The basis of relations between Muslims and non-Muslims is peace, living in safety, respecting the sanctity of neighborliness between them and others, and leaving other people to their affairs. Islam aimed to achieve security and peace among peoples at a time when both the Roman and Persian empires were extending their influence by occupying neighboring countries, including the Arabian Peninsula. At the same time, the tribes were at odds, raiding and killing each other. The Quranic verses came to decide that the basis of relations between peoples and countries is peace and good neighborliness, as God Almighty said: " Allāh does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allāh loves those who act justly." (Al-Mumtahanah: 8).
However, the political ambitions of countries and tribes are endless, as no matter how many international laws exist, the ambitions of powerful countries are sitting on weak countries and peoples, striking the international laws that they have agreed to against the wall, and the weak must accept to be occupied, or continue to beg the global system.
Since Islam is a comprehensive system, and despite its great concern for peace and security, it has obligated its followers to defend their homelands against invading occupiers, even if it costs them their lives and money. This is a philosophy that shows that the purpose of jihad in the way of Allah is to deter the aggression carried out by the infidels against the Muslims. The purpose of legislating Jihad is to establish world peace because possessing power means preventing invaders and tyrants from thinking about occupying Muslim lands, so that Muslims may be safe, as others are safe, as Allah the Almighty said: “And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war1 by which you may terrify the enemy of Allāh and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allāh knows.” (Al-Anfal: 60).
The power of weapons and equipment repels the whispers of apparent invaders and the whispers of those who show love while concealing hostility and lying in wait for us to occupy our land without our noticing.
That is why war was an inevitable evil if the homelands of Muslims were attacked, or even if any safe homeland was attacked that did not antagonize others. The Muslims spent years being tortured and killed and were not permitted to defend themselves until the Almighty said: “Permission to fight has been given to those who are being fought because they have been wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory. {39} Those who have been expelled from their homes without right” (Al-Hajj). Permission comes after prohibition, hence Muslims engage in war with others out of compulsion that is not beloved to our souls, and the Holy Quran has revealed that latent desire not to engage in war and the inclination towards peace, but Allah has a ruling and wisdom in cutting off the roots of the aggressors, as He, the Almighty, said: “and you wished that the unarmed one would be yours. But Allah intended to establish the truth by His words and to eliminate the disbelievers” (Al-Anfal: 7).
War in Islamic law is an exception to the rule. The rule is peace, and Muslims do not engage in war except in the event of aggression against them. Islam has set morals and controls that must be adhered to when repelling the aggression of the aggressors, as it prohibits the killing of the elderly, women, children, and all those who do not participate in the war from the people of worship, as it prohibits treachery; “And do not betray.” In war, it is forbidden to cause corruption on earth, and if an infidel is killed, it is not permissible to mutilate him after his death. Islam also requires spending on prisoners and treating them well, as God Almighty says: “and give food—despite their desire for it—to the poor, the orphan, and the captive” (Al-Insan: 8).
The commandment to be kind to the captive has remained in this nation since the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) until this day, and it will remain until people stand before the Lord of the Worlds.
The question here is: Is it permissible to kill a prisoner of war who came from his country to attack our homeland, our money, and our sanctities?
And how can that be reconciled, if it is possible, with what is mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah about being kind to the captive?
Is it permissible to kill a prisoner of war?
Regarding dealing with prisoners in war, jurists have two opinions; the first: it is permissible to kill a prisoner, and the second: it is not permissible to kill him. This is in general terms. As for the details of the general, it is as follows:
It is not permissible to kill prisoners at all
It is not permissible to kill prisoners of war, women and children. Al-Rafi’i said in “Al-Sharh Al-Kabeer” (11/91): As for women, children and boys, if they are captured and arrested, they are detained until the end of the fighting, then they are released, because obedience and allegiance to jihad are not required of them. This is what appears, and the wisdom behind that is that women and children are not originally among the people fighting.
Consensus of the Companions
Thus, some jurists have ruled that it is absolutely impermissible to kill a prisoner.
Al-Hasan bin Muhammad al-Tamimi reported that it was the consensus of the Companions, and al-Hasan al-Basri supported it, and that the ruler has the choice between favor or ransom. They cited as evidence the words of Allah Almighty: “So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterward or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens .” (Muhammad: 4). It was refuted that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, killed some prisoners in more than one place, and the majority cited as evidence the words of God Almighty: “Then kill the polytheists wherever you find them.” (At-Tawbah: 5).
Combining the two opinions and reconciling the two verses
Some jurists combined the two opinions and reconciled the two verses, so all of that is permissible according to what the ruler sees, as required by the interest, and some jurists made an exception for war criminals if they were captured, as they are killed; because of their extreme danger.
No killing except under strict conditions
The majority of jurists believe that the ruler or his representative has the right to rule to kill the combat prisoners; if he sees an interest in that, and he has the right to rule not to kill them based on what he sees as best according to the data and information that is based on balancing the interests and harms in the event of killing them.
This is the opinion of the four schools of thought, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali, although they differed among themselves in the matters in which the ruler has a choice, which are: killing, slavery, and being generous to them by making them dhimmis and paying the jizya, and this is the Hanafi school of thought. The Malikis added: emancipation, or ransom, and the Shafei’s believe that if the interest does not appear, the ruler has the right to imprison them until the decision becomes clear to him.
Hence, it becomes clear that Islam makes peace the basis for the relationship with non-Muslims, but it requires jihad, repelling aggression, and defending homelands. As for the prisoner, the ruler and the relevant state institutions are worthy of taking the appropriate decision in that regard. It may be in the interest to keep them to ransom Muslim prisoners, and it may be in the interest to kill them, especially if they are war criminals, so that they may be deterred. All of that must be according to studies and consultations from the political, diplomatic, and military perspectives, and such a decision is not for individuals, but rather it is a state decision.
