VIOLENCE IS NOT AN OPTION — Choose the Easier Option

or engage in violence. They enjoy complete freedom and all kinds of opportunities. Their human rights are secure, and even as far as politics is concerned they are living in the age of democracy. All these factors have made war and violence outdated. The so-called jihads we see in Muslim countries are not jihad, but what can be called anti-jihad. There is no true justification for these violent activities. At the time of the Prophet there was a need for compulsory defence. Here the choice was not between peace and violence. The choice was between defending and perishing. Therefore, Prophet was compelled to engage in war sometimes, as he had no choice. In every such occasion he tried his best and utmost to first avoid war by negotiation or some other strategy. Then, he tried to limit the war. Due to this policy there was no full-fledged war during the Prophet’s time. All the wars in his time were skirmishes, and not wars in the true sense of the word. Now, in the present age we have a reliable option for peace, that is, to refer the conflict to the United Nations. In Prophet’s time there was no such body as the United Nations, so one had no option other than to take decisions on one’s own. In every situation of war or attack, there exists the easier option of compromise. There is, a guiding principle in the Quran: As-sulh khair (THE QURAN 4: 128). It means that peace is the best option. According to this verse, self-defence is not an option. War was permissible only in the face of compulsion created by the other party. This also after exhausting all efforts to establish peace and make compromises. In other words war being the only way available to settle the matter. The concept of unilateral attack is another meaningless term. All attacks occur after some provocation. If one abstains from provoking others, then there will be no attack. But, if, in a rare case, there is an unprovoked attack, then the immediate and available solution is to select between two evils. Opting for defence is opting for the greater evil (keeping in mind the destruction which a modern day war causes), while opting for compromise is choosing the lesser evil. In such situations, the question is not why you shouldn’t opt for defence. The problem is that in the name of defence, you are opting for a greater evil. If the choice is between greater evil and lesser evil, then it is wisdom to opt for the