Thread by @DrJavadTHashmi

I was someone who recently said that we should not portray the Israel-Palestine conflict as a religious dispute, so allow me to clarify. Our religion calls to certain universal moral values, virtues, & principles: justice, peace, equity, the right to life, liberty, & religion. 1/

https://twitter.com/imransalha1/status/1393697237495173121

My dissertation work focuses on jihād in the Qur'an: the Qur'an calls to jihād (a word that means "[holy] struggle" -- NOT synonymous with "holy war") against (religious) persecution & being expelled from one's homeland--what we today call ethnic cleansing. 2/

Our Qur'anic & Islamic ethic stands with the oppressed against the oppressor. If you are channeling these universal moral values & virtues in the language of religion & scripture, then please go ahead. This is something I support & engage in myself. 3/

Even Gandhi used religious language & symbolism in his struggle against British colonialism. However, what I am opposed to -- & many others -- is when certain Muslims stress not the universal values & virtues our religion affirms, but rather, their EXCLUSIVIST beliefs... 4/

...& alienating rhetoric. Why would we amplify pro-Palestinian voices that chant, "Khaybar Khaybar Yā Yahūd ..."??? This would be equivalent to Christians today accusing Israelis of being "Christ-killers"--or of invoking the blood libel against them. 5/

Even in your own thread, you express some religiously exclusivist language. Not all Palestinians are Muslims. If it is only Islam that brings you "glory," then are Palestinian Christians & secular Muslims doomed to humiliation? 6/

To be fair, you rightfully say that this shouldn't be portrayed as a battle between Muslims and Jews. But, the problem is that many of the people using religiously inflected language are indeed understanding the conflict in that way... & this is positively harmful. 7/

Even some of the people quote tweeting your thread show how problematic it is to use such religiously exclusivist & alienating language. One person portrays it as a matter of "defensive Jihad and the ruling on kuffar occupying the Muslim lands..." 8/

...as if this is somehow a specifically Islamic concept to fight for the freedom of one's homeland. More ominously, another person takes it to an apocalyptic level, telling us that "the first battle is going to be in bilad al sham Golan heights the occupied." 9/

Others will even draw upon quetionable reports about Jews hiding behind trees & killing them. So, you can see why we would be reluctant to encourage such rhetoric... This allows the Zionist side, which is all based on a religious & scriptural claim--"God gave us this land"--10/

...to portray this as a purely religious dispute, a battle of rivaling religious ideas. Worse yet, the average Joe thinks that this dispute goes back thousands of years, explainable by historic Jewish-Muslim rivalry. Rather, it began just some hundred or so years ago... 11/

...with the idea of Zionism & their colonial project to expropriate the land of Palestine. This was followed by settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing, occupation, & apartheid. Yes, our religion stands against these things... but this is the universal aspect of our religion. 12/

Social activism relies upon convincing the masses of the justness of one's cause. Aside from sell-outs & ignoramuses, most Muslims are already sold on the justness of the Palestinian cause. So, the people needing to be convinced are, by & large, non-Muslim. 13/

Therefore, the language & rhetoric of such social activism ought to appeal to them, grounded in universal ideas of justness & fair play... & more concretely in international law & human rights. This is if one is interested in winning over hearts & minds. 14/

In many places, the Qur'an itself expresses the just cause of the early believers in universal language. I acknowledge your point that the religious element should not be ignored altogether, but quite frankly, some Muslims express themselves in a less than helpful way. 15/