EDUCATING CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER ON HAMAS'S TEN-YEAR “TRUCE" OFFER

Dear Mr. Krauthammer,

I read with interest your opinion piece on Hamas's ten- year “truce” offer, “The Hamas ‘Peace' Gambit,” published today, Friday, May 8, 2009.¹ While I certainly share your overall sentiments, unfortunately the piece ignores the uniquely Islamic context of Hamas's truce “offer” which is firmly rooted in classical Muslim jurisprudence, the precedent being Muhammad's temporary “treaty” of Hudaybiyyah.

Below are extracts from my book The Legacy of Jihad- which elucidate the underlying Islamic principles for such truces. I have included for your edification the classical interpretation of the great jurist and scholar Averroes (d. 1198), followed by the historical/juridical analyses of two important twentieth­century scholars of Islamic law/jihadism, Antoine Fattal, and Bassam Tibi.

Sincerely,

Andrew G. Bostom, MD, MS

Associate Professor of Medicine

The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University

[www.andrewbostom.org] “Among those who profess that the Imam is entitled to conclude a truce when he considers it in the interest [of the Muslims] are Malik (founder of the Maliki school of Sunni Islamic Law), Shafi! (founder of the Shafi’ite school of Sunni Islamic Law), and Abu Hanifah (founder of the Hanafi school of Sunni Islamic Law). Shafii maintains that a truce may not be concluded for a period longer than that of the truce which the Prophet concluded with the unbelievers in the year of Hudaybiyyah.... Therefore, says Shafii, a truce may never exceed the period for which the Prophet concluded truce in the case of Hudaybiyyah. Still, there is controversy about the duration of this period. According to some it amounts to four years, but according to others three or ten years. Shafii opts for the latter. ” [Emphasis added.]

—Averroes (Ibn Rushd) [d. 1198]-

“Connected with the notion of jihad is the distinction between dar al-harb (territory or ‘house’ of war) and dar al-islam (house of Islam).

—Antoine Fattal (1958) ⁴ “Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of “opening” the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad. Relations between dar al- Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur'an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists. Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da'wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da'wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it. In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. Only when Muslim power is weak is ‘temporary truce' (hudna) allowed.” [Emphasis added.]

—Bassam Tibi (1996) -

19.