Continuing our series on war and peace in Islam, we discuss the modern phenomenon of Jihadi-Salafism which post 9-11 has dominated the world scene as part of America’s war on terror.

A brief history

In the latter part of the 20^th century, a number of Jihadi-Salafigroups emerged in the Muslim world. These groups were established as a reaction to the deaths and destruction inflicted upon Muslims in a number independence wars starting primarily with the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan (1979-1989). The resistance to the Soviet invasion was undertaken by Afghan mujahideen who had lived in the land for thousands of years, and who followed the Hanafi-Deobandi school of thought (mathhab). Throughout the 1980s many Arab volunteers who followed Salafism came to assist the Afghans bringing with them money from the Gulf countries who were rich in oil wealth. One of the most famous in this regard is Osama bin Laden whose family to this day are billionaires. The mujahideen were openly supported by America and the CIA who were actively training them as part of their proxy wars against the Soviet Union. U.S. President Ronald Reagan said in 1983, “To watch the courageous Afghan freedom fighters battle modern arsenals with simple hand-held weapons is an inspiration to those who love freedom.”^[1]

In 1988, Osama bin Laden along with many of the Arab volunteers who followed Salafism, established Al-Qaeda in Peshawar, Pakistan.

After its invasion of Iraq in 1991, America imposed punishing sanctions on the country which had no effect on Saddam Hussein and his regime, but which devastated the lives of ordinary Iraqis. Madeline Albright, the former US Secretary of State’s infamous statement that the deaths of half a million Iraqi children due to US sanctions were in her words a price worth paying,^[2] epitomised everything wrong with American foreign policy at the time and which continues to this day. America’s unwaivable support for Israel no matter how many horrific atrocities it committed against the Muslims, also became a rallying call among the Jihadi-Salafis. It should be noted however, that Salafism never took hold in Palestine and there are no Jihadi-Salafi groups operating there.

It’s within this context that the ‘World Islamic Front’ issued a fatwa (Islamic edict) in 1998 declaring ‘Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders.’ This fatwa was signed among others by Al-Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Those groups who signed the fatwa are known by various names such as Jihadi-Salafis, Global Jihadists and Salafi Takfiris, even though mainstream Salafism has rejected their ideas and refuted them.

Yasir Qadhi says, “There are, of course, Muslims who prefer not to have the Islamic institution of jihad sullied through an association with terrorist violence that is antithetical to normative jihad or the Pious Predecessors. They consider the phrase ‘Jihadi-Salafism’ to be part of a regime of nefarious propaganda about Islam and terrorism, and would prefer that the groups under discussion are simply called ‘terrorists’ (irhabiyyun), Khārijites, ‘deviants’ (munharifun), or members of ‘the misled sect’ (al-fi’a al-dhalla). However, the term Jihadi-Salafism retains a usefulness and sense of accuracy in describing an aspiration to perform jihad with adherence to Salafi foundations and principles, even if there is an element of imperfection in its use, as is the case with the related term ‘Islamism.’ People who are often deemed to be Jihadi-Salafis, like Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, have come to adopt this label for themselves, particularly after 9/11, despite its questionable origins.”[3]

The second invasion of Iraq in 2003 mobilised the Jihadi-Salafi movement once again after their base in Afghanistan was destroyed. Iraq then became the new front for Al-Qaeda under the leadership of Abū Muṣʻab al-Zarqāwī in 2004, but al-Zarqāwī went to such extremes, declaring open war against Shi’ites and massacring civilians, that even Al-Qaeda’s leadership formally rebuked him. After his death in 2006, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) was formed under Abu Umar Al-Baghdadi. This group then become the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in 2013, and in 2014 ISIS declared itself as a caliphate with Al-Baghdadi its ‘caliph’.

Neo-Kharijites

The intolerance and extremism of Jihadi-Salafis and ISIS in particular, and their complete disregard for human life, has its origins in the Khawarij (Kharijites) who broke away from Ali ibn Abi Talib’s army in 37H / 657CE accusing the Caliph of apostasy!

The Khawarij are – in the words of Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi – “a sect which appeared in the first century of Islam and have manifested throughout the centuries since. It deviated from mainstream Islam and was known for killing Muslims under allegations of takfir, which means accusing a Muslim of becoming an apostate. This sect was described in numerous Prophetic Traditions (hadith)…According to the words of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, the followers of the Khawarij are described as “the dogs of Hell,” and “the worst of both men and animals.”^[4] Although the historical sect of the Khawarij does not exist today, we have clear proofs in the Prophetic Traditions that it would emerge at various times throughout the centuries of Islam. The comparison between the crimes and practices of ISIS and the description of the Khawarij mentioned in the words (hadith) of the Prophet proves my conclusion that ISIS is the modern-day Khawarij, implying that its followers are deviators and that fighting them is obligatory.”^[5]

Yasir Qadhi says, “Jihadi-Salafis reject the label ‘Kharijites,’ stating that the Kharijites declared people to be disbelievers for committing sins, while they only declare people to be disbelievers for engaging in acts of disbelief. These ‘acts of disbelief’ according to the Jihadis include ruling by a law other than Islamic law; supporting a government that rules by man-made laws; working for a government that implements man-made laws; allying with disbelievers; and not supporting their jihad. They declare people to be disbelievers and apostates based on these issues, thus justifying the targeting and murder of such people in the name of jihad.”[6]

‘Acts of disbelief’ to Jihadi-Salafis are actually major sins to mainstream normative Islam. Therefore, these groups are clearly following in the footsteps of the Kharijites.

One incident in particular from the time of the Caliphate of Ali ibn Abi Talib sums up their fanaticism, and from which we can draw many parallels with their modern equivalents in Iraq and Syria known as ISIS, an offshoot of Al-Qaeda.

In 37H / 657CE while Ali “was preparing to invade Syria, news reached him that the Kharijites had spread corruption throughout the land, shedding blood, blocking roads, and violating what was forbidden. Among those they killed was Abdullah ibn Khabbab, a companion of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. They captured him and his pregnant wife. They asked him, “Who are you?” He replied, “I am Abdullah ibn Khabbab, a companion of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. You have terrified me.” They said, “You are safe. Tell us what you heard from your father.” He said: I heard my father say: I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say:

ستكون فتنة القاعد فيها خير من القائم ، والقائم خير من الماشي ، والماشي خير من الساعي

“There will be a tribulation (fitna) in which the one who sits will be better than the one who stands, the one who stands will be better than the one who walks, and the one who walks will be better than the one who runs.”^[7]

So they led him by the hand. While he was walking with them, some of them came across a pig belonging to one of the dhimmis (non-Muslim citizens), and one of them struck it with his sword, tearing its skin. Another said to him: “Why did you do this? It belongs to a dhimmi!” So he went to that dhimmi, asked his forgiveness, and appeased him. While he was with them, a date fell from a palm tree, and one of them picked it up and put it in his mouth. Another said to him: “Without permission or payment?” So he spat it out of his mouth.

Despite this, they brought forward Abdullah ibn Khabbab and slaughtered him. Then they came to his wife, and she said: “I am a pregnant woman! Do you not fear Allah, the Exalted and Glorified?” They slaughtered her and ripped open her belly to remove her child. When the people learned of this, they feared that if they went to Syria and engaged in fighting, these people would leave their families and homes behind and do the same. They feared their treachery and advised Ali.”^[8]

The Khawarij said to Abdullah “you are safe” and then they killed him, his wife and unborn baby. Treachery, lying, breaking covenants and horrific injustices are the hallmarks of such groups. This is why Ibn Kathir said, “If the Khawarij ever gained power, they would corrupt the entire land, Iraq and Syria. They would not leave alone a boy or a girl or a man or a woman, for in their view the people have become so corrupt that they cannot be reformed but by mass killing.”^[9]

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, “There will be division and sectarianism in my ummah, and a people will come with beautiful words and evil deeds. They will recite the Quran, but it will not pass beyond their throats. They will leave the religion as an arrow leaves its target, and they will not return to it as the arrow does not return to its bow. They are the worst of the creation. Blessed are those who fight them and are killed by them. They call to the Book of Allah, but they have nothing to do with it. Whoever fights them is better to Allah than them.”^[10]

Legitimate Opposition groups are not Kharijites

An important to note, is that corrupt regimes whether today or in the past will always label opposition movements as Khawarij even if they have legitimate demands. This was clearly seen during the Umayyad Caliphate where anyone opposing the hereditary rule of the caliphs was labelled as a Kharijite.

Tabari narrates that in 719CE/100H the Kharijites rebelled in Iraq under the leadership of Bistam. Umar bin Abdul-Aziz wrote to Bistam requesting that he comes and discuss the reasons for his revolt with him. It is reported that Bistam sent two men to debate with Umar. They engaged him in debate, saying, “Tell us about Yazid. Why do you acknowledge him to be your successor as caliph?” ‘Umar replied, “Someone else appointed him as my successor.” They said, “Consider the following case: Suppose you were administering some property that belonged to someone else and you then entrusted it to someone who was unreliable. Do you think that you would have conveyed the trust to its owner?” ‘Umar said, “Give me three days,” and the two men left.

The Banu Marwan were afraid that ‘Umar would confiscate the properties that they owned and administered and that he would renounce Yazid; therefore, they had someone poison his drink. He died less than three days after the two men left him.[11]

Bughāh (rebellion) against just and unjust regimes, based on legitimate or illegitimate causes is a reality that has existed throughout Islamic history. Even in the time of the sahaba a civil war broke out between Mu’awiya, the governor of Ash-Sham (Greater Syria), and Ali ibn Abi Talib who was the caliph, with sahaba on both sides. We don’t label either side as khawārij, because both were acting upon an ijtihad (Islamic opinion), although its well-established that Ali held the correct and legitimate position, and Mu’awiya was incorrect in what he did. Ahmed Al-Dawoody says, “A few jurists confuse the bughāh with the khawārij, but one of the main differences between them is that the bughāh fight only against the ruler and his army, unlike the khawārij, who indiscriminately attack all Muslims, civilians or otherwise.” footnote it.[12]

To err is human, and Allah (Most High) has described in the Qur’an a situation where two groups of Muslims fight each other labelling both as ‘believers’, and the course of action that should be taken to resolve it.

وَإِن طَآئِفَتَانِ مِنَ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ ٱقْتَتَلُوا۟ فَأَصْلِحُوا۟ بَيْنَهُمَا ۖ فَإِنۢ بَغَتْ إِحْدَىٰهُمَا عَلَى ٱلْأُخْرَىٰ فَقَـٰتِلُوا۟ ٱلَّتِى تَبْغِى حَتَّىٰ تَفِىٓءَ إِلَىٰٓ أَمْرِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن فَآءَتْ فَأَصْلِحُوا۟ بَيْنَهُمَا بِٱلْعَدْلِ وَأَقْسِطُوٓا۟ ۖ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُحِبُّ ٱلْمُقْسِطِينَ

And if two groups of believers fight each other, then make peace between them. But if one of them transgresses against the other, then fight against the transgressing group until they ˹are willing to˺ submit to the rule of Allah. If they do so, then make peace between both ˹groups˺ in all fairness and act justly. Surely Allah loves those who uphold justice.[13]

Jihad-Salafis invent a new jihad

Yasir Qadhi says, “The problems with the JS (Jihadi-Salafis) understanding of jihad in light of normative formulations of Islamic law are many.

Firstly, they elevate it into the greatest act of worship.

Secondly, they view it as a perpetual act that must be carried out all the time, with peace not being an option.

Thirdly, they view it as an individual obligation on every believer.

Fourthly, the killing of citizens and bystanders is deemed by them to be permissible.

Fifthly, it is held that their notion of jihad demarcates between faith and disbelief; hence anybody who supports their jihad is a believer, and all those who oppose them are disbelievers.

Sixthly, the functions of states, borders, and treaties with non-Muslim lands, allies or otherwise, is altogether disqualified despite modern Muslim jurisprudence in the traditions of the existing legal schools recognizing their legitimacy in the modern world within an Islamic law framework.

This new understanding of jihad did not exist even half a century ago. It is a post-modernist understanding that was invented out of desperation, due to the current tyranny, wars, and oppression that are carried out against Muslims in various parts of the world. Unable to see any way for the Muslim world to overcome its humiliation and oppression, many young people turn to this theory of jihad as a desperate solution. Yet, the results have been catastrophic, causing even more problems for Muslims across the globe than before.”^[14]

The Caliph manages military affairs

In a future caliphate based on normative Islam, imbuing the principles of a balanced and just nation (أُمَّةً وَسَطًا), it is only the caliph as commander-in-chief who has sole responsibility over military affairs within the domains of the Islamic state. No individual or group is permitted to undertake any military actions or initiate war unless in a defensive manner, without permission of the caliph. This is the position of any state in the world where the government has a “monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force.”[15] This is a well-established position from the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and throughout Islamic history.

In regards to the activities of the Jihadi-Salafis, Yasir Qadhi says, “This new understanding of jihad did not exist even half a century ago. It is a post-modernist understanding that was invented out of desperation, due to the current tyranny, wars, and oppression that are carried out against Muslims in various parts of the world. Unable to see any way for the Muslim world to overcome its humiliation and oppression, many young people turn to this theory of jihad as a desperate solution. Yet, the results have been catastrophic, causing even more problems for Muslims across the globe than before.”^[16]

With regards to the role of the caliph in military affairs, Al-Mawardi (d.1058CE) says, “If the territorial authority of this type of amir (governor) lies adjacent to a border he may not initiate a jihad except with the Caliph’s permission, although he must wage war on them and repulse them if they initiate the attack, without the Caliph’s permission, as this forms part of his duty to protect and defend what is inviolable.”[17]

In a unitary state, the armed forces are all unified under the caliph who is the Commander-in-Chief. He has the sole power to declare war and despatch the military. Philip Hitti (d.1978) says, “The army was the ummah, the whole nation, in action. Its amir or commander in chief was the caliph in al-Madinah, who delegated the authority to his lieutenants or generals.”[18]

Muhammad Haykal says, “For the management and disposal to belong to the Imam represents the ‘Asl (original position) in relation to the Qitaal (fighting) of the enemies, when he exists, and it is obligatory to obey him in accordance to the speech of Allah (Most High):

يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ أَطِيعُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا۟ ٱلرَّسُولَ وَأُو۟لِى ٱلْأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ

“O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you.”[19]

…Based upon this understanding, the one entitled to dispose of the affairs of Al-Qitaal is only the Imam and consequently obedience to the Imam is obligatory in respect to the matters related to managing the matter or affairs of Al-Qitaal.”[20]

Structure of an Islamic State: The Armed Forces

Notes

[1] U.S. President Ronald Reagan, ‘Message on the Observance of Afghanistan Day,’ March 21, 1983, https://web.archive.org/web/20101116103312/http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1983/32183e.htm

[2] https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/3/25/lets-remember-madeleine-albright-as-who-she-really-was

[3] Yasir Qadhi, ‘Understanding Salafism: Seeking the Path of the Pious Predecessors,’ Oneworld Academic, 2025, p.336

[4] Abu Ghalib narrated that Abu Umamah said:

يَقُولُ شَرُّ قَتْلَى قُتِلُوا تَحْتَ أَدِيمِ السَّمَاءِ وَخَيْرُ قَتْلَى مَنْ قَتَلُوا كِلاَبُ أَهْلِ النَّارِ قَدْ كَانَ هَؤُلاَءِ مُسْلِمِينَ فَصَارُوا كُفَّارًا ‏.‏ قُلْتُ يَا أَبَا أُمَامَةَ هَذَا شَىْءٌ تَقُولُهُ قَالَ بَلْ سَمِعْتُهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم

“(The Khawarij) are the worst of the slain who are killed under heaven, and the best of the slain are those who were killed by them. Those (Khawarij) are the dogs of Hell. Those people were Muslims but they became disbelievers.” I said: “O Abu Umamah, is that your opinion?” He said: “Rather I heard it from the Messenger of Allah.” [Sunan Ibn Majah 176, https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:176 ]

[5] Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi, ‘Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal of Its Religious And Ideological Foundations Paperback,’ Sacred Knowledge, 2015, p. xvii

[6] Yasir Qadhi, ‘Understanding Salafism: Seeking the Path of the Pious Predecessors,’ Oneworld Academic, 2025, p.260

[7] Sunan Ibn Majah 3961, https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:3961

[8] Ibn Kathir, al-Bidāyah wal-Nihāyah 10/584, https://www.islamweb.net/ar/library/content/59/855/%D8%B0%D9%83%D8%B1-%D8%AE%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%AC-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AC-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D9%88%D9%81%D8%A9-%D9%88%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B2%D8%AA%D9%87%D9%85-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D8%B1%D8%B6%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%87-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%88%D8%A9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%A9

[9] Ibid

[10] Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4765, https://sunnah.com/abudawud:4765

[11] Al-Tabari, ‘The History of Al-Tabari’, State University of New York Press, Volume XXIV, p.78

[12] Ahmed Al-Dawoody, ‘The Islamic Law of War: Justifications and Regulations,’ Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, p.151

[13] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Hujurat, ayah 9

[14] Yasir Qadhi, ‘Understanding Salafism: Seeking the Path of the Pious Predecessors,’ Oneworld Academic, 2025, p.343

[15] Weber, Max (1978). Roth, Guenther; Wittich, Claus (eds.). Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press. p.54

[16] Yasir Qadhi, ‘Understanding Salafism: Seeking the Path of the Pious Predecessors,’ Oneworld Academic, 2025, p.343

[17] Abu l-Hasan al-Mawardi, The Laws of Islamic Governance, translation of Al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyah, Ta Ha Publishers, p.52

[18] Philip K. Hitti, ‘History of the Arabs,’ London, 10th edition, 1970, p.173

[19] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Nisaa’, ayah 59

[20] Muhammad Khayr Haykal, ‘Al-Jihad wa’l Qital fi as-Siyasa ash-Shar’iyya,’ vol.1, Chapter: The Tenth Study: Qitaal Al-Ghaarah (fighting by raids or attacks) for the purpose of seizing the property of the enemy