Jihad in WWI
Jihad in WWI
Jihad in WWI
The concept of jihad has been brought up a lot, and when one brings it up,
Modern Middle East/Dr. Kramer
Date: April
often times many think about militant 11, However,
Islam. 2010 the term jihad goes back
further than the concept of militant Islam, since the time of the Prophet in fact. The
abuse of jihad, however, is a much more recent notion. Used to insight anger within
Muslims, many have tried to use the idea of jihad in order to legitimize warring
actions. One such event was the declaration of jihad by the Ottoman Turks in 1914
during the Great War (WWI). However, this fatwa was not as popular, nor as
powerful as other callings for jihad in the past. This of course is due to many
different reasons, but first we must look at the concept of jihad. What does a true
jihad entail? Who is the enemy in the jihad? These questions will all answered
within the first part of this endeavor, while the second part shall delve into the issue
of the sultan’s fatwa of 1914.
Part 1: Jihad
The term jihad in Arabic literally means “struggle”, and deals mainly with the
personal “struggle” within each Muslim. However, Islamic law does condone one
kind of war, which is also called a jihad or “Holy War in the western world.
According to Rudolph Peters, jihad is a war against unbelievers, and its main aim is
not to forcibly convert unbelievers to Islam, as thought by the older European
literature, but to expand and defend the Islamic state. 1 Unbelievers who were
1
Rudolph Peters, Jihad in Mediaeval and Modern Islam, Vol. V (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1977). P. 3.
defeated by the Muslims were given a choice: either convert to Islam and gain
complete civil rights, or do not convert, and pay a special tax. Rudolph Peters also
brings up the interesting notion of the ulterior motives behind the jihad. Peters
states that a jihad is not strictly concerned with religious reasons, since there is no
real distinction between state and religion within Islamic Law. Because of this, a
jihad cannot be defined as a “Holy War”, and this is only due to European literature
from the past.2 Peters also states, “Within the past as well as recently these religious
sentiments have been exploited by rulers with a view to mobilize the people for
wars.”3 This clearly shows that religious as well as political motivations have been
Within the aspect of jihad, there are several things that must be taken into
account, such as the nature of the very person who issues the call to jihad, the
Sheihk al-Islam. According Peters, these entail the persons who are obliged to
partake in the jihad, the enemy of the jihad, the prerequisites for warfare, and the
aims of warfare4.
As to the first part, a jihad is said to be a collective event, and so must not be
brought upon for personal reasons. Also, not every Muslim is taken on the jihad,
since the Prophet left Muslims behind while at battle.5 As to the enemy of the jihad,
the Koran claims that only polytheists shall be fought. The Koran states “Fight them
until there is no persecution and the religion is entirely Allah’s”. 6 With this in mind,
2
Ibid. p. 4.
3
Ibid. p. 4.
4
Ibid. p. 9.
5
Ibid. p. 10.
6
Ibid. p. 11.
other monotheistic religions, or as Islam refers to them, “people of the Book”, such
as Christianity and Judaism, were not considered enemies of a jihad, with the
exception of defending Islam. Also, as was said earlier, “people of the Book” who had
been brought under the rule of Islam were given the choice of converting to Islam,
or paying a special tax. As to the prerequisites of warfare, according to the Koran it
is only lawful to wage jihad against enemies that have heard the summons to Islam.
The Koran states, “We have not been accustomed to punish until We have sent a
messenger”7. This seems to show that before attacking, the Muslims offer
negotiating terms of Islam to their enemies. The final issue to approach is the aims
of the warfare, which as has been said before, is simply the conversion to Islam, or
payment of the poll tax. This is stated within the Koran: 8
Fight against those who do not believe in Allah…and do
not practice the religion of truth, of those who have
been given the Book, until they pay the [poll tax] off-
hand, being subdued.
Now that we have established some of the basic ideas behind jihad, let us
now turn to the main example set forth at the beginning of this excursion: the jihad
fatwa for WWI.
Part 2: The Fatwa of 1914
7
Ibid. p. 20.
8
Ibid. p. 24.
World War One, also known as the “Great War”, truly engulfed a good portion
of the world in warfare. It was a conflict involving Great Britain, France and Russia
on one side, while Prussia and Austria-Hungary were on the other. The only other
main powers to enter the scene were the United States of America and the Ottoman
Empire. The United States would not enter the action until later on in the war.
However, the Ottoman Empire would enter the Great War in 1914. In order to “gain
more fuel for the fire”, a jihad was issued by Sheikh ul Islam, the head of the
religious Islam. However, this did not hold as much weight as other jihads for
First, we must take a look at the “messenger”, the Sheikh ul Islam. Many of
the Muslims did not pay attention to the fatwa, because they considered the Sheikh
to be a “notorious atheist”9.
Not only that, but stories were being spread that Emperor William had
embraced Islam and assumed the title of Hajji Wilhelm Mohamed. 10 Clearly, this was
cannot just look at the players behind this matter. We must take a look at the words
of these players, specifically within the five fatwas issued by the Sheikh ul Islam.
Russia, France, and Great Britain. In order to make the declaration credible to the
9
Sir Valentine Chirol, The Turkish Empire from 1288 to 1914 (New York, New York:
Howard Fertig, 1969). P. 378.
10
Ibid. p. 378.
religious community, fatwas were issued in the form of questions answered with a
There are several issues with this fatwa. First, the “enemies” stated are
definitely referring to the British, French and Russian forces of Great War. However,
attacks during the Great War were not against Islam, and were merely considered
political issues. The beginning players were Serbs who assassinated the Archduke
Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary, and this was due to the ethnical abuse against
the rights of the Serbs in Serbia (which was a part of the Austria-Hungary Empire at
the time). There was no issue relating to religion, and so the Islamic world would
feel no threat. Now this is not to say that Islam would not feel threatened later in the
war (especially from Russia, who wished to create a warm water port in the
Mediterranean). The other issue is that the fatwa calls for the “old” as well as the
“young” to partake in the jihad. A jihad does not compel everyone to go on the jihad,
and so many of the Muslims felt that only those capable should partake. This goes
11
Rudolph Peters, Islam and Colonialism: The Doctrine of Jihad in Modern History
(The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1979). p. 90.
along also with the third fatwa that was issued, which claims that those who do not
partake in the jihad deserve “Divine wrath”12. Since the Prophet stated that not
Two of the other fatwas state that it is necessary to fight the British, French,
and Russian forces because they are hostile to the Islamic Caliphate, and so must be
declared war against. As was stated before, the British, French and Russian forces
declared war for political purposes in order to protect the smaller nations of Serbia
and Montenegro from the Austria-Hungary Empire. Islam was never called into
question, and so a jihad, which is in fact a religious war, cannot be waged when
The final fatwa states a very important part of the jihad, the enemy. It
states:13
The main issue with this fatwa can be found within the very players of
message. Due to the fact that a jihad deals with religious as well as political affairs,
we must therefore take a look at the religions of these players. Each one of these
declare a jihad upon the British, French, and Russians, when the Muslims
12
Ibid. p. 91.
13
Ibid. p. 91.
themselves would be allied with other Christian nations? Although during the
Prophet’s age the Christians were considered to not be the enemy of the Muslims, by
the time of the Great War, the idea of jihad had become twisted, and so Christians
were considered “infidels”. Therefore, it would seem preposterous that the Muslims
Within these different areas of understanding jihad, and giving the main
example of the Ottoman jihad of the Great War, we can gain a better approach to
Chirol, Sir Valentine. The Turkish Empire from 1288 to 1914. New York, New York:
Howard Fertig, 1969.
Peters, Rudolph. Islam and Colonialism: The Doctrine of Jihad in Modern History . The
Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1979.
—. Jihad in Mediaeval and Modern Islam. Vol. V. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977.