect is very important, especially in the event of its exposure to invasion, as the large area makes the control of the invaders slow, and perhaps faltering if their invasion is an invasion of the territory, and not an invasion of the centers of power.
Domestic terrain grants natural internal defensive lines for a country if it contains rugged terrain, or vice versa if it contains flat terrain. The diversity of terrain also contributes to the diversity of production in a country. The Ural Mountains in Russia were a natural barrier, behind which a vast extension to the east protected Russia from collapse, in the event that invaders took control of its western part, the part in which the Russian capital, Moscow, is located. In contrast, the European Plain in Eastern Europe made its countries a corridor for wars and an arena of cultural conflict.
It is important for countries to be located on land ports and transportation routes. Turkey’s location makes it a major land link between Asia and Europe, and thus, land trade routes between Asia and Europe pass through it. The same applies to countries located along the ancient Silk Road and the Belt and Road Initiative, including China, Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, Poland, and Germany. This has prompted the implementation of major projects along these routes, including railways, land ports, and oil and gas pipelines.
Population, on the other hand, is a very important factor in a state’s strength. Research into it takes several approaches, one of which is population size and growth rate. Another links population to area, thus studying population density. Another relates to the age density of the population, and another relates to the nature of the people. Countries that aspire to assume international status push toward increasing their population. This is achieved by encouraging the population to reproduce, and providing benefits for each additional family member, thus increasing birth rates in the country. Another approach is to compensate for the population deficit by immigration, thus increasing the incentives that drive people to immigrate into the country, thus increasing the population. This stimulates the economy, provides protection from extinction, and provides the potential to pursue major projects that may require waging costly wars in terms of manpower, whether in terms of preparation or in terms of bearing losses. Population density, on the other hand, is an indicator of a state’s human and economic strength, as you will see that the largest cities in the world are those that provide abundant economic opportunities, abundant resources, financial activity, or political centers. Population density indicates the ageing or youthfulness of societies. Young societies have a high capacity for production and fighting, unlike aging societies.
Energy and technology have become key issues in shaping the strength of nations, especially those that have, or seek to achieve, a prominent international position. Energy and technology are interconnected. While energy can be classified as a nation’s resource, it can also be given a separate classification. It can be viewed in terms of the availability of raw materials for fossil fuels and nuclear energy within a nation. It can also be viewed in terms of the nation’s investment in its existing energy resources, such as the presence of oil wells, refineries, nuclear reactors, and the level of enrichment in nuclear reactors. These resources and associated facilities are extracted and operated by the nation, or the nation has granted concessions for other nations to do so. Conversely, some technologies are relatively common within a nation and do not significantly impact its weight, while others are a key factor in its strength. These include iron and steel technology, heavy industries, electronics technology, and the microchip industry. Others include artificial intelligence, which is used in military industries and espionage operations, and aviation and satellite technology. There are many examples of this. Taiwan’s “monopoly” over the microchip industry has given it global influence. In other words, America has influenced the world because the Taiwanese government is subordinate to America, and because the operating system for Taiwanese chips is American. Indeed, America provides subsidies to companies operating in this field in America, including Intel, which has chip projects in Arizona, Ohio, New Mexico, and Oregon, and the Taiwanese company, TSMC, which has two factories under construction near Phoenix (Al Jazeera Net, January 28, 2024). This is to ensure the industry remains under its control. Furthermore, America excels in the software aspect of microchips, and has been ahead of the rest of the world in this field, which has helped strengthen its global influence. On the other hand, the development of the missile industry in Russia has made it a reality in wars. The Kinzhal missile and the hypersonic Oreshnik missile have distinguished Russia’s strength. As for the espionage industry, America developed it to the point of producing aircraft during the Soviet era that fly at high altitudes beyond radar detection, equipped with high-resolution cameras that accurately capture the desired locations. It then developed into the manufacture of spy satellites with ultra-high-resolution cameras. Let’s not forget modern technologies in image analysis, facial recognition, and network security, to the point where its armies wage wars as electronic hackers. Although these things haven’t been captured on modern maps, they must be observed in countries, just as raw material and oil resources are observed.
This is a brief overview of a collective of issues that are important to consider when looking at a map, noting that some are more influential in highlighting a state’s power than others. There is no single law that determines whether a state possesses certain characteristics that make it more powerful than another. Instead, it examines the overall geopolitical situation of the state and the sum of its characteristics.
-
The Concept of Empowerment (Tamkeen) in the Noble Quran
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
The Concept of Empowerment (Tamkeen) in the Noble Quran
(Translated)Allah (swt) said,
[وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا يَعْبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئًا وَمَنْ كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ]
“Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land, as He did with those before them; and will surely empower for them their Deen, which He has approved for them; and will indeed replace their fear with security, provided that they worship Me, associating nothing with Me. However, whoever disbelieves after this promise, it is they who will be the rebellious.” [TMQ Surah An-Nur: 55].
When we talk about empowerment (tamkeen), we are talking about the cause for which the Messengers and Prophets, peace be upon them all, were sent. The cause we are discussing in this article is not the empowerment of a person or persons, but instead the empowerment of Deen, and the empowerment of the Islamic Ummah that establishes this Deen. The purpose of establishing Deen is to establish on this earth the way of life that Allah (swt) has chosen for humanity. Among the last verses revealed in His Noble Book is,
[ٱلۡيَوۡمَ أَكۡمَلۡتُ لَكُمۡ دِينَكُمۡ وَأَتۡمَمۡتُ عَلَيۡكُمۡ نِعۡمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ ٱلۡإِسۡلَٰمَ دِينٗاۚ] “Today I have perfected your Deen for you, completed My favour upon you, and chosen Islam as your way.” [TMQ Surah Al-Maida: 3]. That is, Allah (swt) has chosen for Muslims Islam as loyalty (walaa’), Deen, Shariah Law, and way of life. The word ‘Deen’ encompasses all of these meanings. The Prophet (saw) did not join the Supreme Companion, Allah (swt), until he (saw) had completed the mission, by conveying the Risaalah (message). His action (saw) was not limited to conveying the Risaalah (message) alone. Instead, he (saw) also established a political authority for Islam, empowered by Allah (swt) on earth. The Prophet (saw) did not depart from this worldly life, except after leaving behind an Islamic state, an Abode of Islam (Dar ul-Islam) encompassing the entire Arabian Peninsula, for the Khulafaa Rashidoon (Rightly-Guided Caliphs) and those who came after them to continue the advance, by expanding the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate) state. This advance continued for centuries, until a time came when the Ummah abandoned this mission, its authority was removed from the earth, and its empowerment (tamkeen) was completely lost.
Now it is in the process of working to regain empowerment, wanting to return to its former glory; an Islamic Ummah empowered by its Deen, appointed as a successor on earth in order to carry out the mission for which it was sent. Allah (swt) said,
[كُنتُمۡ خَيۡرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخۡرِجَتۡ لِلنَّاسِ تَأۡمُرُونَ بِٱلۡمَعۡرُوفِ وَتَنۡهَوۡنَ عَنِ ٱلۡمُنكَرِ وَتُؤۡمِنُونَ بِٱللَّهِۗ]
“You are the best community ever raised for humanity, you encourage good, forbid evil, and believe in Allah.” [TMQ Surah Aali Imran: 110]. So, when we talk about empowerment (tamkeen), we are talking about the empowerment of Deen on earth. Linguistically, empowerment (تمكين) comes from the word “makkana مَكَّنَ” which means to enable and assist in something. As for مكَّن له في الشَّيء “To empower someone in something,” it means جعل له عليه سلطانًا وقدرة “to give them authority and power over it.” Whoever is empowered from within a people, has power over them. Empowerment comes from power (قدرة). When we say, “So-and-so has been empowered on earth,” it means he has acquired power. Of course, power on earth is authority (sultan سلطان). The one with authority, influence, and power is the one who has power on earth. This is the linguistic meaning of empowerment.
When Allah (swt) empowers us on earth, it means that He, glory be to Him, has empowered us. That is, He (swt) has given us the ability to be the decision-makers and the ones with power on this earth, so that the Word (Kalima) of Allah (swt) is supreme, and the word of the disbelievers is the lowest on earth. This is in the context of the natural struggle that Muslims must engage in, which is the ongoing struggle between truth and falsehood, between Iman and kufr. Quranic verses in the Book of Allah (swt) contain this meaning of empowerment. Among them is the Saying of Allah (swt),
[ٱلَّذِينَ إِن مَّكَّنَّٰهُمۡ فِي ٱلۡأَرۡضِ أَقَامُواْ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَءَاتَوُاْ ٱلزَّكَوٰةَ وَأَمَرُواْ بِٱلۡمَعۡرُوفِ وَنَهَوۡاْ عَنِ ٱلۡمُنكَرِۗ وَلِلَّهِ عَٰقِبَةُ ٱلۡأُمُورِ]
“They are those who, if empowered in the land by Us, would perform Salah (Shariah ritual prayer), pay Zakat (Shariah alms), command what is good, and forbid what is evil. And with Allah rests the outcome of all affairs.” [TMQ Surah Al-Hajj: 41].
Establishing Salah in the Quranic verse does not mean merely the performing of Salah by individuals, instead it extends to establishing Salah amongst people in general, within an Islamic society. Commanding the good is also achieved through empowerment, by establishing this good through the obligating authority of the Islamic authority on earth, and not merely through verbal commands and prohibitions. This is because verbal commands and prohibitions are within the power of almost all people, even if they are not empowered on earth.
Similarly, we consider Allah’s Saying,
[وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا يَعْبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئًا وَمَنْ كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ]
“Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land, as He did with those before them; and will surely empower for them their Deen, which He has approved for them; and will indeed replace their fear with security, provided that they worship Me, associating nothing with Me. However, whoever disbelieves after this promise, it is they who will be the rebellious.” [TMQ Surah An-Nur: 55]. Succession and empowerment are a promise from Allah (swt) to those who believe and do righteous deeds. Therefore, empowerment is dependent on Iman in Allah (swt) and adherence to His Shariah Law.
Allah (swt) first said,
[وَعَدَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ مِنكُمۡ وَعَمِلُواْ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ لَيَسۡتَخۡلِفَنَّهُمۡ]
“Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land.” This means that He makes them successors as He made those before them successors.
As for the Saying of Allah (swt), [وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ] “And that He will establish for them their Deen which He has approved for them,” clearly states that the goal of this succession is not to establish succession over individuals alone, but instead the succession is for the sake of the empowerment of the Deen, because the goal is to give rise to a jamaa’ah (community) of believers who live the life that Allah (swt) has approved for His servants. As for His Saying,
[وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّنۢ بَعۡدِ خَوۡفِهِمۡ أَمۡنٗاۚ] “And He will surely replace their fear with security,” this is a promise from Him, the Most High, that one of the fruits of empowerment is that He will substitute for them, after their fear, security. Then Allah (swt) says, [يَعۡبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشۡرِكُونَ بِي شَيۡٔٗاۚ ۚ] “They worship Me, not associating anything with Me,” which is further evidence that the goal of this empowerment is a life in which the worship of Allah (swt) is manifested. Worship in the Islamic concept is not limited to individual ritual acts of worship. Instead, the concept of worship in the Book of Allah (swt) is complete submission to Him, the Almighty. What is meant is a life in which servitude to Allah (swt) is manifested in all aspects of life, including the relationships that shape society, generating a way of life that distinguishes the Islamic Ummah from others, which is a life in which the Islamic way of living is manifested.
Then, Allah (swt) said, [وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعۡدَ ذَٰلِكَ فَأُوْلَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلۡفَٰسِقُون] “However, whoever disbelieves after this promise, it is they who will be the rebellious.” This statement also indicates that the goal of empowerment on earth is to manifest the Deen so that its emergence, that is, its dominance, is a confirming evidence for the people. After that, those who disbelieve in it, those who disbelieve and commit sins despite the clear evidence, will be disobedient transgressors. Therefore, this goal of empowerment (tamkeen) is to create a community (jamaa’ah) of believers and Muslims living an Islamic life, which is also called, in contemporary terms, an Islamic society. When we speak of an Islamic society, we are not only speaking of a society whose components are Muslims. Today, Muslims are spread across the globe, numbering nearly two billion. However, they do not constitute an Islamic society. A society is a community (jamaa’ah) of people who have established permanent relationships upon a basis, and these permanent relationships give this society its identity and way of life. If the relationships are shaped by Islam, then it is an Islamic society. If its relationships are shaped by capitalism, then it is a capitalist society, and so on.
These relationships can only be Islamic if the culture of a society is based on Islamic thoughts, and the prevailing systems are Islamic systems, which means it is based on Shariah Law. If Muslims embrace pure Islamic concepts, free of any foreign concepts, and apply their Islamic system to their lives, they will have manifested themselves as an Islamic society. If Islam spreads among Muslims with its concepts, if they desire to live an Islamic life, and if they reject all non-Islamic concepts, but limit themselves to being educated in Islam and committed to it as individuals, then unless a political system is established in their land that applies Islamic systems and oversees their affairs, then this society will not be Islamic. This is because the system implemented in a society, in terms of constitution, laws, and legislation, determines its essential identity. A society cannot be Islamic as long as the systems implemented there are not Islamic, even if Muslims embrace a pure Islam devoid of any blemish individually. Therefore, working for empowerment is working for an empowered Ummah on earth, with authority, where sovereignty belongs to the Shariah Law of Allah (swt).
The above discussion leads us to a very important question: Is empowerment the ultimate goal of Islam and Muslims in this worldly life? Or is it a method to achieving the actual goal?
This question is a subject of debate, and even conflict, among many Muslims today. Most of those who answer it give the wrong answer. Many Muslims believe that establishing an Islamic state is the pinnacle of reviving Muslims, and that it is the result of implementing Islam, and establishing an Islamic way of life and an Islamic society. Many sincere Muslims who love their Deen say: We must establish an Islamic society so that an Islamic state can then be established. This is a major misunderstanding, as they fail to grasp the meaning of the state or its function. The state in Islam is neither the pinnacle of reviving nor the ultimate goal. Instead, the state in Islam is the practical method for establishing Islam, generating an Islamic way of life, and perfecting Islamic society. It is well known to all political thinkers, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that the state is the executive entity for the set of concepts, convictions, and standards held by any people. The state is its means of achieving the way of life it seeks. Without an Islamic state, there will be no Islamic society, and no Islamic life. The misconception that the existence of an Islamic state or the Khilafah (Caliphate) is the ultimate goal of reviving and advancement for the Ummah, after it has fully implemented Islam, is a complete failure to understand the true meaning of implementing Islam and the Islamic state. Islam cannot be implemented without a state, and Islamic systems cannot be truly viable on the ground unless they have a state.
Therefore, Allah (swt) made empowerment on earth a means to establish Islamic life, implement Shariah Law, and achieve security. Therefore, those who limit their efforts to preaching Islam to mere preaching, guidance, and what resembles Christian evangelism, without considering the serious work required to establish an Islamic state, whether they realize it or not, are not working to establish Islam. They are merely calling people to adhere to Islam individually. No individual can fully implement Islam, and more so, all individuals together cannot implement it without a state. This is because Islam did not come only for individuals; instead, it came as a way of life, and a state must be established to implement it. The state is the executive entity of any civilization and any political culture. It is the executive entity of the way of life that people want to live.
So, the issue of empowerment on earth means that the Islamic Ummah must have a state that embodies this empowerment, a state for the Ummah, not just any state. For example, if we imagine that Muslims established a small, territorial state that lacks the strength to make it impregnable against enemies, such a state would not empower Islam and Muslims on earth. The state that empowers Islam and Muslims is the one Islam calls “Dar ul-Islam (Abode of Islam).” Dar ul-Islam is the one that, by its Shariah definition and legal reality, embodies the empowerment of Islam and Muslims. The definition of the Abode of Islam is الدار التي يطبّق فيها الإسلام، ويكون أمانها بأمان المسلمين “the Abode in which Islam is implemented and whose security is guaranteed by the Muslims.” If one of these two conditions is missing — the complete establishment of Islam and the security of the state being guaranteed by the Muslims alone, both domestically and externally — then it is not an Abode of Islam and does not embody the empowerment of Islam and Muslims. There is no empowerment where there is dominance and hegemony of the kuffar, as Allah (swt) says,
[وَلَن يَجۡعَلَ ٱللَّهُ لِلۡكَٰفِرِينَ عَلَى ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِينَ سَبِيلًا] “Allah (swt) does not grant the kafiroon a way of dominance over the Muslims.” [TMQ Surah An-Nisaa: 141].
After the establishment of an Abode of Islam, Muslims cannot be content with merely implementing Islam in their own lands. Instead, the state must have a foreign policy based on carrying the Risaalah (message) to the world. Carrying Islam to the world is the practical implementation of the Saying of Allah (swt),
[وَكَذَٰلِكَ جَعَلۡنَٰكُمۡ أُمَّةٗ وَسَطٗا لِّتَكُونُواْ شُهَدَآءَ عَلَى ٱلنَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ ٱلرَّسُولُ عَلَيۡكُمۡ شَهِيدٗاۗ]
“Thus We have made you a just Ummah that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger (saw) will be a witness over you.” [TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah: 143].
Another issue that remains a source of controversy and confusion for some Muslims today is: Is succession on earth a consequence of Muslims striving for empowerment, as it falls under the takleef (Shariah liability) conferred by Allah (swt) upon His servants? Or is it merely a Favor (mannah) from Allah (swt)? Now, some say that empowerment is not one of the takaaleef (Shariah liabilities) upon the believers, but instead it is a mere Favor from Allah (swt) and so we are required have Iman and do good deeds in general, without striving to assume authority and ruling. They add that when good deeds are evident in us, Allah (swt) will then bestow upon us His Favor of succession and empowerment on earth. This statement is undoubtedly devoid of any Shariah legal evidence. Indeed, it contradicts the Shariah legal evidencing. Its implication is that Muslims are not required to strive for nasr (victory), whereas Allah (swt) says,
[وَأَعِدُّواْ لَهُم مَّا ٱسۡتَطَعۡتُم مِّن قُوَّةٖ وَمِن رِّبَاطِ ٱلۡخَيۡلِ تُرۡهِبُونَ بِهِۦ عَدُوَّ ٱللَّهِ وَعَدُوَّكُمۡ وَءَاخَرِينَ مِن دُونِهِمۡ لَا تَعۡلَمُونَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ يَعۡلَمُهُمۡۚ]
“And prepare against them whatever you are able of material power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them whom you do not know but whom Allah knows.” [TMQ Surah Al-Anfal: 60].
Allah (swt) commanded us to prepare for battle, and He will not grant victory to the believers if they do not prepare for battle. Instead, Allah (swt) warns them of destruction if they neglect to prepare. Allah (swt) says,
[وَأَنفِقُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ وَلَا تُلۡقُواْ بِأَيۡدِيكُمۡ إِلَى ٱلتَّهۡلُكَةِ]
“And spend in the Path of Allah and do not throw yourselves with your own hands into destruction.” [TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah 195]. This means that if they do not prepare for battle, then Allah (swt) will not grant them nasr.
Instead, more than that, they will throw themselves into destruction. Allah (swt) attributes nasr to Himself, but this does not mean that nasr comes without the efforts of His believing servants. If we refer to the Seerah of the Prophet (saw), from the time he was sent until he established his state, he did not wait for the state to come to him as a Favor from Allah (swt). Instead, he would approach the people and tribes and ask them: How much quwwa (material strength) and man’ah (protective capability) do you have? He would ask them to believe in him and grant him material support, because he was searching for a ruler to be established on earth, and he was searching for someone to grant him material support in order to convey the Risaalah (message) of his Lord (swt), and in order to establish a state for Islam. Therefore, when the people of Madinah gave him their leadership, Allah (swt) honored them by calling them the Ansar, because they supported him and supported Islam. Thus, by the Grace of Allah (swt), the state of Madinah was established based on the Prophet (saw) and his Companions (ra) taking the necessary causative measures (asbaab) to achieve this empowerment.
Yes, those who work to achieve empowerment may seek to take the necessary causative measures (asbaab) but fail to achieve it, because they do not yet possess the necessary elements, and because some of these elements are not even within their control. This is what happened with previous Prophets (as). However, if they do not take the necessary asbaab (causative measures), then empowerment will inevitably not occur, and succession will not take place. There is no succession or empowerment on earth without working for it, and taking the necessary causative measures.
After taking the necessary causative measures, their goal may or may not be achieved, for this is a matter of the Unseen (Ghayb). However, this nation is promised succession by the text of the Book of Allah (swt), in the Words of the Almighty,
[وَعَدَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ مِنكُمۡ وَعَمِلُواْ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ لَيَسۡتَخۡلِفَنَّهُمۡ فِي ٱلۡأَرۡضِ كَمَا ٱسۡتَخۡلَفَ ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبۡلِهِمۡ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمۡ دِينَهُمُ ٱلَّذِي ٱرۡتَضَىٰ لَهُمۡ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّنۢ بَعۡدِ خَوۡفِهِمۡ أَمۡنٗاۚ يَعۡبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشۡرِكُونَ بِي شَيۡٔٗاۚ وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعۡدَ ذَٰلِكَ فَأُوْلَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلۡفَٰسِقُونَ]
“Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land, as He did with those before them; and will surely empower for them their Deen, which He has approved for them; and will indeed replace their fear with security, provided that they worship Me, associating nothing with Me. However, whoever disbelieves after this promise, it is they who will be the rebellious.” [TMQ Surah An-Nur: 55]. It is also through His Saying,
[هُوَ ٱلَّذِيٓ أَرۡسَلَ رَسُولَهُۥ بِٱلۡهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ ٱلۡحَقِّ لِيُظۡهِرَهُۥ عَلَى ٱلدِّينِ كُلِّهِۦ وَلَوۡ كَرِهَ ٱلۡمُشۡرِكُونَ]
“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the Deen of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others with Allah (swt) dislike it.” [TMQ Surah As-Saf: 9]. This is a promise from Allah (swt) that this Deen will prevail over all religions, and this prevalence over all religions has not yet happened. Islam has appeared over a wide area of the earth, but it has not yet been established over the entire earth. This promise is still awaited. In Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Thawban, he said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, إنّ الله زوى لي الأرض، فرأيت مشارقها ومغاربها، وإنّ أمّتي سيبلغ ملكها ما زوي لي منها “Allah (swt) folded the earth up before me, so I saw its easts and its wests. My Ummah’s dominion will reach what was folded for me of it.” However, the Ummah cannot reach this empowerment unless the causative measures (asbaab) for this empowerment are achieved within it, and these reasons cannot be achieved without its own efforts. Allah (swt) said,
[يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓاْ إِن تَنصُرُواْ ٱللَّهَ يَنصُرۡكُمۡ وَيُثَبِّتۡ أَقۡدَامَكُمۡ]
“O you who have believed, if you support Allah, He will support you and plant firmly your feet.” [TMQ Surah Muhammad: 7].
-
Q&A: The Trump-Putin Meeting in Alaska
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمAnswer to Question
The Trump-Putin Meeting in Alaska
(Translated)Question:
US President Trump and Russian President Putin held a meeting in Alaska on 16/8/2025. Did they reach an agreement on key issues? What was the impact of this meeting on relations between the two countries? on Ukraine? And internationally on Europe and China?
Answer:
To clarify the answers to the above questions, we review the following points:
1- The relationship between America and Russia has evolved over the past three decades from a relationship between two superpowers controlling the fate of the world before the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, to Russia’s withdrawal from the international arena and its withdrawal into itself, with America monitoring the depth of Russia’s collapse and its attempts to seize Soviet-era areas of influence. Then, to Russian President Putin’s attempts to restore Russia as a major power with international standing, and America’s rejection of this. In an indication of the depth of the conflict between the two countries’ goals, the war broke out in Ukraine in 2022, through which Russia sought to raise its international standing by force, and America sought, through its support for Ukraine, to remove Russia from the list of major powers. This situation remained the case until the end of the Biden administration. When Trump again became president of the United States, he began to redirect the American compass against China, and announced his desire to ease tensions with Russia. He said he was capable of ending the war in Ukraine within 24 hours, and that this war was not his war, but Biden’s war. Thus, under Trump, America began to shift its relations with Russia. This became apparent from President Trump’s repeated insults of Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, his harsh criticism of US military support for Ukraine, and his demand that European countries assume their financial and military responsibilities in Ukraine.
2- The Ukrainian war has weakened Russia’s international standing. Its army has proven unable to achieve quick, high-value objectives in Ukraine. Nearly half of its naval fleet was destroyed in the Black Sea, its strategic bases deep inside Russia were struck, and it has lost important elements of its ground forces, including equipment and generals. However, it has not been defeated and has remained capable of making progress inside Ukraine, even if described as the crawling of ants. However, Russia, which has found itself facing NATO’s military capabilities, as if it were at war with NATO countries, has shown frustration, sometimes making nuclear statements and preparations. This is extremely dangerous and is not what America wants. In other words, the Ukrainian war has highlighted the risks of escalation to a nuclear war. The war in Ukraine has prompted Russian President Putin to strengthen his strategic partnership with China. Although this trend was expected from America, and despite China not responding to Russia with the same warmth, lest it lose its essential trade relations with America and Europe, the re-division of the world into what resembles two camps is the last thing America wants. It absolutely does not want China’s economic power to complement Russia’s military power in one camp.
3- Russia’s fear of the strategic defeat that America is planning in Ukraine has motivated it to increase its missile and nuclear armament. Nuclear agreements with the United States are at a minimum following America’s withdrawal in 2019 from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. In addition to Russia’s introduction of hypersonic missiles into its war in Ukraine, it also introduced the highly destructive Oreshnik missile in 2024. Finally, shortly before Putin’s meeting with Trump, Russia announced tests that America was aware of Russian preparations for them, of nuclear missiles with nuclear engines too, meaning unlimited range and speed. In addition to the danger it poses to America and the fact that it would eliminate its much-vaunted missile shield, which it has spent billions on, it also confirms to America that Russia is pursuing a new strategic military race, regardless of the cost to its economy. This requires America to reach an agreement with Russia to halt its advance and avoid a military race similar to the Cold War.
4- Russia faced a possible military defeat in Ukraine. Its military image as a superpower was shattered and it was unable to defeat the Ukrainian army. The war was a back-and-forth, meaning that Russia lost its decisive advantage, which harmed its international standing. In addition to its apparent military weakness in Ukraine, it fell under a deep package of Western sanctions that almost brought it to the brink of exiting the global economy and imposed significant international isolation on it. The Russian president was unable to even freely move outside the country due to the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court. Therefore, Russia deployed all its economic and military capabilities to ward off the specter of strategic defeat in the Ukrainian war. Its economy became a war economy. It believed that its international standing was determined by the war in Ukraine. However, the specter of defeat did not leave it, and its greatest fear was that matters would escalate towards NATO intervention and a direct confrontation with it. It is not capable of doing so unless it employs its nuclear tools, but employing these tools is dangerous and extremely dangerous. When US President Trump came and began praising Russia and praising its president, Russia breathed a sigh of relief, as this represented a US shift away from its plans for a strategic defeat of Russia. Russia may have considered accepting Trump’s offers as they are to limit its depletion, but it is watching the door Trump has opened for its return to the international arena, and it is on edge fearing it might close when it wants to enter it.
5- When America witnessed Russia’s hesitation and refusal to stop the war, and voices rose in the West that Putin was exploiting Trump’s recent approach and desire to stop the war in Ukraine, the American president announced a 50-day deadline for Russia to stop the war in Ukraine. Despite Russia’s deep annoyance with this deadline and its request for clarifications, it continued to procrastinate within this deadline, wanting to exploit it to the end. This prompted the American president to threaten to take a U-turn, that is, to close the door and return to the positions of the Biden administration. He announced that this period would be shortened to only 10 days, which Russia saw, through the Deputy National Security Advisor and former President Medvedev, as a step towards war. Medvedev reminded America of Russia’s “doomsday nuclear hand”, and the American president exchanged words with him, who urged him to be careful that he was entering an extremely dangerous area. With this American threat to take a U-turn and return to supporting Ukraine and imposing harsher sanctions on Russia, including all those who buy oil from it, namely China in particular, the clock struck in Moscow that a decision had to be made.
6- Russia thus felt it must quickly make concessions to America. It does not want a return to the momentum of American support for Ukraine, which would impose further strain on it and waste the opportunity offered by President Trump to break its international isolation. Furthermore, Russia has doubts about China. If China were given the choice between benefiting from cheap Russian oil and its trade relations with America, it would certainly choose the latter, given its many benefits. Moreover, Trump’s peace offer provides Russia with what it desires from an agreement with America alone, similar to the Yalta Conference in 1945. It does not want to involve other European or Ukrainian parties, but rather wants an agreement with America that would then be presented to the other parties as a fait accompli. Thus, Russia took the initiative to request a meeting with US President Trump’s envoy, Witkoff, to eliminate the idea of a deadline granted to Russia. This certainly requires it to give up some of its demands. On the eve of the summit between the two presidents and during the short preparation period, both parties showed signs of their desire for this meeting, and Trump actually responded to Russia’s request to send his special envoy, Witkoff, to Moscow. Trump spoke about opportunities and the exchange of lands and borders between Russia and Ukraine, and Russia spoke about America’s sincerity: “Putin said that Moscow is working to create conditions for peace, and that the United States is “making sincere efforts” to resolve the situation regarding Ukraine. Putin stressed the importance of reaching agreements with Washington on limiting strategic offensive weapons.” (Al Jazeera Net, 14/8/2025). Russia agreed to the summit being held in Alaska, i.e., in America, to appease Trump: “Trump believes that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to travel to Alaska to meet with him is “an act of great respect.” (RT, 12/8/2025)
7- But from another angle, America, having witnessed Russia’s procrastination for months after Trump came to the White House, did not want this summit to be without concessions from Russia. Trump said that this summit was “exploratory,” and that he would know from the first minutes of the summit whether Putin was serious about ending the war in Ukraine or not. He warned of the summit’s failure, setting a 25% chance of its failure, and threatened Russia with dire consequences: (US President Donald Trump threatened his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on Wednesday with “severe consequences” if he obstructed efforts to achieve peace in Ukraine, threatening the possibility of imposing economic sanctions if their meeting scheduled for Friday in Alaska failed to achieve tangible results. Trump explained that the meeting with Putin would be “preparatory” for a second meeting that would include Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, indicating that its holding depends on the outcome of the Alaska meeting. (Arab 48, 14/8/2025)
US President Donald Trump then described his summit with Vladimir Putin as “high-stakes” before heading to Anchorage, Alaska, to hold the first of their meeting since seven years ago. Trump expressed his desire to see a ceasefire “very quickly.” (Independent Arabia, 15/8/2025). Trump said he would rush back from Alaska to Washington if Putin wasn’t serious. (US President Donald Trump arrived at Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday. Trump said that if the summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin goes badly, he will leave. (CNN Arabic, 15/8/2025)). This statement about leaving the meeting carries a kind of insult to President Putin, who came to meet Trump in America!
8- All these statements put pressure on Russia to make concessions, as he threatens it with dire consequences, sanctions, and withdrawal from the meeting. This means that the meeting between them was disproportionate as were the important meetings between Soviet and American leaders in the past. It is not a meeting of two giants, and does not even rise to the level of US-China summit meetings. It reinforces America’s arrogance and its demand for Russia’s submission, as well as the decline of the status of the new Russia, which accepted all these American conditions, deadlines, and threats. Its president traveled to America to hold the meeting with Trump instead of it being held in a third country. Perhaps the action contradicting protocols is Russian President Putin accepting the US president’s offer to ride with him in his private car, despite the presence of Putin’s car that accompanies him in all his international meetings, is evidence of Russia’s submission and its need for a warm relationship with Trump to reduce its strategic losses. What confirms this is that despite the major rupture in US-Russian relations imposed by the Biden administration, the Russian president was keen to entice Trump. Yuri Ushakov, the Russian president’s assistant, said: “Cooperation between Russia and the United States has enormous untapped potential. He noted that the Russian delegation will include Presidential Aide Yuri Ushakov, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Chairman of the Russian Direct Investment Fund Kirill Dmitriev.” (RT, 14/8/2025). This is an indicator of Russia’s weakness that America is sure to pick up on. Perhaps Russian President Putin’s statements after the meeting indicate this weakness and the depth of Russian concern about the continued tension in relations between the two countries. The Russian president began his speech at the press conference by acknowledging the deterioration of US-Russian relations in recent years. He said, “As is known, Russian-American summits have not been held for more than four years. This is a long time. The past period was very difficult for bilateral relations. And, let’s be honest, they have slid to the lowest point since the Cold War. And this is not good for our countries, or the world as a whole.” He added: “Obviously, sooner or later, it was necessary to correct the situation, to move from confrontation to dialogue. And in this regard, a personal meeting of the heads of the two states was really overdue.” Putin said: “The negotiations were held in an atmosphere of respect, constructiveness, and mutual respect and were very comprehensive and useful.” (Reuters, CNN Arabic, 16/8/2025)
9- In conclusion, by carefully examining the course of the meeting between Trump and Putin and the media coverage, it can be said that the following matters were covered in their meeting:
a- Ukraine: This is the most prominent, though not the only, issue, but it is the most famous and heated. Despite the firmness of Russia’s security demands, namely, that Ukraine be excluded from NATO and that it not possess a strong army that threatens Russia, a clear agreement was outlined at the summit. One aspect of this agreement was Russia’s future pledge not to attack Ukraine: (Putin emphasized that he agrees with the need to guarantee Ukraine’s security, saying: “I…agree with President Trump, as he has said today, that naturally, the security of Ukraine should be ensured as well. Naturally, we are prepared to work on that.” He added: “I would like to hope that the agreement that we’ve reached together will help us bring closer that goal and will pave the path towards peace in Ukraine.” (CBS, CNN Arabic, 16/8/2025)). What also confirms the existence of an agreement is that the US President gave his meeting with Putin a score of 10 out of 10. (Sky News, 16/8/2025). America is cooling the war zone in Ukraine in preparation for a ceasefire. This requires an American pledge to gradually slow down American and Western military support for the Ukrainian army, then declare a ceasefire, which may come through a subsequent summit between the two presidents and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy within weeks. Then proceed with the solution in Ukraine slowly, perhaps over the course of years. In other words, America is postponing the final solution and wants a quick ceasefire. The final solution must be over many years, during which America will force Ukraine to concede territory and borders equal to the concessions Russia will make to America on other issues. This is as if it is making Russia salivate by its recognition of the limits of Russian control in Ukraine, with conditions that Russia must fulfil and please America.
b- Re-normalizing US-Russian relations: Although this process began with the Istanbul meeting in April 2025, it is expected to gain momentum, and this momentum will likely become apparent after the second meeting between the two countries, which Ukraine may join with the aim of declaring a ceasefire. Normalizing relations is considered an urgent necessity for America to open negotiations in other strategic files.
c- The Arms Race and Strategic Power: It is highly likely, given both parties’ need for it, that negotiations on arms control and strategic nuclear and missile power will be urgently opened. Russia is likely to agree today to America’s previous condition that China joins these negotiations, making them trilateral. This is because previous Russian-American agreements were a continuation of decades-old agreements between the two military giants, which America severed because it wanted to include the Chinese giant in its ranks. Especially since China is currently implementing nuclear weapons programs that will soon place it among the ranks of the two giants. Its nuclear program is expected to lead to its possession of approximately 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030, meaning that it has surpassed intermediate nuclear powers such as Britain and France for years. Therefore, it is likely that all reasons for Russia’s embarrassment regarding inviting China to participate in the Russian-American negotiations on strategic weapons have been removed. This represents a step for America on its path to dismantling the Russian-Chinese alliance. For all of this, it is likely that America’s hope to dismantle Russia’s alliance with China is a big possibility, but without directly striking it and hurting Russia’s feelings. Rather, it will take steps to reach a rapprochement with Russia to gradually weaken the Russian-Chinese alliance.
10- Finally, it is painful that the kaffir countries control the world, and their leaders meet, discuss, and plan. Yet the Ummah of Islam is the best Ummah that was brought forth for mankind is sitting and has no impact on international events. Indeed, it is not even capable of independent control over its own affairs, but rather is managed by the kaffir colonialists!
The problem is that this Ummah, which numbers nearly two billion, is a body without a head. The Khilafah (Caliphate) State that unites it is not established, and the Caliph who oversees its affairs, who is fought from behind and is protected by him, is absent! Nevertheless, the Khilafah will return, Allah willing, by the promise of Allah (swt) and the glad tidings of His Messenger (saw). However, Allah’s law requires that angels not descend from heaven to establish the Khilafah for us while the Ummah is sitting and does not work to establish it. Rather, Allah sends angels to help us while we work. Hizb ut Tahrir, the pioneer that does not lie to its people, calls on the Ummah to work with it to establish it (the Khilafah). Then Islam and Muslims will be honoured, and kufr (disbelief) and the kuffar (disbelievers) will be humiliated.
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And on that day the believers will rejoice * at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful” [Ar-Rum: 4-5]
25 Safar 1447 AH
19 August 2025 CE -
Q&A: Events in Armenia and Azerbaijan
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمAnswer to Question
Events in Armenia and Azerbaijan
(Translated)Question:
The Russian presence in the South Caucasus has been shaken “following Armenia and Azerbaijan signing a joint declaration with the United States on a peaceful settlement and agreements in the areas of trade and security after a conflict that had lasted more than 35 years between the two neighbouring countries…” (Al Jazeera, 15/8/2025). Azerbaijan and Armenia issued a joint statement on 11/8/2025, following the agreement signed between them in Washington on 8/8/2025, calling on the other parties to dissolve the Minsk Group, which was formed in 1992 to resolve the issues between the two countries. It stipulated the opening of connections between them for local, bilateral, and international transportation. How was this achieved at a time when relations between them were tense and punctuated by wars, especially in recent times? What were its intended purposes? May Allah reward you.
Answer:
To get a clear answer, let us review the following points:
1- On 9/8/2025, the Armen Press Arabic page published the text of the agreement signed by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in the presence of US President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, D.C. It stipulated: “The initialing of the agreed text of the agreement on establishing peace and international relations between the two countries, Azerbaijan and Armenia, and the continuation of further efforts toward its final signing, emphasizing the preservation and strengthening of peace between them, and charting a course for a future not determined by past conflicts, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration, which is the declaration related to the agreement on demarcating the borders between the two countries after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the secession of Azerbaijan and Armenia from it, and mutual recognition between them, respect for sovereignty, and the non-use of force to resolve disputes. The two parties reaffirmed the importance of opening communications between the two countries for domestic, bilateral, and international transportation, based on respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and jurisdiction of states, in order to promote peace, stability, and prosperity.” These efforts will include unhindered communication between the main part of Azerbaijan and the Nakhichevan (Nakhchivan) Autonomous Region through the territory of Armenia.”)
Thus, the agreement focused on opening communications, transportation, and roads between the two countries, given the importance of this issue. The Nakhchivan region of Azerbaijan is not connected to it, and is cut off by Armenia. To connect, the Azerbaijanis must pass through Iran. The agreement calls for opening a road between Azerbaijan and its Nakhchivan region. It also calls for opening roads between Azerbaijan and Turkey, since Armenia is located between them. Land communication is only possible through Armenia. By this means, America can strengthen its influence in Azerbaijan, expand its influence in Armenia, and weaken or eliminate Russia’s influence there.
2- The agreement also stipulated, as published by the Armen Press Arabic page on 9/8/2025, that (“Armenia will work with the United States and mutually agreed third parties to determine the framework for implementing the communications program through the so-called ‘Trump Road to International Peace and Prosperity’ (TRIPP) in the territory of Armenia.” The United States had previously offered to establish and lease this corridor through an American commercial company. The Middle East Eye website reported on 14/7/2025, that “The United States has proposed taking over the planned transport corridor between Armenia and Azerbaijan in an effort to advance long-stalled diplomatic negotiations between the two Caucasus nations, the US ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, told journalists during a briefing on Friday.” The website quoted Barrack’s statements regarding the 32-kilometer corridor, saying: “They are arguing over 32 kilometers of road, but this is no trivial matter. It has dragged on for a decade – 32 kilometers of road…So what happens is that America steps in and says: ‘Okay, we’ll take it over. Give us the 32 kilometers of road on a hundred-year lease, and you can all share it’.”
This would strengthen American influence in both countries. This is confirmed by what Reuters reported on 8/8/2025, that Armenia has agreed to Trump’s plan to lease a communications corridor with the Republic of Azerbaijan for 100 years, indicating that the United States is seeking to impose its will on the dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia. The former, with the support of Turkey, is seeking to open the road to its geographically separate Nakhchivan region. Armenia sees this agreement as an opportunity to obtain American protection from any potential attack by its neighbour, Azerbaijan, amid Russia’s failure to support it in the recent war. Armenia was defeated and its republic in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, which they declared 35 years ago with previous support from Russia, fell.
3- The Middle East Eye website reported that “Azerbaijan has insisted that the corridor should not be placed under Armenia’s total control.” It also stated that “Turkey has quietly urged…[the signing of] the peace agreement… Turkey that originally proposed the idea of a private company, approved by both Armenia and Azerbaijan, managing the corridor.”
Erdogan received both Azerbaijani President Aliyev on 19/6/2025, and the following day he received Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan, whose visit to Turkey was considered historic. The Turkish President’s office reported that “Erdogan stressed ‘the importance of the consensus reached in the ongoing peace negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia… and discussed the potential steps that could be taken within the framework of the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia…” (Al Jazeera, 21/6/2025). Thus, we see that Erdogan has prepared to sign the agreement on behalf of America. He is in America’s orbit and provides it with services to expand its influence in the region in exchange for its support in remaining in power, and for Turkey to benefit from the movement of land trade through Armenia to Azerbaijan.
4- The agreement stipulated that they (“expressed their deep gratitude to US President Trump for hosting their summit and significantly contributing to the process of normalizing bilateral relations between the two countries”). US President Trump wanted to highlight his country’s role and his personal role in particular, as he loves to stand out and claim every achievement in his name, claiming that he is capable of achieving peace and prosperity. Thus, the road that will be built between Azerbaijan and its Nakhchivan region via Armenia was named after him (Trump Road). By concluding this agreement between these two countries, Trump also hopes to win the Nobel Peace Prize, for which he was nominated by the Pakistani Army Chief, Munir Asim, and the Prime Minister of the Jewish entity, Netanyahu. It is worth noting that the peace and prosperity that Trump claims to be working to achieve means achieving America’s interests, expanding its influence and hegemony over various regions of the world, and restoring its greatness, as he launched the slogan “America First” and “Make America Great Again (MAGA).”
5- The agreement states that (“The signatories to the agreement called on the participating states of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and relevant structures on Minsk to accept the decision”). In other words, Trump is forcing the other states in the Minsk Group to accept this American decision without their participation or even consultation, and without giving them any value or attention. This is especially true for Russia and France, which share the leadership of the Minsk Group with America, which was formed to resolve the Azerbaijani-Armenian problem in 1992 by decision of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe! America signed this agreement independently of Russia and scheduled it before President Trump’s meeting with his Russian counterpart, Putin, to avoid any objection from Russia, which should be involved in the matter as it has influence in the region, especially in Armenia, having lost its influence in Azerbaijan, and as one of the leaders of the Minsk Group. He asked it, as he asked others in the group, to recognize and bless this agreement. Instead of Russia intervening and objecting, it did nothing to demonstrate the weakness of its position and the weakness of its influence, which is on the verge of disappearing in Armenia.
6- It appears that Russia is not in a position to intervene and forcefully object, thus influencing Armenia to prevent it from further strengthening its relations with America. It has preferred to go along with the situation, as if satisfied with what is happening, while sending warnings to Armenia to avoid losing it permanently. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, “Therefore, the meeting between the leaders of the South Caucasus republics in Washington, facilitated by the United States, merits a positive assessment. We hope this step will advance a peaceful agenda.” However, she stressed “direct dialogue without third-party mediation.” and warned that “Involvement of actors outside the region should contribute to strengthening the peace agenda rather than create additional difficulties and dividing lines.” (Ministry of Russian Foreign Affairs; Al Jazeera, 9/8/2025). In other words, she is warning against the penetration of American influence there. Armenia had previously been warned against allying with the West. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on 24/7/2025, that (“While Armenia has the right to choose its political direction, Moscow hopes to avoid a repetition of the geopolitical shift witnessed in Ukraine.” He emphasized that “Russia still considers Armenia an ally and wants it to continue cooperating with us.” (Al Jazeera, 25/7/2025). This threatens Armenia with the fate of Ukraine, where Russia lost its influence following the fall of its agent Yanukovych in 2014 after America and Europe incited the Ukrainians to revolt against him. Last year, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan announced in an interview with France 24 on 23/2/2023, (“the freezing of Armenia’s practical participation in the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization… because it has not achieved its goals regarding Armenia”).
Russia did not defend Armenia when Azerbaijan attacked it in 2020 and 2023, forcing it out of the territories it occupied in Azerbaijan. We had mentioned in a Question to Answer issued on 4/10/2023 that (Russia has most likely realized that this war is directed and planned against it by America through Erdogan’s Turkey and Azerbaijan, which has become its guardian, and will occupy it to no avail and disperse its forces. It is now focusing on its war in Ukraine, which is a fateful war that it does not want to lose. Russia knows that if it loses it, it will lose everything, and if it wins it, it will be able to restore its influence in the areas it has lost. At the same time, it does not want to clash with Turkey, which it needs in these circumstances and the blockade imposed on it. It is its gateway to the Western world. It also wants to maintain its relations with Azerbaijan, as it has investments there, especially in energy resources worth $6 billion. The volume of trade exchange between them is more than $4 billion. As for Armenia, it depends on it in everything…it is not unlikely that it will restore it to its full influence as it was if it won the war in Ukraine).
7- America has neglected Europe, especially France, which co-leads the Minsk Group. Trump has thus marginalized Europe, led by France, as he did with Russia, leaving the issue to his own devices. Indeed, Azerbaijan and Armenia have issued a joint letter calling for the dissolution of the Minsk Group. A statement issued by the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry on 11/8/2025, stated, (“The foreign ministers of the two countries addressed a joint letter to the OSCE Chairman-in-Office to terminate the Minsk Group.” “Following this call, a draft resolution on ending the Minsk process and related structures was circulated among the OSCE participating states.” It called on “Azerbaijan and Armenia to support the necessary measures to adopt this decision.” (Azerbaijani State News Agency, 11/8/2025). Thus, America is eliminating any European influence on this issue, allowing it to dominate the issue and extend its influence there. The two countries began implementing the agreement quickly, including (“withdrawing all mutual claims and disputes between them at the international level, as stipulated in the agreement” (the same source). France was forced to announce its acceptance of the dissolution of the Minsk Group and has had no role or influence since 2020, after Azerbaijan declared war on Armenia and then regained its territories, which the Minsk Group did not benefit from by regaining them, as the group claimed to be working on this through peaceful means. France began to flatter America so as not to appear to have lost and is looking for a role to play there. It claimed that it supports the agreement, even though it was the one that openly supported the Armenians against Azerbaijan.
8- Trump also neglected Turkey, which was waiting for its president, Erdogan, to be rewarded for his services by inviting him to Washington to attend the signing of the agreement. Erdogan played a significant role in supporting Azerbaijan and enabling it to defeat Armenia and liberate its occupied territories, thanks to American planning. But even this was begrudged by Trump, as he saw no need to finalize this agreement. Otherwise, he would have summoned Erdogan to Washington, or asked him to speak by phone with Azerbaijani President Aliyev, as he asked him to speak by phone with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa during his meeting with him in Riyadh on 13/5/2025, to comply with American demands. But in the Armenia-Azerbaijan agreement, he ignored him! Thus, the kaffir (disbelieving) colonizers reap the fruits, while others who revolve in their orbit or are agents plow and toil for them in exchange for their reward of remaining in power. And even this does not always happen. Will they not understand?!
9- Trump is keen to show off America’s greatness and his own greatness, and that he is the only person in the world who can make peace and accomplish difficult tasks, wage economic wars against enemies and friends, and ignite bloody wars directly or through the Jewish entity, as he did recently in Iran. He openly supports the Jewish entity in killing, starving and displacing the people of Gaza with no shame or fear to achieve his project of transforming it into a resort and without anyone being able to intervene to stop the genocide there or to bring in a morsel of bread in a proper way! He forgot that Allah had destroyed before him generations of people who were stronger, more numerous, and more deadly “than him and his country, America, and his base, the Jewish entity.” He forgot, or pretended to forget, that the Islamic Ummah, no matter how much oppression, subjugation, and injustice befalls it from its rulers, the allies of the kuffar, will rise up and revolt against them, overthrow them, and hand over its authority to one who is worthy from amongst it to rule it according to what Allah has revealed, thus restoring the Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly-Guided Caliphate) after this oppressive rule in which we live, in fulfillment of the glad-tiding of the Messenger of Allah (saw) in His noble Hadith that was narrated by Ahmad on the authority of Hudhayfah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
«… ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكاً جَبْرِيَّةً فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ، ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا، ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ. ثُمَّ سَكَتَ»
“Then there will be an oppressive rule (ملكًا جبرية), and it will last for as long as Allah wishes, then He will lift it if He wishes. Then there will be a Khilafah on the method of Prophethood.” Then he (saw) fell silent. And it carries its message to the world and spreads it, as stated in the noble Hadith narrated by Ahmad on the authority of Tamim al-Dari, who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say:
«لَيَبْلُغَنَّ هَذَا الْأَمْرُ مَا بَلَغَ اللَّيْلُ وَالنَّهَارُ، وَلَا يَتْرُكُ اللَّهُ بَيْتَ مَدَرٍ وَلَا وَبَرٍ إِلَّا أَدْخَلَهُ اللَّهُ هَذَا الدِّينَ، بِعِزِّ عَزِيزٍ أَوْ بِذُلِّ ذَلِيلٍ؛ عِزّاً يُعِزُّ اللَّهُ بِهِ الْإِسْلَامَ، وَذُلّاً يُذِلُّ اللَّهُ بِهِ الْكُفْر»
“There will not remain on the face of the earth a mud-brick house or a camel’s hair tent which Allah will not cause the confession of Islam to enter bringing both mighty honour and abject abasement. Allah will either honour the occupants and put them among its adherents, or will humiliate them and they will be subject to it.”This will happen by Allah’s permission.
[إِنَّ اللَّهَ بَالِغُ أَمْرِهِ قَدْ جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدْراً]
“Certainly Allah achieves His Will. Allah has already set a destiny for everything” [At-Talaq: 3]
22 Safar 1447 AH
16/8/2025 CE -
Causes and Effects: Are Results Achieved at our Hands?
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمCauses and Effects: Are Results Achieved at our Hands?
[Victory (Nasr) as an Example]
(Translated)The study of causes and effects, the relationship between causes and effects, or what is known as the law of causality (sababiyyah), and whether this relationship is constant and unchanging, is a topic long addressed by scholars of academic, intellectual and Shariah research. The accepted, practical view among all people is that this relationship is self-evident and definitive. This interconnectedness is the Qadr (Predetermination) of Allah (swt) and His unchanging law for all things and people.
The term “cause” is used in this context in two senses. One is the intended meaning in both rational and tangible matters, i.e., something that is the cause of something else that results from it. This is like the shattering of glass upon impact, with something solid, or the falling of something suspended by a rope if the rope breaks, or the explosion of a closed object if the pressure inside it continues to increase. This impact, rupture, or pressure is a rational cause of a result or effect, namely the shattering, falling, or explosion. The effect inevitably results when it occurs and by its occurrence, that is, with it and by it. The term “cause” is also used in the technical, Shariah sense in the foundations of jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh). This is like sighting the Hilal crescent moon of Ramadan or Shawwal to establish the Shariah obligation of Sawm (Shariah fasting) or Eid, or like the setting of the sun to establish the Shariah obligation of the Maghrib Salah (Shariah prayer). This is a cause (sabab) in the sense that it brings the ruling of Sawm, Eid, or Maghrib Salah into existence, but not in the sense of granting the ruling Shariah evidential basis. That is, the Shariah ruling is formed upon the basis of its Shariah evidence, but not brought into existence because it is not a rational cause. Therefore, it is said that in rational matters, a cause establishes the effect is both brought into existence by the cause and substantiated by it. However, in Shariah matters, the cause only brings the Shariah ruling into existence, but does not substantiate it as a ruling evidentially. What is meant in this research is the cause of rational or tangible matters, and it is the action, or actions, by which a goal is intended to be reached, and the intended goal is the effect or result.
The discussion of causes and effects is general for every cause and effect, or what is likely to be a cause and effect. For example, a study is a cause whose intended and desired result is success. Agriculture is a cause whose intended and desired result is harvest. Preparing for war and fighting is a cause, whose intended result is victory, the expansion of influence and power, and terrorizing the enemy. Punishments are a rational, material, and practical reason for preventing violations. The Shariah method for establishing the Islamic State is a material and practical cause for its establishment, which is the intended result. The topic of causes and effects is general, and all of these issues and examples fall under it. It also includes the meaning of the Arabic saying, من جَدَّ وَجَدَ ومن زَرَعَ حصد“Whoever strives will generate, and whoever sows will reap,” in all its generality.
Since this research is general in its coverage of these topics, what applies to any one of them in terms of its being a cause and effect, a result, or a goal, will apply to all others. The most frequently mentioned and questioned topic is the topic of victory (nasr), as a result of the actions that achieve it.
If the relationship between cause and effect is inevitable, and it is so, this means that taking the causes into account will inevitably lead to their results. That is, taking the causes of victory (nasr) will inevitably lead to victory. Is this true? If the causes of victory are in the hands of those who target it, this means that the results are also in their hands. Is this true? These questions are the requirements of this research.
It also requires, after establishing the inevitability of the connection between victory and its causes, to reconcile this fact with the Shariah texts that are definitive in narration, and definitive in evidencing, that victory comes from Allah (swt) Alone, such as the Almighty’s saying,
[وَمَا النَّصْرُ إلَّا مِنْ عِنْدِ اللهِ الْعَزِيزِ الْحَكِيمِ]
“And victory comes only from Allah—the Almighty, All-Wise.” [TMQ Surah Aali Imran: 126], and His saying,
[إن يَنْصُركُمُ اللهُ فَلَا غَالِبَ لَكُمْ وَإنْ يَخْذُلْكُمْ فَمَنْ ذَا الَّذِي يَنْصُرُكم مِنْ بَعْدِهِ وَعَلَى اللهِ فِلْيَتَوَكَّلِ الْمُؤْمِنُون]
“If Allah helps you, none can defeat you. But if He denies you help, then who else can help you? So in Allah let the believers put their trust.” [TMQ Surah Aali Imran: 160], and His Saying,
[يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللهَ يَنْصُرْكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتْ أَقْدَامَكُمْ]
“O believers! If you stand up for Allah, He will help you and make your steps firm.” [TMQ Surah Muhammad: 7]. Some observers see this as a contradiction that raises doubt about this truth or casts doubt on it. In other words, questions arise: Does achieving victory depend solely on causes based on the material law of causality, or does it come from Allah (swt) Alone, whether or not the causes are taken into account? In other words: Is there a contradiction between victory having material causes, and being an inevitable result of them if properly considered, and its coming from Allah (swt) Alone? Does the statement that if the causes are taken into account, victory is inevitable and always achieved, contradict the texts that limit victory (nasr) to coming from Allah (swt)? Does the statement that victory (nasr) comes from Allah (swt) and is given to whomever He wills, regardless of taking the causes, mean that the matter of preparation is merely a Shariah, ritual obligation, with no negative or positive impact whatsoever on victory, and that it contradicts the law of causality? Thus, the apparent problem that arises and raises questions becomes clear. The problem is that the relationship between cause and effect is a definitive rational truth, whilst the Shariah texts’ evidencing that victory comes from Allah (swt) is also a definitive truth, and confirmed truths do not contradict each other. What is the explanation? How can this problem be resolved, the contradiction between these two truths resolved by reconciliation, and their compatibility demonstrated?
The answer, first of all, does that truth contradict or conflict, whether they are either rational truths in themselves, or Shariah truths in themselves, or both Shariah and rational truths. They are all truths. If any apparent conflict between them occurs, it is not real. Instead, it is a misconception that can be dispelled with knowledge, scrutiny, and careful consideration. Therefore, it is called an apparent, not a real, conflict.
Therefore, there is no contradiction between the law of causality, or the inevitable relationship between causes and their effects, and the truth that victory (Nasr) comes from Allah (swt) Alone. If the cause occurs completely, then the occurrence of the effect or the result is inevitable. This is how Allah (swt) has ordained and mandated matters. If we see that the result does not occur, this does not mean that the law has been violated. Instead, it means that the cause did not occur, or did not occur completely. There may be an error, such as when the faa’iI (the doer of an action) thinks that what he is doing is a cause when it is not, or events may have aborted or obstructed the cause, and acted as obstacles, and this occurs frequently, or taking the causes into account may be incomplete and deficient, which makes the result probable, rather than certain. The strength of its probability is proportional to the taking of the causes. This matter is permanent, as no one, no matter how knowledgeable or important, can fully take the causes into account, because he will not be able to fully know them, nor will he be able to take into account everything he knows about them, let alone ignorance of the events and changes that arise. This makes taking the causes into account incomplete, and it is impossible to take them into account completely.
Therefore, the error, or flaw, in achieving a result is not due to a flaw in the law of linking causes to their effects. Instead it is due to an error and deficiency in taking the causes into account. This deficiency, in addition to the presence of causes that are not within human perception or human ability, makes the results uncertain. Therefore, it is certain that the results are in the Hand of Allah (swt) Alone and not in the hands of the doer, no matter how much the causes are taken. Man strives to take the causes that he believes will lead to the result, and when he does so, he can only take what he perceives of them, and what he is able to do from what he perceives. Since his perception is limited and imperfect, and his ability is also limited and imperfect, achieving the result or goal is not in his hands, but in the Knowledge of Allah (swt), and in His Hand Alone.
It may be said, ‘However, it is observed in many actions that achieving results occurs without lag, whether the action is simple, such as demolishing a wall or a murder, or complex, such as actions with many steps and stages, such as modern, advanced industries, for example.’ The answer is that the closer and more uncomplicated the causes of the desired goal are, or the causes of the desired result are, and the more comprehensible and attainable the possibility of taking the causes into account, the more the result is achieved. However, the result will still not reach completion. This is because there is always something beyond human comprehension and ability. There are obstacles or impediments that occur, preventing the completion of taking the causes, such as forgetfulness, death, the occurrence of counter-actions, or natural disasters such as an earthquake, stormy winds, or widespread diseases, and so on. Taking the causes certainly leads to the result, but no human being, no matter how much knowledge and ability he is given, even if he is a prophet, can take the causes completely.
The matter is made clearer by the Almighty’s saying,
[إنّ اللهَ لَا يُغَيّرُ مَا بِقَوْمٍ حَتَّى يُغَيِّرُوا مَا بِأَنْفُسِهِمْ]
“Indeed, Allah would never change a people’s state, until they change all that is in themselves.” [TMQ Surah Ar-Raad: 11]. This Shariah text indicates that Allah (swt) is the One Who changes what is with a people, in terms of their state and situation. It also indicates that He (swt) will not change what is with them until they change what is within themselves. This also raises considerations, because if they change what is within themselves, then they have changed, and the change has occurred, so why does Allah (swt) say that He will change what is with them after that? The answer is what was mentioned above, that there are causes for change that are within people’s hands, and there are those that are beyond their understanding and capabilities. So, they must change what is within them, that is, within their hands. If they do so, Allah (swt) will change what is not within their hands, and the desired change will be achieved.
Taking victory (nasr) in war as an example, the above becomes clear. Victory is an intended outcome, achieved through its causes, such as preparation, planning, combat, and so on. Taking the causes of victory is essential to achieving it. However, no matter how much intellectual, material and military power, or the ability to analyze and plan, those who take the causes may never fully grasp all the causes of victory (nasr), or even its cause. Preparation will remain incomplete. In addition, the enemy also plans and takes the causes into account. Also included are the emergencies that only Allah (swt) knows about, such as a breach, betrayal, coup, assassinations, the death of leaders, the spread of diseases, natural disasters, and so on. These real-life examples demonstrate that the causes of victory cannot be fully grasped, and that the causes taken into account may be disrupted by human or natural causes. This demonstrates that tangible truths also indicate that results and goals, including victory (nasr), come from Allah Alone. Thus, the aforementioned alleged contradiction is resolved through reconciliation, revealing that it is an apparent and illusory contradiction.
There are other issues related to this topic, such as the fact that victory comes from Allah (swt). If the kuffar are victorious over other kuffar or over Muslims, is it Allah (swt) who grants them victory? Another issue is that the Quranic verses indicate that Allah’s victory for believers is conditional upon their supporting Him, and that if they support Him, He will grant them victory. Supporting believers for Allah (swt) means that they worship and obey Him. Does this condition mean that if they disobey Him, He will not grant them victory? Another issue is that saying that outcomes are in Allah’s Hand, not ours, means that people and those charged with Shariah obligations, are not responsible for defeats or their failure to achieve goals?
The answer to the first question is that Allah (swt) says,
[وَمَا النَّصْرُ إلَّا مِنْ عِنْدِ اللهِ الْعَزِيزِ الْحَكِيمِ]
“Victory comes only from Allah. Surely Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.” [TMQ Surah Al-Anfal 10]. Victory is limited to Allah (swt) Alone, and this applies to all victories, whether they are for believers or for kuffar. This means that Allah (swt) grants victory to believers and those who are committed to His Will, as well as to kuffar, those who are not believing, worshipful or obedient.
This leads to the following question: If the victory (nasr) of the disobedient, the kuffar, and their like is from Allah (swt), does this not contradict the verses that indicate that the Iman of the believers and their support for Allah (swt) is a condition for His support for victory for them? These Quranic verses include Allah’s Saying,
[يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللهَ يَنْصُرْكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتْ أَقْدَامَكُمْ]
“O believers! If you support Allah, He will support you and make your steps firm” [TMQ Surah Muhammad: 7], and His Saying,
[إِنْ يَنْصُرْكُمُ اللهُ فَلَا غَالِبَ لَكُمْ وَإنْ يَخْذُلْكُمْ فَمَنْ ذَا الَّذِي يَنْصُرُكُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِه وَعَلَى اللهِ فَلْيَتَوَكَّلِ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ]
“If Allah supports you, none can defeat you. However, if He denies you support, then who else can support you? So in Allah let the believers put their trust” [TMQ Surah Aali Imran: 160] and His Saying,
[وَكَانَ حَقَّاً عَلَيْنَا نَصْرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ]
“It is Our duty to support the believers” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum: 47]. It is well known that, أنّ الشرطَ يلزمُ من عدمه العدم“the condition necessitates through its own absence, absence of the conditioned.” Is there no contradiction between the statement that Allah (swt) grants victory to sinners and kuffar, and the statement that Iman and obedience are conditions for attaining Allah’s victory?
The answer is that there is absolutely no contradiction between these Shariah texts. Allah (swt)’s statement,
[وَمَا النَّصْرُ إلَّا مِنْ عِنْدِ اللهِ]
“And victory comes only from Allah,” [TMQ Surah Al-Anfal: 10] is general in every victory, whether for the kuffar or the believers. In addition to this general evidence, there is specific evidence on the subject that confirms its generality. It is Allah (swt) support for victory of the Romans over the Persians, as He, Allah (swt), informed us that the Romans would be victorious, and that this would be due to the support of Allah (swt) for them. Allah (swt) said,
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُون * بِنَصْرِ اللهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And on that day the believers will rejoice (4) at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful (5)” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum: 4-5]. It is well known that the Romans are kafir, meaning that the condition of Iman and obedience is not met among them. This statement is established. The texts also indicate that the believers’ support of Allah (swt) is a condition for His support of them. Allah (swt) says,
[إنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللهَ يَنْصُرْكُمْ]
“If you support Allah, He will support you” [TMQ Surah Muhammad: 47]. This is definitive evidence. However, this does not mean that disobedience negates the possibility of the victory of Allah (swt). The explanation for this is that this condition is not a condition for victory in itself. Instead, it is a condition for the inevitability of the victory of Allah for the believers, because they deserve His victory. That is, Allah (swt) determined upon Himself that the Iman of the believers and their support for Him necessitates His victory for them. It is a promise from Allah or a covenant He prescribed upon Himself as a favor from Him to the believers. As in the Saying of Allah (swt),
[وَعْدَاً عِلِيْهِ حَقَّاً فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَالْإِنْجِيلِ وَالْقُرْآنِ وَمَنْ أَوْفَى بِعَهْدِهِ مِنَ اللهِ]
“This is a true promise binding on Him in the Torah, the Injeel, and the Quran. And whose promise is truer than Allah’s?” [TMQ Surah at-Tawba 111] and He (swt) said,
[كَتَبَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ الرَّحْمَةَ]
“Your Lord has prescribed Himself to be Merciful.” [TMQ Surah al-Anaam 54] The same is true here in the matter of victory, and is confirmed by the Saying of Allah (swt),
[وَكَانَ حَقَّاً عَلَيْنَا نَصْرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ]
“For it is Our duty to support the believers.” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum 47] It is a right upon Allah (swt), i.e. a covenant from Him, or a promise that He, glory be to Him, prescribed upon Himself, that if you do such and such, He will support you. So the condition in the Saying of Allah (swt),
[إنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللهَ يَنْصُرْكُمْ]
“If you support Allah (swt), He will support you” [TMQ Surah Muhammad: 47] is not a condition for Allah’s victory for them. Instead, it is a condition for the Covenant and Promise from Allah (swt) to them to grant them victory, and Allah does not break His promise or covenant. Therefore, if Iman or obedience is absent, victory from Allah (swt) is not absent, but His promise of victory is absent. Then He does what He wills, so He grants victory or does not grant victory, He grants victory to this group or that, and He abandons this group or that, as Allah (swt) said in Surat Ar-Rum:
[يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful.” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum: 5]. If they believe and commit, then Allah (swt) will grant them victory.
As for the question of responsibility for failure, defeat, or the lack of victory, the answer is that these are all consequences. It has already been stated that outcomes are in the Hand of Allah (swt) lone, and are beyond the control of humans. Allah (swt) says,
[لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللهُ نَفْسَاً إِلّا وُسْعَهَا لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَعَلَيْهَا مَا اكْتَسَبَتْ]
“Allah does not require of any soul more than what it can afford. All good will be for its own benefit, and all evil will be to its own loss.” [TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah: 286]. Therefore, it is not correct to hold those in charge of actions accountable for the results. However, it is correct and necessary that they be asked about, and held accountable for, taking the causes that would lead to the results. They are held accountable for negligence, shortcomings, or errors in taking them. This is because results are reached through their causes. The Shariah obligation falls on taking the causes, not achieving the results. Therefore, we do not find in the Shariah, for example, “secure victory for yourselves.” Instead we find in the Noble Quran, [وأعِدُّوا] “And prepare” [انْفِرُوا] “go forth,” [قَاتِلُوا] “fight, [اقْتُلُوهُمْ] kill them, [فَضَرْبَ الرِّقَابِ] “strike their necks” and [فَشُدُّوا الْوَثَاقَ] “then secure the bindings.” If a Shariah command is given as a result, then it must be diverted from the result to its causes. An example of this is that
Shariah law commands Muslims to love one another. However, love is not a predetermined action that a person performs. It is not like selling, fighting, performing Salah, or speaking. Instead, it is a result that only occurs through diverting to its causes. Therefore, the Prophet (saw) instructed us to perform predetermined actions that are likely causes that lead to the result of love, such as greeting one another and exchanging gifts. He (saw) said, «لا تَدْخُلُونَ الجَنَّةَ حتَّى تُؤْمِنُوا، ولا تُؤْمِنُوا حتَّى تَحابُّوا، أوَلا أدُلُّكُمْ علَى شيءٍ إذا فَعَلْتُمُوهُ تَحابَبْتُمْ؟ أفْشُوا السَّلامَ بيْنَكُمْ»“You shall not enter Paradise so long as you do not affirm belief, and you will not believe as long as you do not love one another. Should I not direct you to a thing which, if you do, will foster love amongst you? Exchange salaams.” This is narrated by Bukhari and Muslim, with the wording of Muslim, here, whilst Bukhari narrated «تهَادُوا تَحَابُّوا» “exchange gifts and you will love each other.” Regarding the issue of accountability and responsibility, and that it is based on taking causes and not results, I will briefly point out instances that occurred with the Prophet (saw), and contemplating them fully demonstrates what was mentioned above. These instances are when the Muslims lost the Battle of Uhud while under the Prophet’s (saw) leadership. He cannot be held accountable for this outcome, nor accused of negligence because of it, as he was the infallible (ma’soom) one to whom revelation was sent. Likewise, it can only be said that he took the necessary measures to the best of his ability. The same can be said of the Battle of Hunayn, where the Muslims lost at the beginning of the battle before achieving victory. As for the Battle of Badr, the Prophet (saw) had chosen a location for his military camp, and this was taking the necessary measures. However, Al-Hubab ibn Al-Mundhir (ra) argued with him that there was a better location than this to achieve victory, so he (saw) accepted his advice and changed his location. This demonstrates that taking the necessary measures is subject to shortcomings and errors, but also involves diligence, and requires sincere advice and accountability. Contrary to the results, there was no accountability for the loss at Uhud, nor for what happened at the beginning of the Battle of Hunayn. The Prophet (saw) almost made concessions at the Battle of the Trench, despite having dug the trench and prepared as much as he could. These concessions were a reason within his control, one he intended to take to prevent a potential defeat beyond his control. However, the Companions (ra) argued with him about the reason, and he changed his mind.
Examples of the above are numerous, and they demonstrate that people’s adherence to the necessary causes is insufficient to achieve definitive results. They also demonstrate that results are in the Hand of Allah (swt) Alone, and that accountability is based on the adoption of the causes, not the results. They demonstrate that since adopting the causes is incomplete, is beset by a lack of knowledge and miscalculations, is hindered by obstacles, and leads to failure, then the causes must be reconsidered to address any obstacle, error, or deficiency. And Allah is the Grantor of success and the One sought for help.
-
Essentials of Political Understanding and Policymaking – Part 2
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمPrerequisites for Political Understanding and Policymaking
Political Information, Following the News
(Part 2)
(Translated)Since political analysis is based on understanding rather than imagining, it is essential to obtain a volume of necessary information to achieve that understanding. The information required for political understanding is of two types. The first type is the news about current events, and the second type is the information related to and surrounding these events. This second type is what we refer to as political information.
Political Information
Political information refers to the information connected to and surrounding an event, including its historical context, political geography, the people involved, the countries effected by the event, and their mutual relations. This information is not approached theoretically. Instead, only the aspects relevant to the political dimension are considered.
The political information related to the event is as follows:
First: Political Geography
A country’s location, geographical features, and resources influence its politics, and therefore play a role in understanding the political events related to that country. A state that is geographically open to global trade routes is positioned to establish relations with countries around the world, which in itself is a factor that can help it become a major power. A country located near key geographical features, such as straits and maritime routes, can use its position to influence those passing through the area, and to accumulate wealth. If a country possesses significant resources such as oil, gold, rare earth minerals, or uranium, its potential for wealth and influence is high. Similarly, rough, hard terrain within a country can enhance its ability to defend itself, and so on.
Second: History
Global issues often have historical dimensions that cast their shadow over current events, or current events emerge by invoking the historical memory they carry. For example, when examining the relationship between Europe and Russia, one must note that it is a relationship marked by hostility, a hostility rooted in history. Russia has been invaded three times from its western front by European powers, which contributes to this historical enmity.
Third: Characteristics of Peoples
A country’s general political orientation is not separate from the traits of its people. For example, if a people lack the quality of taking responsibility for others, and tend to focus solely on their own affairs, then their state’s policies will lean more toward defense rather than offense or expansion. Therefore, it is essential to pay attention to the characteristics of peoples when engaging in political analysis.
Fourth: The International Scenario
This refers to the structure of relationships between countries around the world. The countries that influence the international scenario are those with foreign policies capable of impacting other nations. When one or more powers emerge with the means to influence global affairs, they become the most capable of shaping this structure of relations, thus defining the international scenario. The country that succeeds in shaping the international scenario is considered the leading power in the world, and it is essential to identify this state.
Since an event may occur in a country other than the leading one, it is necessary to understand the reality of the country directly involved in the event, as well as its relationship with the world’s leading power and the nature of that relationship. Neglecting the international scenario or isolating events from the leading global power narrows one’s perspective and results in a flawed understanding, reducing a global event to a mere local incident.
For example, a coup took place in Niger in 2010. It is well known that Niger was under French influence and exploited by France for uranium extraction. The coup overthrew France’s agent, Mamadou Tandja. At the time, Niger was a subordinate state to a major power, France, while the leading power in the world was the United States, which was seeking to undermine France’s influence in Africa. When we examine American statements, we find that they placed the blame on Tandja, did not call for his reinstatement, nor for dialogue between the coup leaders and the ousted president. This information points to the conclusion that the United States was behind the coup.
Fifth: Political Projects Related to the State Involved in the Event
For instance, when conflict erupted in Sudan in 2023, understanding the international scenario, and Sudan’s relationship with the world’s leading power is important, but not sufficient. One must also examine the political projects designed for Sudan. A historical project immediately comes to mind: the plan to divide Sudan, which dates back to the British colonialist rule, where administrative divisions were structured in a way that would facilitate future partition. This project is agreed upon in Western circles.
Another, more recent project is Europe’s attempt to bring Sudan under its influence through the push for civil rule, a project that exploited the Sudanese revolution against Omar al-Bashir to advance its goals. It would be incorrect to ignore these political projects when analyzing such events. Without recognizing them, the analysis would lack depth, and take an entirely different, and potentially flawed, direction.
Sixth: Immediate Circumstances
When an event occurs in a country or region, and the international scenario is understood, as well as the relationship between the state involved in the event, and the world’s leading power, and if there is no direct political project related to the state carrying out the event, then one must consider the immediate circumstances.
For example, when the United States revived its alliance with Australia, India, and Japan in 2017, and it was known that the US had no specific political project for any of these countries individually, but this alliance was revived during the same period when the US had launched a project to contain China, initiated during Donald Trump’s first presidential term and continued thereafter, then the mind must turn to that project as the relevant immediate context. Thus, it becomes clear that the revival of this alliance occurred within the framework of the US effort to contain China.
Seventh: The Individuals Directly Involved in the Event
Since politics is shaped by individuals, it is essential to examine those directly involved in the making of events. By understanding the inclinations of these individuals, one can discern the direction in which the event is headed.
For example, during the 2023 war on Gaza, the Prime Minister of the Jewish entity was Benjamin Netanyahu. At that time, we were aware of the international context and the immediate circumstances. However, it is also necessary to take a closer look at who Netanyahu is. We find that he has strong ties to AIPAC in the US and receives support from them. He is also connected to Trump’s Republican camp, which was fiercely competing against then-President Joe Biden, in what was an election year in the US.
Netanyahu had a political agenda for the Jewish entity, that contradicted the American two-state solution. He actively worked to maintain the separation between Gaza and the West Bank. Additionally, he faced corruption charges in court. With all this in mind, we can understand why he obstructed ceasefire and prisoner exchange deals that the US was trying to implement. Had another figure, one of America’s strongly loyal men in the Jewish entity, been Prime Minister instead, the state’s behavior would likely have been different.
Eighth: The Beneficiaries of the Event
Studying who benefits from an event can be useful, but it requires supporting evidence from other sources, to truly understand the reality of the situation. This is because when an event occurs, multiple parties may benefit from it some may have planned it, while others may have had no involvement in the planning. Therefore, if one’s understanding is based solely on identifying who benefits, the resulting analysis becomes unreliable, and cannot be depended upon.
These are the types of information necessary for political understanding, and we will explore some of them in more detail.
Following the News (Mutaabia tul-Akhbar)
We mentioned that political understanding requires information in order to be produced. This information includes both the following of current events and political information. Following the news should not be a matter of casual browsing, but rather a deliberate and purposeful tracking of developments.
The word “mutaabiah” (following, following-up, pursuit) in Arabic language implies connecting what came before with what comes, after just as pursuit footsteps requires knowing the first step, and then following it to the next. The same applies to following the news, which involves listening to and reading news reports. Following the news means following all news both important and seemingly trivial and making the effort to search for useful information. A seemingly unimportant report might contain information connected to a key event, or it might not. Since the observer doesn’t know when or where the useful piece of information will appear, they must diligently search through the news to uncover it.
A person following the news may either search for a specific piece of information they believe likely exists, or they may search for any potentially useful information. The information that is presumed to exist arises in the mind, when there is an incomplete picture of an event, and a certain missing angle is needed to complete that picture. In this case, the search becomes targeted and specific. However, when the image in the mind is still initial, or not yet fully formed, one must search broadly for any important information, even if its features are not yet clear. Once found, its importance will be recognized by its nature.
There are political pieces of information that speak directly about the event itself, and there are those that relate politically to the event, such as information about the individuals involved, the political project connected to the event, or the immediate context surrounding it. These are the types of information that must be gathered. On the other hand, information not falling within these categories, like emotional stories or dramatized narratives aired by media outlets merely to attract viewers, must be disregarded.
The news followed by a political researcher may come in various forms: a direct report on the event and its related developments, an article describing the event and its connections, or an opinion piece in which a writer expresses their personal view of the event. Here, it is essential for the political analyst to distinguish between what must be taken from this content and what should be disregarded.
Listening to or reading a news piece must be followed by an intellectual operation of classification, whether it is information to be retained or discarded. The information to be kept is that which is directly connected to the event. Any information unrelated to the event, as well as any analysis or opinion, must be left aside. This is because a political analyst must construct their own analysis independently, and must not rely on someone else’s interpretation. An opinion writer may not necessarily share the same political concepts as the analyst. In fact, many analysts base their views on assumptions, speculation, or mere logic, some even intentionally mislead, while others let their biases toward one side of the event, or emotional responses, influence their perspective.
Therefore, straightforward news reports and descriptive articles are more valuable than opinion pieces. However, opinion articles may still contain valuable pieces of information that the writer may have obtained, which is why they remain part of the news sources worth following, though with lower priority compared to direct news reports and analyses.
As for the sources from which a political analyst draws news and articles, they must be reputable news channels and credible newspapers that is, sources known for verifying their reports. However, a political analyst must never accept what these sources present with blind trust. They must always remember that their goal is to search for useful information, which may or may not be found in these sources.
It is also essential to pay attention to the biases of these channels and newspapers. Right-leaning publications tend to present news with a right-wing slant, and the same goes for left-leaning outlets. A single piece of information may be reported by both sides, but each will frame it differently. The analyst must not fall into the trap of biased linguistic framing.
Attention must also be given to the author of the article. Some writers and journalists are clearly connected to the event, or its key figures, and show a strong commitment to the accuracy of their reporting. These writers deserve more attention than others, when it comes to reading their articles and news pieces.
A political analyst must also follow everything issued by those directly involved in the events or affected by them. For example, if an event takes place in the Middle East and the US Secretary of State holds a press conference about it, the analyst must listen to that press conference. The same applies to statements from the President of the United States, the National Security Advisor, the White House spokesperson, and others involved in shaping the event, especially considering that the United States is currently the leading power in the world, and maintains broad control over the Middle East.
At times, we may encounter contradictions between the statements made by officials, or between their words and their actions. To resolve this dilemma, it is essential to distinguish accurate information from misleading statements. This can be done by examining the context in which each statement is made. For example, if the US president makes two seemingly contradictory statements, one may be intended for the domestic audience while the other is directed toward the issue or event itself. When each statement is placed within its proper context, it becomes easier to determine which is accurate and which is misleading.
Additionally, it is necessary to compare the verbal statements, with actual actions on the ground. This is to analyze them in light of the available information about the event, and the objectives set by the state issuing the statement, with regard to that specific event or region. If a statement aligns with the broader political project, while the action contradicts it, then the statement is likely truthful, and the action may be intended as a deception. Conversely, if the action aligns with the project, while the statement does not, then the action is truthful and the statement is misleading. In short, news cannot be separated from the overall context or the broader picture surrounding it.
Deception occurs in actions just as it does in words, and recognizing it is one of the essential skills a political analyst must possess. A disbelieving (non-Muslim) politician may lie in order to deceive, but a Muslim politician does not lie. Instead, he may use deliberate ambiguity phrasing things in a way that suggests something close in meaning, while actually intending a more distant meaning, or even a deeper, concealed meaning.
For example, the Messenger of Allah (saw) would sometimes send a military expedition in a direction different from its true target. Once the expedition reached a point where the enemy felt secure, and assumed they were not the intended target, the expedition would then redirect itself toward the actual objective. The same principle applies in political actions as it does in military operations.
Following the news, selecting what is accurate, and extracting what is useful, is a matter that requires practice and experience, until the skill is developed and the process becomes easier for the one who possesses it. (To be continued)
-
Q&A: The Events in Al-Suwayda
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Events in Al-Suwayda
(Translated)Question:
Axios reported that a high-level meeting took place in Paris between ‘Israeli’ Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer and Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Shibani, mediated by the U.S. special envoy to Syria, Thomas Barak, on 25/7/2025. The past few days since 12/7/2025 have witnessed an escalation in unrest in Al-Suwayda [Sweida] Governorate in southern Syria, which is predominantly inhabited by Druze. The Jewish entity has declared its intervention in their affairs alongside continuing its aggression and attacks in Syria. It struck around the presidential palace, and struck the Ministry of Defense and the General Staff in Damascus.
So the question is: What is the reality of what is happening in Al-Suwayda? What is the Jewish entity planning for the Suwayda region and southern Syria in general, and does America support its plans? And what is the relationship between all of this and the talks of normalization between the Syrian regime and the Jewish entity, especially the meetings that occurred in Azerbaijan? And the referenced meetings in Paris? May Allah reward you with goodness.
Answer:
To clarify the answers to the above questions, we review the following matters:
1- As for the Druze, their number in Syria is estimated at about 700,000, living in areas in southern Syria, especially in the Al-Suwayda Governorate. A portion of them lives in Lebanon, estimated at around 250,000, and another portion, estimated at around 140,000, resides in northern Palestine and the Golan Heights. The Jewish entity has granted its citizenship to those living in the occupied areas, and some of them have joined its army ranks. Thus, the Jewish entity uses them as a pretext to intervene in Syria. It has incited them since the end of last February in Jaramana and Sahnaya near the capital, Damascus… and in the recent events in Al-Suwayda that erupted since 12 July 2025, the Jewish entity explicitly announced that it supports the Druze and works to exploit them. Druze militias carried out acts of violence against Muslim Bedouins residing in Al-Suwayda Governorate, killing hundreds of them. The Prime Minister of the Jewish entity, Netanyahu, declared in a speech broadcast by Jewish television and other media on 17/7/2025: “We have set a clear policy, demilitarizing the area south of Damascus, from the Golan Heights to the Druze mountains, is one [red] line. The second line [is] protecting… the Druze in the Druze mountains.” The Jewish entity’s Minister of War, Yisrael Katz, sent threats to Syria via the X platform on 16 July 2025, saying, “The signals to Damascus are over; now comes the painful blows. The army will continue to operate forcefully in Al-Suwayda to destroy the forces that attacked the Druze until their complete withdrawal.” The spokesperson for the Jewish army said on the X platform: “The army continues to strike military targets of the Syrian regime. A short while ago, it attacked the headquarters of the Syrian General Staff in the Damascus area.” On the same day, the Jewish entity’s Army Radio announced: “It attacked about 160 targets in Syria since last night, most of them in Al-Suwayda ‘against Syrian security forces and Bedouins,’ and some in the capital Damascus.” Strikes were announced on the presidential palace, the Ministry of Defense, and the General Staff in Damascus.
2- Thus, the Jewish entity explicitly announces its objectives and policy and that it exploits the Druze to implement this policy towards Syria, making their affairs of concern to it and not to the Syrian regime, as if it is implicitly carving this region out of Syria and becoming the one in control over it. It has not stopped its attacks in Syria during the rule of Bashar Al-Assad’s regime, but it had not used the Druze as a pretext for that; rather, it used the presence of Iran and its followers as the excuse. It struck many military centers of the regime and also of Iran, which was supporting the regime with its militias, and it bombed its consulate in Damascus and killed many Iranian military leaders. On the day Bashar Al-Assad fled on 8/12/2024, the Jewish entity launched intensive raids for several consecutive days and struck hundreds of Syrian military sites. When it received no response or resistance, it grew more ambitious and continued its aggressions until it invaded new Syrian territories, reaching approximately 25 kilometers from the capital Damascus and occupying Mount Hermon. It violated the 1974 disengagement and ceasefire agreements. The Jewish entity wants to secure southern Syria as a demilitarized safe buffer zone, playing the minority card, especially the Druze.
3- Following these events, Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa delivered a speech broadcast by Syrian television and other Arab channels on the morning of 17/7/2025, in which he said: (“We were between the option of war with Israel or allowing the Druze elders to reach an agreement, so we chose to protect the homeland.” He said: “Israel sought to undermine the ceasefire ‘in Al-Suwayda’ were it not for American, Arab, and Turkish mediation.”) He gave a second speech on 19/7/2025, as reported by the Syrian News Agency and broadcast by TV channels, in which he said: (“The Syrian state managed to calm the situation despite the difficulty of the circumstances, but the Israeli intervention pushed the country into a dangerous stage that threatens its stability due to the blatant bombardment of the south and government institutions in Damascus. As a result of these events, American and Arab mediation tried to calm the situation.”) He relies on the intervention of other countries, foremost among them America, which sponsors and supports the Jewish entity, in order to give them a way over him!
4- Then the events escalated, and the relationship between the Jews and Hikmat al-Hijri began to become clearer, as he tightened his grip on the internal front in Al-Suwayda. Under slogans like “uniting the ranks within the sect and consoling the families of the martyrs,” he began eliminating voices not supporting him, such as those of Jarbou, Al-Bala’ous, and Al-Hanawi. And while Hikmat al-Hijri’s faction is the largest in Al-Suwayda and dominates the other factions, the voices of opponents like Al-Jarbou’ and Al-Bala’ous have become timid in their call to remain within the Syrian state, with no real weight on the ground. It is Hikmat al-Hijri who ignites confrontations and reneges on agreements made with Damascus, and his current dominates Al-Suwayda. He issues statements in the name of the spiritual leadership of the Druze sect, with no regard to the authorities of Al-Jarbou’ and Al-Hanawi. It is clear that he is in direct contact with the Jewish entity, as he had sent dozens of Druze visitors to the entity. Hikmat al-Hijri issued a statement in the name of the Druze spiritual presidency saying: (“We appeal to the free world and all influential powers in it, and we direct our call to His Excellency President (American) Donald Trump, and the Prime Minister (Israeli) Benjamin Netanyahu, and Crown Prince (Saudi) Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and His Majesty (Jordanian) King Abdullah II, and to everyone who has a voice and influence in this world… Save Al-Suwayda.” (Anadolu Agency, 17/7/2025). The Jewish entity opened its border gates to Druze inside the entity to join the fighting inside Syria. RT reported on 19/7/2025 that about 2,000 people from the Druze sect, including soldiers serving in the Jewish army, announced their intention to join the fighting in Syria in just one day.
5- It is worth noting that the Damascus government has made itself the weakest link in the sequence of events surrounding Al-Suwayda and southern Syria. In addition to its complacency and weakness in the face of all the military strikes carried out by the Jewish entity against it and its forces strikes that reached southern Syria with killings and arrests as if there were no state at all this absence of state response is based on the advice of Erdogan, who declared his support for the American president’s request for Damascus to join the Abraham Accords (Middle East, 6/7/2025). Erdogan facilitated contacts between the Shar’ government and the Jewish entity in Azerbaijan. Thus, Ahmad Al-Shar’s government became extremely fragile in the Al-Suwayda crisis. It intervened to stop the clashes in the area and withdrew in humiliation under the bombardment of the Jewish entity, which targeted the General Staff of the army and nearly reached the presidential palace. Then the U.S. and so-called Arab and Turkish mediation intervened to bring back security forces but this time from the Ministry of Interior, not the army, and with light weapons. It later became clear that these government forces never entered Al-Suwayda at all; rather, their mission was to prevent Arab tribes from continuing their attack on Al-Suwayda. That is, they stood on the outskirts of the province without entering it. In fact, the Jewish entity had demanded this, that they prevent the tribes from attacking Al-Suwayda. In every agreement, the rebel Hikmat al-Hijri is the one who breaks it and demands new terms, forcing the government to draft yet another new agreement, with the latest one being the fourth within one week. The Ahmad Al-Sharaa government, through negotiations, removed the tribal militants from inside Al-Suwayda without entering it and then proceeded to displace the tribes residing in Al-Suwayda. It relocated and displaced hundreds of Muslim families from Al-Suwayda to shelters in Daraa. This is something Hikmat al-Hijri is also doing. “Clashes resumed on Friday after a group affiliated with Hikmat al-Hijri, one of the Druze leaders, forcibly displaced a number of Sunni Bedouin tribesmen and committed violations against them.” (Anadolu Agency, 21/7/2025). Thus, the new Syrian government has practically proven that it accepts ruling Syria according to what America dictates, with its path drawn by the U.S. ambassador in Turkey and its envoy to Syria, Tom Barak!
6- Upon pondering the events in Syria, it becomes clear that America is managing it according to a plan that did not begin today, though it escalated after the arrival of Trump.
(The American president Donald Trump called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during their meeting at the White House, to “solve his problems” with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan “and act rationally.” Trump said in his comments to journalists during his meeting with Netanyahu: “I have a great relationship with a man named Erdogan. I love him, and he loves me, and that’s what angers the media.” He explained that he told Netanyahu he “loves Erdogan,” and if he has problems with him, he should resolve them, stressing: “The Israelis must act rationally to resolve any issues with Turkey.” (Al Jazeera, 8/4/2025) Then: (Trump met on Wednesday in Riyadh with transitional Syrian president Ahmad Al-Sharaa in the first meeting of its kind in 25 years, the day after announcing his decision to lift sanctions on Damascus a move welcomed by Syria as a “pivotal turning point.” A White House spokesperson said that Trump urged the Syrian president to sign the Abraham Accords with ‘Israel’. (France 24, 14/5/2025).Through this meeting and the lifting of sanctions on Syria, and his request that Netanyahu coordinate his activities in Syria with Turkey, President Trump and his administration are working to dominate Syria.
7- Thus, it is clear that the American plan in Syria is based on a fundamental premise: replacing one agent with another. For that purpose, Turkey was given the green light to dismantle Bashar’s regime and build a new one loyal to it. Despite all the submissive statements from the new Syrian president, Ahmad Al-Sharaa, indicating his acceptance of this replacement—such as abandoning the rule of Islam, abandoning the prosecution of Bashar’s followers, and replacing that with national reconciliation, he even went so far as to open negotiations with the Jewish entity behind a curtain… Then in Azerbaijan on 12/7/2025, openly above the curtain, and later in the Paris meetings: Axios reported that a high-level meeting took place in Paris between ‘Israeli’ Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer and Syrian Foreign Minister Assad Al-Sheibani, mediated by U.S. special envoy to Syria Tom Barrak. These negotiations, which lasted about four hours, are the first of their kind between the two countries in 25 years. They focused on reducing tensions in southern Syria, imposing security, and a ceasefire. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights revealed that an agreement was reached between Syria and “Israel,” mediated by the U.S., containing seven main clauses related to the ceasefire in the south, particularly in Al-Suwayda, which has witnessed a serious escalation since 12 July. According to the Observatory, the agreement stipulates transferring the entire Al-Suwayda file to U.S. administration. The agreement also stipulates forming local councils from Al-Suwayda residents to provide services, forming a violations documentation committee that reports directly to the American side, disarming Daraa and Quneitra provinces, and forming local security committees there without allowing possession of heavy weapons. (Axios / Ain Libya, 25/7/2025). All this confirms that America wants southern Syria to be a buffer and safe zone for the Jewish entity, and that it is satisfied with its repeated aggressions in order to force the regime to accept this situation for normalization. The meetings in Azerbaijan and Paris are successive steps along this path. According to media leaks, the most prominent point under negotiation is: establishing a buffer security zone in southern Syria for the benefit of the Jewish entity, similar to the one in Sinai between Egypt and the Jewish entity under the peace treaty signed by the Egyptian regime in 1979, which still prevents the people of Egypt from mobilizing to support their brothers in Gaza, who are facing genocide.
8- Finally, it is truly painful that Syria Ash-Sham which the Messenger of Allah (saw) said about it in his noble hadith reported by al-Tabarani… from Salamah ibn Nufayl who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: »عُقْرُ دَارِ الإِسْلامِ بِالشَّامِ«“the abode of Islam will be in Ash-Sham” has now fallen under a regime that rules it far from Islam, and its ruler throws himself into loyalty to America and submission to the Jewish entity without fighting it, but instead seeking to sign peace agreements with it and do what pleases this entity and its backer, America.
He even left the members of Hizb ut Tahrir those calling for the Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly Guided Caliphate) in prison and did not release them, to appease America and the Jews who are enemies of the Khilafah (Caliphate) and its people, deluding himself that pleasing the enemies of Allah would preserve his regime! He forgot or pretended to forget the saying of the Messenger of Allah (saw) reported by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih from Urwah, from Aisha (ra), who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
«مَنِ الْتَمَسَ رِضَا اللهِ بِسَخَطِ النَّاسِ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ، وَأَرْضَى النَّاسَ عَنْهُ، وَمَنِ الْتَمَسَ رِضَا النَّاسِ بِسَخَطِ اللهِ سَخَطَ اللهُ عَلَيْهِ، وَأَسْخَطَ عَلَيْهِ النَّاسَ»
“Whoever seeks the pleasure of Allah at the cost of people’s anger, Allah will be pleased with him and make the people pleased with him. And whoever seeks the pleasure of people at the cost of Allah’s anger, Allah will be angry with him and make the people angry with him.” It was also narrated by al-Tirmidhi in his Sunan with the wording: «مَنْ الْتَمَسَ رِضَا اللهِ بِسَخَطِ النَّاسِ كَفَاهُ اللهُ مُؤْنَةَ النَّاسِ وَمَنْ الْتَمَسَ رِضَا النَّاسِ بِسَخَطِ اللهِ وَكَلَهُ اللهُ إِلَى النَّاسِ»“Whoever seeks the pleasure of Allah while displeasing the people, Allah will suffice him against the people. And whoever seeks the pleasure of people while displeasing Allah, Allah will entrust him to the people.”
In any case, we are reassured that the Caliphate will return after this oppressive rule that we are living in: Ahmad narrated in his Musnad from Hudhayfah who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
«... ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكاً جَبْرِيَّةً فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ، ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا، ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ. ثُمَّ سَكَتَ»
“Then there will be tyrannical kingship, and it will remain as long as Allah wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be a Caliphate upon the Prophetic method.” Then he fell silent. It was also reported by al-Tayalisi in his Musnad. At that time, Islam and the Muslims will be honored, and disbelief (kufr) and the disbelievers (kuffar) will be humiliated. And give glad tidings to the believers:
[وَأُخْرَى تُحِبُّونَهَا نَصْرٌ مِنَ اللهِ وَفَتْحٌ قَرِيبٌ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ]
“And [you will obtain] another [favor] that you love – victory from Allah and an imminent conquest; and give good tidings to the believers.” [Surah As-Saff:13].
1st of Safar 1447 AH
26/7/2025 CE
