Within Islamic thought, the judgments pertaining to rebels constitute a subset of the larger category of “judgments pertaining to armed struggle” (ahkam al-jihad). Indeed, one might refer to the latter as the overarching name for a Muslim war convention, which would then include judgments pertaining to military actions intended to: (a) extend or enhance the territory in which Islam provides governance or serves as the established religion of state; (b) defend the Islamic territory against invaders; and (c) regulate the relations between various groups within the territory of Islam, including (i) ahl al-dhimma, the “protected” class of non-Muslims (Christians, Jews, and others), (ii) apostates (Muslims who stand accused of abandoning Islam), (iii) highwaymen and other renegades, and (iv) secessionists and rebels (ahl al-khawarij wa al-bughat).
As we consider Muslim discourse about rebellion, it is worth summarizing some of the salient features of this latter tradition.
To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here.
More in this issue
Winter 2013 (27.4) • Essay
Ad Fontes: The Question of Rebellion and Moral Tradition on the Use of Force
JAMES TURNER JOHNSON On the older conception, the sovereign could use force against behavior that he understood as endangering the order, justice, and peace of ...
Winter 2013 (27.4) • Essay
Why We Need a Just Rebellion Theory
Because these two influential streams of thought are in such tension with each other, our thinking about rebellion in the West tends to be piecemeal, ...
Winter 2013 (27.4) • Review
On Complicity and Compromise by Chiara Lepora and Robert E. Goodin
Humanitarian action is regularly accused of prolonging wars or colluding with vicious regimes. But the profession has been strangely tardy in developing its operational ethics.