Mullah Omar: Taliban Rules and Regulations

[M-A Lagrange]

Mike,

Ok, may be I was not clear enough. I do agree with you on the fact that we have to stick to Islam Schoolar work as we do not are mullah nor Muslim Schoolars.
I just tried to give the very raw bases of the law of war in Islam. I did not include the Sunnah and Hadith because I could not come with strong references for anyone to look at them with a different eye.
That is why I said this is not to start a new Islamic School. That is not our work and we do not have the legitimacy. I tried to stay neutral and provide the most neutral base. Also, as I said, I tried to come with generaly accepted comon Quran quotes as the reference to Law of War. Good also you remind me that I should have put the book reference so the translation could be identified. Will follow your line of quoting Quran, it is the best one.

Actually, at home, I have a copy of the Quran you are refering to. The story of that Quran is interesting as it was given to me by my colleagues from Islamic Relief when I went to Lebanon during the 2006 war. They gave it to me for Allah to protect me and support my efforts to save the people. It is a book, for that precise reason, very much attached to.
But it also, from an anthopological point of view shows how, in war, we all come back to magic.

To come back to the fatwa. Fatwa are opening the Law as any mullah or recognised Islam teacher can come with a fatwa. A Mullah from a village can make a fatwa that will apply to his village only. You can have fatwa for one person only. It is not laws or jurisprudence. That is why it makes the things difficult. And that is why we have to go by recognised Islamic Law Schools, as you mentioned. The most known are for example the one against Rushdy. But 1st it is a worlwide application fatwa and it has been given by a very well known mullah.
So may be we should establish a "rule" for fatwa if we come with some in the discussion. Like being recognised by a recognised Ilamic Law School, being world wide... I do not know. Lets make a decision here.

[jmm99]

I'm inclined to let the thread take itself where it will go, without establishing what sources are authoritative or not. The only thing I can ask is that the discourse be scholarly and reasoned - and that, if on-line sources are being used, link to the source so that people do not have to guess and Google.

I have to see if Abu Bakr's 10 rules are on-line (Al-Tabari, IIRC) since your quote was not complete (per my Barnard Lewis hardcopy).

More later.

[jmm99]

I found an on-line image of Abu Bakr's 10 Rules of War in Google Books, Gérard Chaliand, The art of war in world history: from antiquity to the nuclear age (1994, 1072 pp.).

Tabari Abu Bakr.jpg

Al-Tabari wrote about 300 years after the fact; although he probably relied on a chain of transmission.

Eight of the 10 rules (the first two are in the first sentence) are unexceptionable in terms of the GCs and protection of civilians in general. Two rules (one dealing with hermits or monks - leave them be; the other dealing with shaved heads, tonsured clergy ? - strike them with the sword) are specific. They call for quite different measures.

-----------------------------
From MSAWest, here is An introduction to the Shari`ah and Fiqh, which seems a good review of the basic concepts.

[carl]

It would be very interesting to know how strict the Taliban leadership is about making their people follow these rules. It does illustrate the things they consider important.

I get the idea in reading various accounts that on our side, there can be some contention as to who has primacy in deciding what is done in local areas, the local forces or some larger command. In rules 37 and 38, the Taliban seems to have decided that the local commander has primacy.

Taliban leadership also seems to think that searching people's houses is a VERY big deal. Rule 53 seems to want to insure that it is done only rarely. Do they really make their people follow this rule or is just there for the sake of form? Also how does this rule compare with our rules for searching houses?

[M-A Lagrange]

Taliban leadership also seems to think that searching people's houses is a VERY big deal. Rule 53 seems to want to insure that it is done only rarely. Do they really make their people follow this rule or is just there for the sake of form? Also how does this rule compare with our rules for searching houses?

A lot of questions in Carl post. I will try to first respond to the one on the houses search: rule 53.

First we have to look at two things: the respect of privacy propriety and the respect of gender separation in Islam. And then we have the questions of honour that comes with the afghan culture and other cultural issues.

Before responding to the legal issue, I will try to give some anthropologic rational behind the rule and why I am starting with women status.

In rigorist Islam gender are separated. In “open” Islam (I do not find any other word and it is a bad one), the gender are differentiated. (Q
The intrusion of a foreigner in a house is always a problem, even a friend, for those practicing a strict Islam. I visited Muslim colleagues in UK, Lebanon, Chad, Sudan, Somalia… If for West African Muslim, the gender separation is not that big deal but can be as in Chad, in Sudan or in Somalia.
I meet highly educated Muslim from Pakistan, Indonesia, and Yemen and Middle east for whom, it was just impossible that you even see a woman presence at home.
It all may come wired when you are in UK and the shadow of a hand pass a plate with tea from behind the door.
This just to say that the issue of possibility of women presence in the house is important for the Taliban but not only. It has religious and legal roots but also “cultural” (I do not like the term) roots.
On the cultural side, if the Taliban were setting a rule saying that searching a house or even entering a house would be permitted at all hours of day and night, they would probably face strong opposition. Most of the people would not even know the base of the practice but it will hurt their habitus.

This finds its roots into Quran by the sura: 4. Women (An-Nisáa). I took the following site to make the quotes: http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0027/_P1V.HTM#SV
It is not as good as the version that JMM advised but it is a quite good translation. And you can find a lot of Quran versions, even back to the first translations. Also you have a word research tool that allows you to look for a quote in Quran in French, English and Arabic. You also have Spanish, German versions of the Quran.

First of all you will find this verse:

31. And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male attendants free of sexual desires, or small children who have no carnal of women; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah in repentance, that ye may be successful.

This is the verse used to justify the fact that women have to be unseen. Depending on each culture, this goes from total (Afghanistan, Somalia, Saudi Arabia…) to partial or correct dressing (Sudan) to proper dressing (Algeria…).
So basically, if you look at it with a very strict view, as in wahabism or salafism, as in Afghanistan, the women cannot be seen by other persons than husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess. So out of the family ring only the slaves, now days domestic, can see a women. A man free from sexual desires and small children can also see a woman. For the small children, the rule is quite obvious in the sense that they do not have the sexual desires. For other men it is different.

All Muslim are virtuous but… You basically cannot know what is in the mind of someone else. So traditionalist will go for a very strict application by limiting the visual contact to the family ring. Elders are considered as men without sexual desires. So when a man needs to address a woman, they are considered as a guaranty for the woman and the family pride and honour.

Secondly, in Sharia, there is a need of 2 men as witness to guaranty the word of 1 man. So the 2 elders’ requirement is to ensure that in front of a Sharia court there was enough witness.
Al-Baqara - 2.282 .And call to witness , from among your men , two witnesses .

What is interesting here is that the whole verse is about loans and debts.

Al-Baqara - 2.282 . O ye who believe! When ye contract a debt for a fixed term , record it in writing . Let a scribe record it in writing between you in ( terms of ) equity . No scribe should refuse to write as Allah hath taught him , so let him write , and let him who incurreth the debt dictate , and let him observe his duty to Allah his Lord , and diminish naught thereof . But if he who oweth the debt is of low understanding , or weak , or unable himself to dictate , then let the guardian of his interests dictate in ( terms of ) equity . And call to witness , from among your men , two witnesses . And if two men be not ( at hand ) then a man and two women , of such as ye approve as witnesses , so that if the one erreth ( through forgetfulness ) the other will remember . And the witnesses must not refuse when they are summoned . Be not averse to writing down ( the contract ) whether it be small or great , with ( record of ) the term thereof . That is more equitable in the sight of Allah and more sure for testimony , and the best way of avoiding doubt between you ; save only in the case when it is actual merchandise which ye transfer among yourselves from hand to hand . In that case it is no sin for you if ye write it not . And have witnesses when ye sell one to another , and let no harm be done to scribe or witness . If ye do ( harm to them ) lo! it is a sin in you . Observe your duty to Allah . Allah is teaching you . And Allah is Knower of all things .

That is all for the issue of woman presence in the houses. But I think that it already shows how it is complex to comment those simple rules as you have a mix of cultural practices with roots in Islam Quran and Sharia and strict application of Quran, virtually by the letter.

[M-A Lagrange]

To go further than the anthropologic view on gender, which must have a strong importance, I will try to come with some tracks to understand it.
Previously, I used only one source of translation of Quran as it was easier for me to show the gender issue.
But as we are looking at that problematic from a more in depth point and it has deeper religious potential issues involved, I will use several source of translations of Quran.
I will use a source of translation that comes from a site from Morocco (http://www.yabiladi.com) and the site recommended by the Centre for Muslim-Jewish Engagement. (http://www.Altafsir.com)

I will first come with some quotes of the Quran on the question of the Muslims into war.
For that I will use the Surah al-Anfal translated as the spoils of war by the site Altafsir.com that you can access through the Centre for Muslim-Jewish Engagement.
Then I will look at the issue of accusing someone by the Taliban.
For that I will use the Surah At-Tauba or At Tawba, The Surah At-Tauba or At-Tawbah is translated the repentance. (Altafsir.com).

The Muslims in war:

Al-Anfal - 8.72 . Lo! those who believed and left their homes and strove with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah , and those who took them in and helped them ; these are protecting friends one of another . And those who believed but did not leave their homes , ye have no duty to protect them till they leave their homes ; but if they seek help from you in the matter of religion then it is your duty to help ( them ) except against a folk between whom and you there is a treaty . Allah is Seer of what ye do .

http://www.yabiladi.com/coran/search...t&lg=en&min=20

[8:72]
BEHOLD, as for those who have attained to faith, and who have forsaken the domain of evil and are striving hard, with their possessions and their lives, in God’s cause, as well as those who shelter and succour [them] – these are [truly] the friends and protectors of one another.
But as for those who have come to believe without having migrated [to your country] – you are in no wise responsible for their protection until such a time as they migrate [to you]. Yet, if they ask you for succour against religious persecution, it is your duty to give [them] this succour – except against a people between whom and yourselves there is a covenant: for God sees all that you do.

http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslat...nslationBook=7

These are the translation of the same Surah and the same verse; and both are correct translations.
I personally think we have to go for the first version; this seems to be more in accordance with the Taliban way of understanding the Quran. But this shows how it is difficult to come with ONE understanding.

This verse (Q8.72), in a literal translation, can be understood as the obligation of the Muslim to help Muslim during war time.
Lo! those who believed and left their homes and strove with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah , and those who took them in and helped them ; these are protecting friends one of another

In verse 8.74 from the same surah, it is said:

Al-Anfal - 8.74 . Those who believed and left their homes and strove for the cause of Allah , and those who took them in and helped them these are the believers in truth . For them is pardon , and a bountiful provision

http://www.yabiladi.com/coran/search...t&lg=en&min=20

[8:74]And they who have attained to faith, and who have forsaken the domain of evil and are striving hard in God’s cause, as well as those who shelter and succour [them] – it is they, they who are truly believers! Forgiveness of sins awaits them, and a most excellent sustenance.

http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslat...nslationBook=7

Truth, as to be understand as “faith in Islam” but also as “The Truth” given by Allah. So it is a duty for the Muslim or the true believer to support the Taliban. So the accusation may be interpreted in a wider view than just committing an act of war against the Taliban. Here again, the interpretation has to be taken with great precautions.

Accusing a Muslim of treason:

At-Tauba - 9.71 . And the believers , men and women , are protecting friends one of another ; they enjoin the right and forbid the wrong , and they establish worship and they pay the poor-due , and they obey Allah and His messenger . As for these , Allah will have mercy on them . Lo! Allah is Mighty , Wise .

http://www.yabiladi.com/coran/search...t&lg=en&min=20

[9:71]AND [as for] the believers, both men and women – they are close unto one another: they [all] enjoin the doing of what is right and forbid the doing of what is wrong, and are constant in prayer, and render the purifying dues, and pay heed unto God and His Apostle. It is they upon whom God will bestow His grace: verily, God is almighty, wise!

http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslat...nslationBook=7

Truth, as to be understand as “faith in Islam” but also as “The Truth” given by Allah.
This is generally understood as: It is forbidden to spread discordance among the Muslims. So it is also a problem for the Taliban to accuse someone as this is speading war and discordance among the Muslim.

So entering in the home of someone, to search it, can clearly be seen as an offence for the person searched but it also is a potential offence for the Taliban.
If the Taliban search a house and cannot find anything, this can be interpreted as an offence against Allah. Therefore the presence of the witness is even more important. Also this can also explain why this has to be authorised at local level.

[M-A Lagrange]

To stick with the "rules" we agreed on, I will explain what has been the rational behind the post to try to explain why it is so important to not enter a house.
I should have start by this but...
I will now explain why I proposed to explain the rules through only Quran quotes and in its literal version.
It is due to the fact that Taliban are in the Wahhabist and Salafist tradition.
Most of the information of that post are coming from Wikipedia fr and Wikipedia the free encyclopedia.

Where comes the word Wahhabism from?

Wahhabism as a word comes from Suleyman ibn Abd al-Wahhâb, the brother of Mohammed Abd el-Wahhâb, from a book criticizing the doctrine proposed by his brother in a book called (translated by my self from french) “The holy lightining refuting wahhabism” (Al-sawaiq al-ila-hiyya fi al-radd ala al-wahabiyya)

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabisme

The doctrine

According to Wahhabism Wahhabi theology treats the Qur'an and Hadith as the only fundamental and authoritative texts. Commentaries and "the examples of the early Muslim community (Ummah) and the four Rightly Guided Caliphs (632-661 C.E.)" are used to support these texts but are not considered independently authoritative.
Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab further explains in his book Kitab-at-Tawhid (which draws on material from the Qur'an and the narrations of the prophet) that worship in Islam includes conventional acts of worship such as the five daily prayers; fasting; Dua (supplication); Istia'dha (seeking protection or refuge); Ist'ana (seeking help), and istigatha (seeking benefits). Therefore, making dua to anyone or anything other than Allah, or seeking supernatural help and protection which is only befitting of a divine being from something other than Allah are acts of shirk and contradict Tawhid. Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab further explains that Prophet Muhammad during his lifetime tried his utmost to cut all ways and roots towards shirk.
The most important of these commentaries are those by Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab (even though he was not among the first three generations) including his book Kitab al-Tawhid, and the works of Ibn Taymiyyah. Abd-al-Wahhab was a follower of Ahmad ibn Hanbal's school of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) like most in Nejd at the time, but "was opposed to any of the schools (Madh'hab) being taken as an absolute and unquestioned authority". Therefore, he condemned taqlid at the scholarly level.
Wahhabism also denounces the practice of blind adherence to the interpretations of scholars and the blind acceptance of practices that were passed on within the family or tribe. Of the most widely used excuse of the pagans around the time of the prophet was that they worshiped idols because they saw their forefathers engaged in that practice. Ibn Abd al-Wahhab wrote in support of the responsibility of the individual Muslim to learn and obey the divine commands as they were revealed in the Quran and the Sunnah. He upheld the view that blind deference to authority eventually leads one to neglect their direct connection with Qur'an and Sunnah. Islam is not an elitist religion in which one must be bound by priests and rabbis for any recourse to religious texts. He uses as evidence an ayah of the Qur'an in which Allah condemns the children of Israel for taking their rabbis as authorities besides Allah. This was because they gave supreme authority to scholars without any critical and evaluative mindset and gave ultimate loyalty and connection to the scholars and creation rather than Allah and his revealed texts.

Wahhabism as Fiqh or legislative system:

Two key aspects define a religious group's understanding of Islam: its philosophical approach and cultural background; and, most importantly, the methodology used to derive Fiqh.
The Wahhabis consider themselves to be 'non-imitators' or 'not attached to tradition' (ghayr muqallidun), and therefore answerable to no school of law at all, observing instead what they would call the practice of early Islam. However, to do so does correspond to the ideal aimed at by Ibn Hanbal, and thus they can be said to be of his 'school'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi

The recognition of Wahhabism:

Wahhabism is recognised as the orthodoxy in Islam since 1932, after the creation of the third wahhabit kingdom. Previously, wahhabism was considered as a deviant sect of Islam and condamned (radd)by the all the Sunny and Chia madh’hab (Islamic theological schools). But as it coincided with the al Nadha (the renaissance) period wich coupled anticolonial fighting and rediscovery of the Islamic culture, Wahhabism was accepted as the very Islamic orthodoxy in Arabia.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabisme

the rational behind the posts:

The idea has been to use wahhabism tools: Quran and Haddith only. As I did not have the Hadith with good comments with me, I just took the Quran.
It is a starting point that gives tracks. The closest Law code and Law practice from the Taliban is Saudi Arabia Laws and Law practices.

[jmm99]

Kepp right on a-going - you're on a roll.

Earlier I linked to MSAWest (Muslim Student Association West), which has a number of link pages to articles and sources, Muhammad, Qur'an, Sunnah & aHadith, Islamic Law, and other topics. There are several large collections of aHadith in English. For the most part, little argument exists in Islam as to texts themselves. The differences come in interpretation and emphasis.

Cheers

Mike

[M-A Lagrange]

What are saying Saudi Arabia Laws?

Saudia Arabia Laws are accessible on the site Lexadin which provides an English version of almost all countries. That is the source I used.
http://www.lexadin.nl/wlg/legis/nofr/oeur/lxwesau.htm
I went to the law of criminal procedure law.
Under the section 4, search of the persons and the dwellings I found this:
Article 40:

The privacy of persons, their dwellings, offices, and vehicles shall be protected. The privacy of a person protects his body, clothes, property, and belongings. The privacy of a dwelling covers any fenced area or any other place enclosed within barriers or intended to be used as a dwelling.

Article 41:

A criminal investigation officer may not enter or search any inhabited place except in the cases provided for in the laws, pursuant to a search warrant specifying the reasons for the search, issued by the Bureau of Investigation and Prosecution. However, other dwellings may be searched pursuant to a search warrant, specifying the reasons, issued by the Investigator. If the proprietor or the occupant of a dwelling refuses to allow the criminal investigation officer free access, or resists such entry, he may use all lawful means, as may be required in the circumstances, to enter that dwelling.
A dwelling may be entered in case of a request for help from within, or in case of a demolition, drowning, fire, or the like, or in hot pursuit of a perpetrator.

Article 46:

A dwelling shall be searched in the presence of its owner or his representative or any adult member of his family residing with him. If no such person is present, the search shall be conducted in the presence of the Umda (Chief) of the quarter or any comparable officer or two witnesses. The owner of the dwelling or his representative may peruse the search warrant and a note to that effect shall be entered into the record.

So the rational behind the Saudi Arabia Law for searching a house is the protection of persons and properties. In fact the law in Saudi Arabia is pretty much the same as in West. It is only the source of the Law that differs. Sharia has been used as source for positive legislation seeking first to protect individuals and properties.

The Taliban rule 53 is:

The mudjahidin are not allowed to search local people’s houses. If it is necessary to search someone’s house, you must have the provincial authority’s permission, and you must take with you two elders of that area during the search of the house.

Unlike in the Taliban code of conduct, the presence of two witnesses is requested only when the owner or representative or any adult member of the family is not available and after having requested support from the chief of quarter or any comparable officer.
Also,it is not forbiden to search an house, you need to have legal reasons.

Now I let Mike (If he is Ok) or any others compare with US troops code of conduct to search an house.

[jmm99]

Sorry, M-A, this is an area I haven't looked at except very generally. Recourse to the US domestic rules for searches and seizures would not be helpful.

In general, the specific rules will first depend on the SOFA, or equivalent informal agreement, with the government of the host country. The specific rules in-theatre, and on down to units, are probably not open-source since most specific ROEs/RUFs are classified.

Someone else will have to answer this - if they can without violating OpSec.

Regards

Mike

[Igel]

M-A Lagrange, jmm99,

Very good posts!

I think this is an interesting thread and I don't want it to die. Unfortunatly I have no background knowledge about sharia law. So right now I can't really contribute anything to the disscussion. However I will read your posts more carefully and especially read the book M-A Lagrange linked (that looks interesting).

[jmm99]

For some reason, Google Books doesn't work on this computer. Anyway, I believe we are talking about this short monograph (51 pp.), Lieutenant Commander Youssef Aboul-Enein & Sherifa Zuhur, Islamic Rulings on Warfare (2004), which downloads in pdf (free) from the U.S. Army War College.

This monograph is written from the following viewpoint (p.5 - all page cites are to the pdf file pages):

The authors of this monograph share their respective connections with the topic.

Lieutenant Commander Aboul-Enein: In 2000, I encountered Dr. Bernard Lewis, a famous Princeton scholar of Islamic history and author of many books on Islam, delivering a speech on Capitol Hill. He stressed the importance of classic Arabic and Islamic texts.

Later, when confronting extremist interpretations of Islam, I saw the importance of these texts, especially the Quran (the Islamic book of divine revelation), the hadith (Prophet’s Muhammad’s sayings and deeds), and the 1,400 plus years of commentary, which essentially run counter to current jihadist ideology.

Dr. Zuhur: For 20 years, I have interviewed Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian, Palestinian, Saudi, and other Islamists who cite verses from the Quran to support their worldview of necessary and continuous conflict between Islam and the West. Yet, throughout my own education, I was exposed to liberal and humanistic interpretations of Islamic doctrine and law. Now we ask: Which Islamic vision is to prevail?

Now, please understand: I have no objection to "liberal and humanistic interpretations of Islamic doctrine and law." However, the AQ and Taliban interpretations are not going to correspond to the interpretations of more Westernized Muslims. E.g., in speaking of Mohammed Atta (p.5):

His version of Islam is one of misguided faith and misplaced loyalty to those who hide Islam’s rich 14 centuries of discussion, debate, and intellectual exploration.

While this is an overstatement, the more extreme Salafists do rely most heavily on the texts from the era of the first series of "right-standing" caliphs. But they are also shaped by the commentaries generated by later Muslim clerics.

This monograph presents a strategy for an propaganda campaign similar to what both sides used in the Cold War (pp.5-6):

Since 9/11, the United States has grappled with how to counter the abuse of Islam by militants who inspire indiscriminate mass murder and suicide. Some studies argue that solving the Israeli-Palestinian dispute or addressing poverty would offer immediate relief from Islamic militancy. Certainly, programs addressing the political and economic crises in the area should be undertaken. But these alone will not solve the expansion of Islamic radicalism.

Islamic radicalism does not stem solely from desperation, nor from a sense of inferiority, as some theorists maintain. Instead, in the 3 1/2 decades of this recent period of Islamic revival and militancy, we have seen that radicals come from a variety of social and educational backgrounds and political circumstances.

Hence, we also need a long-term strategy that involves discrediting Islamic militant thought, such as that propagated by al-Qaeda’s strategist Ayman al-Zawahiri in several books that draw upon a combination of the Quran, the hadith, and radical Islamic texts written from the 13th to the late 20th century.

Hence, while scholarship certainly went into its composition, it is not (and does not claim to be) an unbiased scholarly work. I would class it as a good brief in opposition to the extreme Salafist positions.

That being said, what the monograph finds to be normative in Islamic law, is of little comfort to any US soldier reading this who is in or going to Iraq or Astan, or any other place in the Muslim World (p. 12):

Further, this law recognized and was organized into two categories dealing with the abode, or territory of Islam (dar al-Islam); and the abode of war (dar al-harb, lands not controlled by Muslims). Those from the abode of war should only enter Muslim territory under an agreement known as an aman that entitled them to trade, or to serve as an emissary, or to enter for other peaceful purposes.[7]

7. Numerous details on the rules of safe-conduct, or aman, are provided in al-Shaybani’s Siyar. See The Islamic Law of Nations: Shaybani’s Siyar (Kitab al-siyar alkabir), Majid Khadduri, trans., Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1966, pp. 158-194.

One might dwell on this.

The monograph goes on to discuss many specific issues.

Best

Mike

[carl]

The specific rules in-theatre, and on down to units, are probably not open-source since most specific ROEs/RUFs are classified.

If true, doesn't this put us at propaganda disadvantage? The Taliban can say "Look here is our rule. It is for all to see and it is consistent with Islamic and local tradition. Those infidels do not respect our ways and are not man enough to tell you what rules they use."

[jmm99]

Hope you haven't been flying sleep-deprived.

As to your serious post. True. Sometimes the political effort and the military effort collide, where both have good reasons for what each wants to do.

In this case, I don't know there was a collision because I know not the military rules for house entries and searches in Iraq and Astan. I searched through various CLAMO pubs covering both campaigns and came up empty.

Judging from the silence in this thread to the question, I infer we are dealing with classified rules and OpSec.

Regards to thou (former Yooper; is there ever a former Yooper ? )

Mike

[jmm99]

Joseph C. Myers, “The Quranic Concept of War,” Parameters, Winter 2006-07, pp. 108-21, reviewed The Quranic Concept of War, by Brigadier S. K. Malik of the Pakistani Army (originally published in Pakistan in 1979).

I do not have this book - is there a re-print at a reasonable price ?

In any event, the review is worth the read; and the book was recommended by LTC Myers:

Historiography

In The Quranic Concept of War, Malik seeks to instruct readers in the uniquely important doctrinal aspects of Quranic warfare. The Quranic approach to war is “infinitely supreme and effective . . . [and] points towards the realization of universal peace and justice . . . and makes maximum allowance to its adversaries to co-operate [with Islam] in a combined search for a just and peaceful order.”[10] For purposes of this review, the term “doctrine” refers to both religious and broad strategic approaches, not methods and procedures. Malik’s work is a treatise with historical, political, legalistic, and moralistic ramifications on Islamic warfare. It seemingly is without parallel in the western sense of warfare since the “Quran is a source of eternal guidance for mankind.”[11]

The approach is not new to Islamists and other jihad theorists fighting according to the “Method of Mohammed” or hadith. The lessons learned are recorded

109/10

and form an important part of Quranic surah and jihadist’s scholarship.[12] Islamic scholars both Muslim and non-Muslim will find much to debate in terms of Malik’s view of jihad doctrine and Quranic warfare. Malik’s work is essentially modern scholarship; although he does acknowledge the classical views of jihad in many respects.[13]

Malik’s arguments are clearly parochial, often more editorial than scholarly, and his tone is decidedly confident and occasionally supremacist. The reach and influence of the author’s work is not clear although one might believe that given the idealism of his treatise, his approaches to warfare, and the role and ends of “terror” his text may resonate with extremist and radicals prone to use terroristic violence to accomplish their ends. For that reason alone, the book is worth studying.

10. Ibid [Brigadier S. K. Malik, The Quranic Concept of War (Lahore, Pakistan: Associated Printers, 1979)]., p. 1.

11. Ibid., pp. I-ii.

12. See for example the discussion by Dr. Mary R. Habeck, “Jihadist Strategies in the War on Terrorism,” The Heritage Foundation, 8 November 2004, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Nat...rity/hl855.cfm.

13. David Cook, Understanding Jihad, (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 2005). There is approximately 1,400 years of jihad scholarship beginning with Mohammed and his military campaigns. Classical approaches to jihad as described by Mohammed’s successors, Abu Bakr for example, and the challenges presented by the struggles of succession to Mohammed.

From LTC Myers' Evaluation:

General Malik’s thesis in The Quranic Concept of War can be fundamentally described as “Islam is the answer.” He makes a case for war and the revitalization of Islam. This is a martial exegesis of the Quran. Malik like other modern Islamists are, at root, romantics. They focus on the Quran for jihad a doctrine that harkens back to the time of the Prophet and the classical-jihadist period when Islam enjoyed its most successful military campaigns and rapid growth.

The book’s metaphysical content borders on the supernatural and renders “assured expectations” that cannot be evaluated or tested in the arena of military experience. Incorporating “divine intervention” into military campaigns, while possibly advantageous, cannot be calculated as an overt force multiplier. Critics may also point to the ahistorical aspect of Malik’s thesis; that Islam is in a state of constant struggle with the non-Islamic world. There are examples of Muslim armies serving side by side with Christian armies in combat and campaigns are numerous, with Iraq being but a recent example.[65]

65. Four notable examples are the Crimean War where French, British and Ottoman Forces allied against the Russians; Fuad Pasha of the Ottoman Army served as a coalition partner with French Army during the 1860 Rebellion in Syria; more recently Muslim Arab and Kabyle soldiers served in the Harkis of the French Army in the French-Algerian War; and, of course, today in Iraq. Malik would address some of these events as alliances of convenience serving Islam’s interests in accord with the Quran and Sharia Law, others as takfir or treason.

See post #52 above for non-Muslim troops in Muslim lands.

[carl]

No. I'm on the night shift over here so I go to bed when the sun comes up. I can tell you some falling asleep in the cockpit stories though if you want to hear some. Every pilot, and I mean EVERY pilot has some.

I think that this may be a case where opsec and desire for secrecy will do considerable more harm than good in the long run. From M-A's posts this has a lot of history behind it and it means a lot to those people. The Taliban, in promulgating rule 53 is announcing that they recognize and will address the concern. If we are silent about it, we are saying in effect (pardon the phrase) "screw you guys. we don't care about your traditions. we just care about what is convenient to us."

That can do our side a lot of harm with those prickly Pathans, especially if the Taliban point it out every chance they get. I suspect they do that.

Maybe this is like Dr. Strangelove when Gen. Turgidson says "But he'll see the big board!" Perhaps we'd be better off if they did see the big board.

One of my friends from MQT gave me a Yooper green card. How often do I have to renew those?

[jmm99]

are perpetual - and entitle you, if you fly into Mt. Brockway while asleep, to 101 Keweenaw virgins - if you can find them.

Which is a much easier question to answer than resolving the question of whether to classify information or release it.

If we are publishing our Iraq and Astan entry and search rules, I've not found them. But, if anyone else has open-source, a post here would be appreciated.

Cheers

Mike

[M-A Lagrange]

Hello everybody

What Carl just said is exactly my opinion. In the battle of legitimacy among the people, Taleb have taken a great strategic advantage.

I also go with JMM on the book on Islamic rulings in warfare (yes, it is the same). I did mention that it did not concern this actual debate but it is good for anyone to have a look at it. It shows that Taleb are not the real good guys they pretend.
But may be unlike JMM, I have some restrictions on Barnard Lewis books (I have a whole collection at home). May be because he is too close to the clash of the civilisations theories for me.

I am actually working on the distribution of security among traditional societies. Afghanistan is one of them. My feeling is that we are looking at the wrong side of the problem. Traditional societies are not based on distribution of security but rationalised distribution of insecurity. But we are far from our subject. (or may be not in fact)

I think that a methodic explanation of the Taleb rules could be very interresting and could help to understand why they are organised that way and not another.
I will come with new stuff but need some rest first.

[jmm99]

In this area (as in many others), I don't blindly accept the editorializing of experts in the field (and Bernard Lewis does qualify in that regard). I don't ask others to accept my editorializing unless it is backed up by reference back to the original sources.

That being said, Lewis does often quote translated original sources, and in fact has some volumes devoted to compiling them. So do others and the translated originals can often be found on the Net. Unfortunately, I am not an Arabist.

As to this:

from M-A
Traditional societies are not based on distribution of security but rationalised distribution of insecurity.

Part of law is based on security (e.g., property boundaries). Another part is based on reciprocity (e.g., contracts). So, your concept of "rationalised distribution of insecurity" would have relevance to what we are now discussing.

I don't know whether a "rationalised distribution of insecurity" would relate in any way to AQ writer Naji's The Management of Savagery - although that in a large way deals with a distribution of "insecurity" as part of the intermediate state between non-Islamic governance (as defined by AQ) and Islamic governance (again as defined by AQ). However, that may well be far from what you are presenting.

I suppose the simplest way to present your theory is to provide:

1. An example of "distribution of security" in a given traditional culture (perhaps imposed on it, if it does not normally operate that way).

2. An example in the same or similar culture of "rationalised distribution of insecurity" (presumably how the culture works if left alone).

This topic has obvious relevance to local governance in Astan; and what will work better.

Cheers

Mike

[M-A Lagrange]

Ah... Mike. I like your rectitude.
Like I said, I have many of Lewis books and he is an expert. His way to explain how movement like AQ thought they were powerful enough to defeat USA after the defeat of USSR in Afghanistan (with US support) is extraordinary clear. (What went wrong with Islam; I’m right, you’re wrong go to hell…)
He is an expert of Islam but I also reserve to me the right to have an independent opinion. My reserves are purely on the clash of civilisations theory.

Les ressentiments actuels des peuples du Moyen-Orient se comprennent mieux lorsqu’on s’aperçoit qu’ils résultent, non pas d’un conflit entre des Etats ou des nations, mais du choc entre deux civilisations. Commencé avec le déferlement des Arabes musulmans vers l’ouest et leur conquête de la Syrie, de l’Afrique du Nord et de l’Espagne chrétiennes, le “grand débat”, comme l’appelait Gibbon, entre l’islam et la chrétienté s’est poursuivi avec la contre-offensive chrétienne des croisades et son échec, puis avec la poussée des Turcs en Europe, leur farouche combat pour y rester et leur repli. Depuis un siècle et demi, le Moyen-Orient musulman subit la domination de l’Occident – domination politique, économique et culturelle, même dans les pays qui n’ont pas connu un régime colonial (...). Je me suis efforcé de hisser les conflits du Moyen-Orient, souvent tenus pour des querelles entre Etats, au niveau d’un choc des civilisations.
Bernard Lewis, Islam, Quarto, Gallimard, Paris, 2005, p. 55.

(sorry do not have the quote in english)

There was no judgement of you from my part but only a reminder that the author is also controversial, at least among the French intellectual society. Not even talking about the Muslim society.
We have here to accept that I am French and you are American. Two cultures, close but different. That’s what makes the discussion rich.
As you warn the readers on the orientation of the Islamic Ethic on warfare, I also provided my personal reserves on the fact that Lewis arguments are not fully neutral.

But what can I say on your editorial... You came with Gerard Chaliand who is just a great expert I admire. I would recommend his last book (do not know if it is translated in English) le nouvel art de la guerre 2008 Edition L’Archipel, 2008
(the new art of war).

On terror, I would recommend to French readers to have a look at http://www.ifri.org/files/Securite_d...er_Terreur.pdf It is about the “good use of terror” in counterinsurgency. Here again, some may disagree.

Well actually what I am working on is more access on showing the economical rational that will lead members of traditional societies to choose insecurity and disaster management rather than unknown or known failure of security management.
Here again, do not mistake me, I am speaking of the USSR experience concerning Afghanistan.
My first postula is that all societies are based on protection. The question is how do they protect? By the distribution of security or the distribution of insecurity? But as I said, this has to be polished.