• Using the concept of "alliance" to describe the relations of Palestinian resistance and efforts to support it is inaccurate.
• In Islamic jurisprudence, "alliance" refers to absolute cooperation, mutual support, and solidarity for truth, good, and collective interest.
• Supporting Palestinian resistance is an individual obligation, whereas "alliance" is a discretionary matter that Muslims may choose to forego.
• Combating the Zionist enemy is an individual jihad, not exclusive to Palestinians, and has expanded to all Muslims across the globe.
• States and movements that support resistance fulfill a definitive obligation, not optional, and are required to sustain it as a permanent condition.
• Acceptance of such support by the resistance is a religious duty, and cooperation to implement it and enhance its benefits is an absolute obligation.

In most contemporary political studies, the concept of alliance—defined in its Western sense, as we will clarify—is commonly used to express the relationships of Palestinian resistance and efforts to support it. We attribute this to the dominance of Western methodologies in the study of political science and international relations. However, what is even more surprising is the widespread use of this term—with the same connotation and without redefining it in light of the Islamic civilizational perspective—in expressing the efforts of the Ummah to support the Palestinian people and bolster Palestinian resistance within the Islamic, jurisprudential, and activist contexts. 

Negative Repercussions of Misinterpretation 

The establishment of this concept in the legitimate discourse regarding the Palestinian issue has led to negative repercussions not intended by the sincere individuals who have overlooked the precise legal framing of this supporting action. Those who are biased against the resistance hasten to adopt the concept of alliance to escape responsibilities, seeking gain, avoiding harm, or adhering to school inclinations or preconceived positions. 

 Dialogue with Sincere Individuals

This article engages in a dialogue with those sincere individuals without detracting from their efforts or diminishing their contributions. Its aim is merely to call for careful examination of the foundation, rooting, and application of the concept. In doing so, it aligns with other efforts to root the Palestinian cause through a comprehensive perspective that combines texts with their objectives, details with their generalities, and foundational thinking with a civilizational outlook. 

 The Problem of Expressing the Concept of Political Alliance

We do not deny the originality of the concept of alliance and coalitions in Islamic jurisprudence and political legislation, which refers to mutual support, solidarity, and cooperation for justice, goodness, and the common interest. It is an accurate usage when intended to encompass all efforts of solidarity across various ties within the Ummah, making its usage appropriate in this sense to achieve the intended purpose without misleading it into unintended meanings. However, if it is used inappropriately or in a manner that diminishes its broad connotation, it becomes problematic. 

 Challenges of Terminology  

This issue is not limited to this concept but extends to all concepts across various fields of knowledge; poor selection of terminology or failure to clarify its meanings does not fulfill the objectives of dialogue and communication, intercultural exchange, and reflection, as clarity and precision—defined in logic by the conditions of inclusiveness and exclusiveness—are essential. The term should match or closely resemble its meaning. If it raises ambiguity, fails to achieve the intended goal, or another term is more precise or complete in its expression, then its usage is not considered successful. 

 Consequences of Imprecision

Consequently, the failure to accurately select a concept or clearly articulate its meanings leads to other imbalances in determining responsibilities and defining obligations. In other words, the severity of the issue lies not in the lack of precision itself but in the consequences that derive from it. 

 Western Implications of Political Alliance  

When looking at the concept of political alliance, we observe that, with its Western implications, it embodies several meanings that contradict the legitimate and civilizational perspective in describing the support of resistance. In the Western model, alliance stems from reality rather than obligation. Here, "reality" refers to the modern nation-state imposed on the Ummah through well-known colonial efforts. The establishment of the nation-state in the Islamic world suggests a disconnection between the ties of different states, peoples, and Arab and Islamic components. It also replaces terms like alliance and coalition with phrases like integration and solidarity, brotherhood, and mutual support. 

 Legal and Religious Duties in the Nation-State Context  

It is absolutely not permissible to negate the reality of the existence of the nation-state and the realities of obligatory religious duties, both individual and collective, directed towards the Ummah (the Islamic community). Indeed, the reality contributes to rationalizing perspectives and directing judgments by considering the components of legal rulings that frame obligatory rulings, but they do not change legal situations. 

 Misconceptions in Contemporary Usage 

One of the issues related to the concept in contemporary usage is the restriction of its meanings in contemporary jurisprudential texts to the establishment of treaties and alliances between the Islamic state and other non-Islamic states. In many cases, it appears solely within the context of military alliances with non-Muslims. When it appears in an Islamic context, reference to its linguistic meanings is made only briefly, and then it is framed in the context of the alliance between Islamic movements and secular, leftist, and nationalist currents. 

 Reduction to Exceptional Circumstances  

Another issue is reducing the meanings of the concept to exceptional circumstances, dealing with it as an emergency situation comparable to drinking alcohol or consuming pork in times of famine. The fundamental principle is about pursuing benefits and repelling harms in a manner of continuity and connection, not temporariness and interruption. 

 Issues in Resistance Context 

Additionally, the concept raises issues, especially in the context of resistance relations. In addition to the previously mentioned points, there is the misconception of associating Palestinian resistance with its supporters in matters that are subject to legal denial or following them in matters that are administrative ijtihad (jurisprudential reasoning) that fall outside the issue of mutual support and solidarity against the Zionist enemy. 

 Clarification Efforts 

We believe that the expression "Alliance of Al-Quds" instead of "Axis of Resistance" in the speeches of resistance leaders over the past two years was a measure to clarify this confusion, and it is an important precaution. 

 Methodological Leniency in Terminology 

If we wish to analyze the reasons and motives that facilitated the use of this concept with its previous negative implications, they can be attributed, in our view, to several issues. One is the methodological leniency in the use of concepts and the borrowing of terms, which some Islamists engaged in. This has been cautioned against by some pioneers who have contributed many scholarly works to the Islamic library in rooting concepts from an Islamic civilizational perspective, warning against distorting original concepts and infiltrating imported concepts, and emphasizing the need to redefine common concepts in different cultures, including concepts like politics and alliances.

 Predominance of Rhetorical Tendencies

The second issue is the predominance of rhetorical tendencies in addressing the issues of the Ummah, including the Palestinian cause, and the weakness of foundational contributions, which has led to a lack of precision in conceptualization and adaptation, and consequently to other misalignments in affirmation and implementation.

Failure to Distinguish Between Individual and Collective Obligations

The third issue is the failure to distinguish between the two types of obligations: individual and collective, leading to the misconception that alliances fall within the realm of individual obligation. In light of these failings or disruptions, we propose the use of the terms "individual jihad" or "mandatory support" instead of "political alliance," without losing sight of the call to redefine political alliances in light of the Islamic civilizational perspective. We hope to address this matter in a subsequent work, God willing.

Transitioning from Military Alliances to Individual Jihad

 The jihad that is taking place today against the Zionist enemy is defined as a tangible jihad definitively, as confirmed by the trustworthy scholars of our time without dispute. This follows what the Muslim community has unanimously agreed upon regarding the obligation to repel the enemy from the lands of Muslims. This is especially critical in defending the heart of Islamic geography, the land of the prophets, the site of revelations, and the path of the leader of creation and messengers. The tangible jihad is not specific to the Palestinians due to their inability, over a century, to expel the occupation from the holy land; therefore, the tangible discourse has shifted from them to the surrounding countries and from there to the general Muslim community on Earth, each according to their capacity and capability.

Obligations in Resistance Efforts

Thus, every effort to resist the occupation, whether from within Palestine or from outside it, constitutes compliance with a tangible mandate, making the act a personal obligation rather than on behalf of anyone else. We have previously pointed out the flaw in the expression that uses "the Palestinian people" or "the Palestinian resistance" in the context of jihad and the opposition to the Zionist enemy, as jihad is something that does not accept representation in principle. The refusal of representation in the tangible jihad is evident because tangible obligations can only be fulfilled by the doer, and this obligation does not extend to anyone but the doer. Additionally, the intent of the legislator in actions where representation does not apply, such as jihad, is to test the individuals involved one by one; hence, it cannot be fulfilled by the actions of others. Moreover, the expression of representation in a civilizational conflict confuses the mind of the contemporary Muslim and falsely implies that a faction of this nation suffices to perform this duty.

Reframing the Concept of Alliances

If this is the case, then it is incorrect to describe the support for the Palestinian resistance or its relationships with its supporters as an alliance, because alliances, in their Western context, are based on mutual interest with others, whether defensive or offensive, prompted by specific circumstances and conditions, and encouraged by efforts or arrangements. In such cases, the principle, within the Islamic perspective, should align with juristic efforts that are of communal obligation. However, repelling the Zionist enemy from the holy land and preventing it from spilling the blood of Muslims or inflicting various harms upon them is a personal duty that does not extend to others. It is, therefore, incumbent upon every individual Muslim, in addition to their larger entities such as states and movements, to seek this, as their support fulfills an absolute obligation that does not allow for choice or discretion. This duty must be sought in a permanent context rather than a temporary situation, as it is a mandatory issue rather than an emergency plan. Failure to meet this obligation results in prohibited abandonment, a grave sin, and a betrayal of God, His Messenger, and the believers.

Religious Duty of Supporting Resistance

Furthermore, accepting support for the resistance is a religious obligation, and collaborating to achieve it, maximize its benefits, and develop its advantages is an imperative duty. Seeking it and urging for it is also a duty in line with the example of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who was commanded by God to incite the believers to fight, as it is a command to do good that has been neglected, and a prohibition against a wrongdoing that has become widespread. The most serious indictment, however, is against those who fail the believers in the holy land or those who refrain from accepting the efforts of solidarity and coordinating with them or who fall short in seeking and obtaining it; they are commanded to pursue what is most beneficial for the nation and its blessed resistance.

Call for Solidarity

The duty of the wise and the dreamers among scholars and fighters is to call for an Arab and Islamic solidarity that encompasses all components of the nation, both the oppressor and the oppressed, the immoral and the righteous, the Sunni and the innovator, the oppressor and the oppressed, regardless of the hope for support from them. In addition to what has been mentioned, their duty is to strive to establish a general humanitarian alliance with those from whom the cessation of injustice, the cessation of violence, the protection of the blood, and the relief of the crisis can be hoped for, even if the one being called upon is a disbeliever or a polytheist.

Urgency of the Obligation Amidst Current Challenges

This obligation is emphasized in light of the spread of treachery, the prevalence of abandonment, the scarcity of supporters, and the weakness of backing, while on the enemy’s side, there is continuous military, political, security, intelligence, and media support, as well as unwavering assistance.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, we say: if we accept to express the concept of an alliance in light of the nature of this specific duty or its origin, it is not appropriate to express it while recognizing its essence and nature.

In a more lenient interpretation - not as a foundational principle - we add: if we concede to accept the criticism of the resistance through the existing "alliances," claiming that they are false, superficial, and pointless, then religion, nobility, and manhood demand that the critics establish genuine alliances, provide meaningful support, and achieve fruitful assistance.

May Allah have mercy on Al-Hutay'ah, who recognized nobility in ignorance and loyalty in Islam when he said:

Reduce your blame on them—may you have no fathers— Or fill the place they filled.

They are a people who, when they build, they perfect construction, and when they pledge, they fulfill, and when they commit, they strengthen.

If there is any advice for the noble resistance leaders in the context of this article, it is to invite them, with the counsel of their noble supporters among the shining scholars and the free thinkers, to further renew terminologies and provide lexical support, alongside other forms of advocacy that clarify their just discourse, their wise cry, and their sincere call.

The concept of an alliance does not accurately express the nature of the support for the Palestinian resistance, as this support is a specific duty, while the notion of alliance implies that the matter is a matter of personal discretion, which allows the ally to abandon it or the allied to disregard it. In reality, support, acceptance, and even seeking to enhance it are mandatory obligations with respect to their subject, which is to repel the aggressive intruder from the heart of the Islamic home.

Palestinian resistance 

support

concept

Islamic      

alliance