MUSLIM SCHOLARS ON PERFIDY AND RUSES OF WAR

Abstract

This paper examines the distinction between lawful ruses of war (khud‘ah) and unlawful perfidy (ghadr) in Islamic law through a critical survey of major twentieth- and twenty-first-century Muslim scholars. It begins by highlighting the centrality of the principle of distinction between combatants and non-combatants and notes that contemporary asymmetric conflicts have blurred the boundary between legitimate military deception and prohibited treachery. Then, it mentions some fundamental Qur’anic injunctions, both from Makkan and Madinan periods, as well as some Prophetic traditions and, drawing upon them, the paper demonstrates that Islamic law places great emphasis on fulfilling promises, trusts and treaty obligations, and condemns all forms of perfidy. The article then analyzes the views of prominent scholars, including Abul A‘la Mawdudi, Muhammad Hamidullah, Wahbah al-Zuhayli, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, contributors to the Fiqh Encyclopedia of Kuwaut and Muhammad Mushtaq Ahmad. While these scholars generally agree that ruses are permissible and perfidy is prohibited, most do not provide a detailed framework for distinguishing between the two. The article concludes that a systematic exploration of the doctrines of ghadr and khud‘ah is needed to clarify the legality of deception, disguise and wartime tactics in Islamic law and to contribute to contemporary debates in the law of armed conflict.