Peace treaties between Muslims and Non-muslims

Submitted by Faqi (United States), Nov 22, 2006 at 02:11

The "hudna" (armistice/ peace) that Muslims make with non-Muslims can never be more than temporary, and is entered into only because the Muslim side feels it is too weak to conduct open warfare, and would benefit from a respite. Alternatively, a Muslim polity may enter into a hudna with non-Muslims if it has a reasonable expectation that those non-Muslims will soon adopt Islam.

If the hudna is undertaken in order to give the Muslims time to gather their strength, then the Muslim side is then not merely allowed, but required, whenever it feels strong enough, to re-engage in open hostilities. Of course all during the period of the "hudna" it may conduct operations not involving combat that it is capable of, including economic boycotts, diplomatic offensives, and suchlike -- which is exactly what all Muslims do engage in to weaken us, whether or not they are still in an official state of war, or have signed a peace treaty.

it's always one sided.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".