The Role of Lawyers in Implementing the Islamic Concept of Law of War

Prior to the Gulf War (lationship Wars), there was no problem between Islam and Western civilization regarding the law of war, or about the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But that was before the United States of America entered the Middle East, changing all that. In this article, we will be discussing about the recent trend of Muslim acceptance of Western civilization despite the horrific acts of terrorism conducted by its proxy, al Qaeda and Taliban.

This development is mainly driven by the Muslims in these countries who were either politically or psychologically forced to side with the West against their homeland. In fact, there were numerous battles between Muslims and the enemy, which could be termed as Islamic battles, where Muslims were forced to fight on the side of the invaders. The rise of Islam as a political movement and a set of values in the world is not new. In fact, it is not new to any other race or culture that has been practicing this for thousands of years. However, these factors did not help these scholars in understanding or accepting, the essence of this concept in their academic community and society.

During the rule of the Ottoman sultanates, there were numerous debates and discussions regarding this law, or rather, the interpretation of this law. Such disagreements were often between the religious scholars, but were also often between the government officials. This explains why there are many contradictory rulings regarding the implementation of Islamic law in the country. There were warlords who were against implementing Islamic law, and there were others who actually implemented such law in the name of fighting the “infidels.” Even today, the government is fighting those who want to incorporate Islamic law in their country.

The ruling Muslims of Egypt and other countries of the Islamic world adopted a version of Islamic law, or Shari’a. This law is one of the major causes of wars and conflicts throughout the world today. Those who are against Islamic law, or who are against all Islamic laws, will tell you that Shari’a is a symbol of power and authority over the weak, which is why it is a source of law for tyrants and oppressors. On the other hand, those who are in favor of Islamic law will tell you that Shari’a is the backbone of law and order, and thus, is a good thing. What is clear is that there is a vast difference between the two perspectives regarding the application of Islamic law, and many people are confused.

One important factor that most scholars will agree upon is that the Islamic law of peace, called shariah, is intended for the protection of the innocent. It does not advocate cruelty to women, children, and even enemies. Those who practice islamic law of war may be doing so as part of a defense mechanism, just as any military person would if ordered to fight a foreign nation. They may, however, also be doing so as a way of instilling fear into their enemies, and as a means of striking fear in their own communities. Many will say that this is a necessary part of being a Muslim, and that one must always be prepared.

Another aspect of this is that islamic law of war is absolutely essential to the preservation of world civilization. Since the beginning of time, all cultures have been warring among themselves. When people lived in tribal or village communities, they rarely ventured out into cities, because they knew that in case they did, the other members of their tribe, including themselves, would attack them. That is not the case in today’s world, where technology has afforded the ability to move virtually anyone from anywhere on the planet, at any time. Today, it is almost impossible to travel safely in most parts of the world. For those who live in Muslim countries, this is absolutely essential, as they know that if they do not observe sharia law at their peril, then their entire community is at risk, and all of those who follow their lead in whatever way they see fit will suffer as a result.

The need for this is why islamic scholars are so desperately trying to find out more about how their religion works in this regard. It is absolutely essential that we recognize the difference between religious law and islamic law, and that we work diligently to get our governments to distinguish the two. Too many politicians seem more interested in catering to those within the Muslim community who wish to impose their religious law rather than those who wish to uphold the rights of all human beings. This is not a problem when those within the Muslim community wish to institute Islamic law, but it is a completely different story when those within the Western world wish to do so. Those who advocate for true islamic law are routinely harassed by both Muslim and non-Muslim individuals alike, and sometimes even governments, simply for attempting to teach the truth in regards to Islamic law.

This is where we must understand the difference between islamic law and islamic jurisprudence. The former is exclusively for Muslims and is designed to deal with issues of life under sharia law. Jurisprudence is exclusively for the Western world and is designed to apply in the event that people of other religions (or no religion at all) engage in war against each other. It is for these reasons that we have seen so many lawyers working specifically in the defense of those who have been accused of crimes against humanity, or engaged in war crimes, or even crimes against the West. Without the application of islamic law, it is very easy for people who commit such unspeakable acts to go free, rather than spend time in prison, which is exactly what would happen if one were to be accused of committing a crime against humanity with a non-Islamic weapon or strategy.