-
Reconciling Peace, Persecution, And Principles
Honorable Sir,
I seek your guidance on reconciling several of Sir Ghamidi’s principles regarding conflict and ethical priorities.
Sir Ghamidi has taught that when two “good” values conflict, we must sacrifice the smaller value in favor of the bigger one. He has also emphasized that instead of entangling ourselves in wars with global powers, we should prioritize a period of peace to invest in our own development. Furthermore, he maintains that jihad against persecution is a right, defining persecution as the forced imposition of an ideology through power. Regarding current affairs, I recall Sir Ghamidi mentioning that the “absolutely not” rhetoric used by Imran Khan is essentially useless.
However, if global powers demand that we assist in imposing their ideology in places like Afghanistan or Iran, does this not constitute persecution? It appears that, in this instance, we are enduring persecution for the sake of the perceived value of peace. Yet, the conflict persists (fighting these wars drains our resources and increases the number of our internal enemies alongside the external ones we are already fighting).
Why should we not simply say “absolutely not”? To be clear, I am not suggesting we go to war with global powers, but rather that we simply refuse to fight their wars. By doing so, we would at least preserve the value of refusing to participate in persecution, and perhaps this refusal would actually lead us toward the value of peace, as we would be making fewer enemies.
It seems there is a direct conflict between two values here. On one side, we have the life, property, and honor of ourselves and our neighbors; on the other side, we have a so-called “interval for development” that we aren’t truly receiving anyway. Is this “so-called peace” really the greater value, or is it the protection of human life and honor? Is it ethical to sacrifice others for the sake of our own perceived peace? I must emphasize once more: I am not advocating for declaring war, but rather for the right to refuse to participate in one. Do we truly lack the strength to refuse to commit injustice at the behest of global powers?
I would be most grateful for your clarification on this matter. I would also appreciate any feedback on this question. It would be a bonus for me if this question is conveyed to Sir Ghamidi for any of his live Q&A sessions; I will be more than grateful to him and the team.
-
6 Replies
-
Reconciling Peace, Persecution, And Principles
updated 2 days, 10 hours ago
2 Members
·
6
Replies
-
There is no persecution in imposing any ideologies from the powers you referred to. It is always some political conflict that brings them to wage a war on a country.
Fighting against persecution needs preparation. Muslims are not asked to go to war unprepared. For preparation, Muslims need peace.
-
1. When you say the global powers are not doing any persecution in the above mentioned case, what does that mean? Are you saying imposing ideology on other nations does not come under the definition of persecution? Or are you saying that global powers are not trying to bring a regime in Iran which aligns to their values of liberaliam?
2. I think my second question is not understood correctly. I will try again with an example. Its from Pakistan’s perspective, not from Iran’s. We lack in power to fight against global powers, so we should not. Agreed. But what if global powers ask us to fight against Iran either with arms or logistic or strategic support. Since we lack in power, we should say no to this war too. Isnt it? Note: I know global powers have not asked us to fight against Iran yet, its just a hypothetical question.
-
-
Ideologies are not being imposed with power. We know Afghanistan is not following the ideologies of the West or of the US, but they are not forced to adopt them. It is always the political interest that compels the powers to exercise their role. Read well about how the big powers intervene.
Pakistan should refuse to participate in any war, no matter what, except when the cause is just. For example, Pakistan is told that Iran is posing threat to Saudi Arabia or other countries, then Pakistan should react accordingly.
-
1. I agree that these big powers have muliple political motives. One of the motives is values also. Trump on multiple occasions expressed that they want a regime in Iran which is liberal. That kind of war is persecutional.
2. I agree that our war would be legit if we fight it to defend Saudia from Iran’s attacks. But what about all the fights we fought against afghanistan in the past to please global powers.
-
-
These are the particular cases we are discussing. People can have different perspectives and opinions. The more one studies, the more informed opinion one can make.
Thanks
-
Thanks.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
