I have been a student of Islam for five+ years because I wanted to know what motivates so called “Islamist” or “Radical” Muslims against Jews, Israel and the West. I now understand.
The short article below sets out the argument why “Land For Peace” is simply impossible under Islam, owing to Koran Sura 2, Verse 191 — and it is for this reason (and Western and Israeli diplomats and negotiators’ ignorance of it) that it has been, is, and will be impossible for Muslim Palestinians to make peace with Israel.
This Palestinian position has been confirmed by the top Palestinian religious figures, who have corroborated that ALL of Palestine is a holy, Islamic waqf (Arabic: an inalienable religious endowment under Islamic Shariah law), and therefore it is prohibited to give up “even a millimeter” of it.
The article has been vetted and approved for accuracy by a number of Islamic experts.
25 Years After Oslo: The Elephant in the Room
It is now more than 25 years since the Oslo Accords were signed in October 1993. Yet in the many published opinion pieces and reporting on this anniversary and the failure of the parties to agree on a final two-state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, nowhere is found any Israeli politician or journalist who has the slightest inkling of the massive effect of Islam in influencing and motivating the Palestinian supposed peacemakers.
Islam is indeed “The Elephant in the Room.”
The Koran, chapter 2, verse 191 states: “Drive them out from where they drove you out.”
Islamic scholars universally have interpreted this verse to mean that once land becomes Islamic, by conquest or otherwise, it stays Islamic forever and that Muslims must drive out any non-Muslim government that takes power in a land once ruled under Islamic law.
Caliph Umar conquered Jerusalem and Palestine in 637 AD, and the Land of Israel remained under Muslim rule (with the exception of the 188-year Crusader Period, 1099 – 1187 AD) until September 1923, when the British Mandate began. To Muslims, Palestine has been “Muslim land” since its conquest by Islam in 637 AD.
Moreover, this position has been corroborated and confirmed (in Arabic) by Mahmoud Al-Habbash, who is Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas’ advisor on Islam and also the Supreme Shari’ah Judge of the Palestinian Authority (“PA”):
“Mahmoud Al-Habbash emphasized that according to Islamic Shari’ah law, the entire land of Palestine is waqf (i.e., an inalienable religious endowment under Islamic law) and is blessed land, and that it is prohibited to sell, bestow ownership or facilitate the occupation of even a millimeter of it.”
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Oct. 22, 2014, translation by Palestinian Media Watch (“PMW”)]
See also the statement below from the Palestinian Authority, translated from the original Arabic:
“Anyone who thinks that the nation has sold its Palestine or its Jerusalem is just imagining things. Anyone who thinks that a day will come when the nation will sell one inch or millimeter of the blessed and sanctified land of Palestine is just imagining things. The entire nation says what [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas said: ‘The Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, or Christian who will relinquish one inch of Jerusalem has not been born and will never be born.’”
[Official PA TV, April 20, 2018, translation PMW]
The Palestinian Authority’s current Mufti, Muhammad Hussein, has corroborated this same position:
“Palestine, that includes within it Jerusalem, is waqf land [and] it is forbidden by Shari’ah law to relinquish it or ease the transfer of ownership of it to enemies, because it is part of the Islamic public property. Granting ownership over Islamic territory or part of it to enemies is invalid and constitutes treason.”
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 13, 2018, translation PMW]
Please note that the Palestinian Authority reflects the same view set out in the Hamas Charter (Article Eleven):
“The Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas] believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.”
For these reasons, the exchange of Muslim “Land for Peace” with Israel simply is impossible under Islam. Has anyone in Israel ever noticed and considered this point — or are we so ignorant of Islam that it has never been properly considered and evaluated?
The Koran, chapter 2, verse 191 was once mentioned to Shimon Peres in 2015. He replied, “No. You are wrong. We made peace with Egypt. We made peace with Jordan.”
Shimon Peres was right — and wrong.
Prior to signing the Israel/Egypt Peace Treaty of March, 1979, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat held out for — and ultimately received — his stated demand to get back “every square inch” of the Sinai. This occurred notwithstanding Israel’s initial negotiating position for a continuing Israel monitoring presence at Sharm el Sheikh and the western mountains of Sinai and retention of both the Israel-developed Taba and Yamit tourist communities in the Sinai near Eilat.
After the Israel / Egypt peace treaty was signed, Sadat could turn to the Egyptian people and rightfully claim that he had recovered “every square inch” of Egyptian-administered Muslim land.
The Jordanian case is even more interesting and illuminating.
In a two-step exercise starting in June 1988, King Hussein first renounced all Jordanian claims to Judea and Samaria, the wishfully named “West Bank” of Jordan. Six years later, in October 1994, Israel and Jordan signed a peace treaty.
However, there had been a serious problem: Israel occupied three areas of Jordanian land since June 1967: The tiny “Peace Island” in the middle of the Jordan River, and two agricultural fields belonging to Israeli settlements in the Arava, south of the Dead Sea.
In Annex 1A and 1B of the Peace Treaty, this matter was resolved: Israel fully recognized Jordanian sovereignty over all this land. Jordan agreed that Israel could continue to “use” the lands in the same manner as previously for a rolling 25-year period unless terminated by Jordan following a one-year notice (which Jordan gave in late October 2018).
After the signing of the peace treaty, King Hussein could turn to the Jordanian people and rightfully claim that he had recovered every square centimeter of Jordanian-administered Muslim land.
As for the land of Israel/Palestine itself located “from the River to the Sea,” the Arab League and Jordan left this to Palestinian President Yassir Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization as the sole entity to negotiate and resolve with Israel.
What did Yassir Arafat and his successor, Mahmoud Abbas, do?
At the Camp David negotiations in July 2000 between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Yassir Arafat, following Israel’s offer to give up 97% of Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians, Arafat stunned Barak and President Bill Clinton by never making a counteroffer. Why? Because he could not do so: the Koran (chap. 2, verse 191) did not permit it. Allah says that Muslim land can never be given to the kufaar (infidels) under penalty of death. Palestinian recognition of Israeli sovereignty over any part of Palestinian land was impossible, Muslim Palestinians never would have accepted it and Arafat would have been murdered by his own people.
After the Camp David negotiations failed, Yassir Arafat was asked by an Israeli Muslim Arab journalist in Arabic why he walked away from the negotiations. “Because the Israelis would not give us 100%!” he replied. The Koran mandated that Arafat recover all of Palestine starting with the so-called “West Bank.” He was not free to do otherwise.
It was the same story seven years later in the negotiations between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas held at the Annapolis Conference in November 2007: Ehud Olmert made very generous offers to the Palestinians, delivering 97% of Judea and Samaria to them, “slicing and dicing” Jerusalem horizontally and vertically, creating a land bridge between Gaza and Judea and Samaria and even allowing some Palestinian refugees back into Israel.
However, how did Abbas respond? He also made no counteroffer. Why? Because he could not do so (Koran, chap. 2, verse 191). The Koran prohibited recognizing Israeli sovereignty over any part of Muslim Palestinian land, Muslim Palestinians would never have accepted it, and Abbas also would have been murdered by the Palestinians.
According to the Koran, the Palestinians are commanded to reclaim ALL Palestinian Muslim land “from the River to the Sea,” a holy waqf under Shariah law. The concept of Israeli-administered Muslim land (i.e. recognizing the sovereignty of the State of Israel over any part of Palestine) is impossible in Islam.
Have you ever noticed how Palestinian claims are always rooted in land-based terms? They speak of the “occupation” of their land, being “driven out” of Palestine by the Israelis in 1948, and recovering all their land “from the River to the Sea.” The Palestinian Authority’s Law No. 1 criminalizes Palestinian sales of land to Jews under penalty of death. Mohamed on his deathbed gave an order to “expel the Jews and the Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and not leave any but Muslims there.” The Hamas riots at the Gaza / Israel border are in commemoration of “Land Day.” Does any of this ring a bell?
In the Oslo Accords, the Palestinians pledged to recognize the State of Israel behind the “Green Line” and to amend the Palestinian Covenant accordingly. They never did. They cannot and will not do so without contravening Allah’s command in the Koran, chap. 2, verse 191.
As you think of the thousands of hours of negotiations by Israel, the USA and other international negotiators in trying to reach a final accord with the Palestinians on a “two state solution” since Oslo, one is reminded of the “mirror principle.”
Israeli, US and other politicians and negotiators keep thinking that they are negotiating with “the man in the mirror,” i.e., someone who thinks as they do in a Western, secular way, without regard to prevailing religious factors.
Some commentators state that the leadership of the Palestinians, starting with Yassir Arafat, is secular. To the extent that this may be true, it does not matter. The Palestinian people certainly are not secular. A survey undertaken by the Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre published on August 6, 2018 asked Palestinians in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) and Gaza: “In general, is religion an important part of your life? The response was 96.8% “yes” in the West Bank and 99.2% “yes” in Gaza.
Israeli and American negotiators are not negotiating with “the man in the mirror” like themselves, but with religious Muslim believing Palestinians. A little more hard knowledge about Islam, which is “the Elephant in the Room,” would help in understanding the Palestinians as driven by their own seriously held religious and cultural imperatives, which are completely the opposite of those of the Israelis and the Americans.
hari singh says
This is the underlying problem of peace between india and Pakistan as well.The Koran, chapter 2, verse 191 states: “Drive them out from where they drove you out.” is the source of the conflict.
The underlying military philsophy of the Pakstan Military Academy at Abbotabad is Jihad and recovery of all lands in India formerly occupied by Islam, until the Marratis, Sikhs and British took control from them. Scholars say that in the 1000 year occupation of India between 50 and 100 million people were killed, not to speak of those enslaved, abducted or raped.
elee says
First the lands they previously conquered, then the lands they haven’t conquered yet. Koran 33:28. And then? See Koran 47:10-12. Then again nothing prohibits killing kafirs before the conquest is accomplished.
Demsci says
So true. But (almost) never Muslims admit this to Westerners, including Israeli’s. And their de facto allies the leftists almost never believe it,
Never see this very unreasonable sheer obstinacy of the Palestinians and fellow Muslims in the OIC, for instance Erdogan or the ayatollahs. Who have the same prejudice but pretend they oppose Israel due to “oppression”.
To a really impartial human the Muslims are so egoistic, unreasonable; them having already 56 Islamic nations, but still they will not allow the Jews to have their only, tiny, state.
So they keep the cold war and their desperate situation and their eternal whining going until judgment day. Which is still not forthcoming after 1400 years. How long will they wait?
It is like a person drowning in a river because of a large purse with gold, but refusing to let go of it.
Rotem N. says
What the hell is “Palestinian”? 🙁
Arabs are no “Palestinians”! They are TRIBES and CLANS from many different countries, who maintain a tribal culture and don’t get involved or married one people with the others.
In fact the false term “Palestinians” had been referring to JEWS who were live in the region which the BRITISH called “Palestine” (San Remo convention 1920) that was intended to establish a JEWISH state.
“Surya Palestina” was a false name that Caesar Hadrianus used to erase any memory of the Judean, after the great revolt in 135 a.d. Jerusalem was renamed “Ilya Capitolina”. The Term “Palestina” was soon to be forgotten (along with the Phlistin invaders whom it was referring to), though it was mentioned very few times during the coming centuries, it wasn’t in use and had/has nothing to do with ARABS!
Therefore, if you say “Palestinians” and refer to Arabs or right this silly name without quotation marks – you’re a liar!
elee says
Muslims are immune to irony. The Palestinians were the only non-Semitic polytheists to ever call the Levant “home.” The people who now claim to assert the claims of this long-assimilated tribe are Muslim Arabs, whose pre-Muslim forbears first show up in history as occasional peripheral players in the time of the Two Kingdoms. Islam is no lover of objective facts; the eternal truth lives in their scriptures, so objective facts, if they contradict the scriptures, must be a snare of the devil. No multiculturalism once Islam takes over!
RonaldB says
It’s an extremely valuable article, in that it gives an unparalleled view into the psychological profile of the opponent. As such, it dictates strategy.
1) Dump the two-state solution. To recognize Palestine as a state, rather than a protectorate, will give them the right to obtain offensive weapons and to gain even more anonymity and influence in global organizations such as the UN. Keep them under heel. As someone said, some problems cannot be solved; only managed.
2) Consider re-establishing sovereignty over Gaza if things become too bad. The Gaza government either cannot or will not, establish full control over the so-called independent radical groups that are always initiating the firing of rockets and infiltrating tunnels. Once Israel administers Gaza and solidifies its control, the Gazas can actually ship in civilian and building items and start to lead the productive lives they enjoyed before Israel ceded them independence. If the article is correct, and it corroborates everything I’ve heard about Islam, such actions will not be any more provocative, in the long run, to Muslims than the mere presence of Israel itself is.
3) Perhaps downgrade the representation of Muslims in the Israeli parliament. Again, this would spark outrage in Muslim countries and their dupes, but would strengthen the national identity of Israel. For a model, I believe they could use Iran, which treats its Jewish community very well indeed, and gives them a voice in the parliament to represent their interests, but does not give them a voice in Iranian policy outside of how it affects its Jewish citizens.,
By the way, there is not only an elephant, but a herd of elephants in the room. Islam has a history of conquest in Europe, including all of Spain and much of France. This means that every Muslim in Spain or France is a very likely collaborator in a movement to turn the country Muslim. The appropriate steps are to expel Muslim non-citizens and again, limit the political influence of Muslims so as to be limited to representing their own interests.
FYI says
Elephant in the room?
How about A TALKING INFANT In the koran?
I wonder what passage Abbas was reading in his koran?
We can speculate..
“Then she{Maryam, the musim Mary:definitely NOT the Jewish Mary}she pointed to him{the baby in a crib}
They said:How can we talk to one who is the cradle, a little child”
koran 19:29
who goes to visit a newborn infant and asks the mother if they could speak to the baby???
“He spake:Lo! I am the slave of allah.he hath given me the scripture{Gospel} and appointed me a prophet”
koran 19:30
Of course “He spake”:this is allah’s book of fantasy,the koran!Why wouldn’t an infant speak exactly like an adult,know what a prophet was and was familiar with scripture enough to tell everybody he has it as it was given to him by allah..
IN A CRIB.
“Lo!I am the slave of allah”said Issa the muslim Jesus…..in a crib….as an infant…speaking Arabic.
.
This alleged statement from Issa the muslim Jesus is always used by the Dawa folk to deceive Christians into thinking Jesus is accepted in islam.
Remember,if you ever encounter this at a Dawa booth,remember where this statement comes from:
A TALKING INFANT IN A CRIB WHO CAN SPEAK LIKE AN ADULT.
That’s issa the muslim Jesus who was certainly NOT Jewish as allah hates the Jews.
“Wow!A talking infant..Who knew a newborn baby could speak?I knew about allah’s Talking Ants but this is preposterous* like “Palestine” as a 2 state solution is nuts”Abbas surely must have thought
*” Oh Ants!Enter your dwellings lest Solomon and his armies crush you unperceiving”,said the Chief Ant in Arabic, as everybody knows Ants can speak in Arabic{koran 27 v 18}
Giacomo Latta says
Abbas must be reading the version of the koran that has pictures. Said book only contains 114 piddly chapters, some only with 6 verses.
Ren says
Anybody that is educated on islam knows islam will only let non-muslims at peace until all of them are submitted to islam. Fighting islam is therefore mandatory as peace is possible only if islam is eradicated.
jayell says
I’m finding it increasingly ludicrious that well-meaning, educated people like Robert L. Meyer waste their time searching seriously and diligently through islamic texts as though islam was really a genuine religion, when it was clearly never any more than a cynically plagiarised sham facade to validate the criminal antics of a thoroughly dishonest, megalomaniac psychopathic Middle Eastern warlord from the Dark Ages. If any thinking person had even a shred of respect for it, the latest outrageous debacle in Brunei must have blown its credibility clean out of the water. The civilised world wouldn’t tolerate the existence of a Nazi party; why is islam tolerated?
Dov Berrol says
I am hoping that all of Robert’s books – especially his next work – will be translated into Hebrew for the Israeli public and government leaders and the IDF. It is critical that every Israeli and every Zionist understand what Islam teaches about Jews and about relinquishing land that was once controlled by Muslims.
Demsci says
If the Israeli’s finally believe that the vast majority of Muslim Palestinians and Israeli Arabs want “all or nothing” then: ANNEXation of parts of Judea and Samaria come into mind.
But it would be a big step too far and also human rights violation if Israel would deport any Palestinian.
No, with annexation come the inhabitants into Israel as full citizens. And that is why Israel can only annex a minimum of Judea and Samaria. I would prefer it annexed the southern part; Judea, right up to Jerusalem and the Jordan.
This is in my case because I consider the Gaza Strip the land of the ancient Philistines. And not of Israel. I also consider that the 10 tribes of Israel lived in the north but officially they were deported and dispersed in 722 BC, by the Assyrians.
But the names Jews and Judea, the name of southern Israel before Palestine (so named by Hadrian # AD 135), refer “explicitly” to the descendants of the tribes of Juda and Benjamin, who after Solomon kept Jerusalem and had this tiny state Juda.
Since officially all Jews “descend from the kingdom Juda” I think it best to annex the territory of ancient Juda. Of course I know that Israeli’s now are much more diverse, but I feel the connection Juda-Judea-state of Israel the most logical and genuine.
The hills of Judea and some hills in Samaria should be annexed, since it is imperative that the state of Israel has defensible borders. But the great population centers of the Palestinians should be cast off, to Jordan if possible. Israel can take in maybe a million Palestinians as full citizens but not all inhabitants of Judea and Samaria, only the ones who live in historically fitting and absolutely strategic necessary areas.
As the situation is now, the so-called occupation is like a huge block on Israels legs, endlessly and enormously used against Israel by Muslims but also by so many leftists and opportunists in the world.
And, it sounds like science fiction, but Israel should somehow endeavour that large numbers of Palestinians apostasize, in a peaceful way of course.
UNCLE VLADDI says
This is why the very existence of Eretz Yisroel enrages them – despite the Qur’an’s promises, it shows up Muhammad’s “Allah” to be an impotent idol after all – and one incapable of enforcing its own rulings.
Giacomo Latta says
”All of Palestine is a holy waqf”
It’s a whole lot simple than that. According to the koran all land is Muslim. Where it is not controlled by Muslims it is merely in a non-restored state. Jihad (wars, if you prefer) are the process of Muslim land ”restoration.”
Robert Denny says
Has White House officials not seen this article?
Linda Rivera says
Under no circumstances can Israel offer ANY of their Holy Land to Muslims.
Israel was given by God as an Everlasting Possession to Jews thousands of years before the Military-Political Conquest Cult of Islam was invented.
Who are these arrogant humans to oppose the Most High God, our Glorious, Majestic Creator?
Anyone who seeks to give away, take or steal any of God’s Holy Land, will face the Wrath of an ANGRY God on Judgment Day.