CC BY
22
6 The process of social research / / Translated from the German by A. Shestakov and I. Marasanova. - Moscow: Progress, 1975. Number of pages 365. P 15.
IGOR DOBAYEV. JIHAD: ESSENCE, IDEOLOGY, POLITICAL PRACTICE* // The article was written for the bulletin "Russia and the Moslem World."
DOI: 10.31249/rmw/2019.03.01
Keywords: jihad, Islam, Islamism, Koran, radicalism, takfir.
Igor Dobayev,
DSc(Philosophy), Professor, Expert of Russian Academy of Sciences, Director of Center of Regional Studies, Institute of Sociology and Religion, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don
Abstract. The article is concerned with emergence and evolutionary development of the term "holy war" (jihad) in Islam. There is an intrinsic interpretation of this phenomenon in early Islam and also evolutionary changes in its understanding over the next centuries. There are offered some typologies of jihad. There are considered parameters of its understanding by representatives of orthodox Islam, and then ideologists of radical Islam (Islamism). It is proved that theorists of radical Islamism peculiar define traditional sources of Islam, perceiving Quranic verses at face value, excessively expanding a circle of so-called "enemies of Islam," applying to them takfir. Ideologists of radical Takfirism demand implementation of their unreasonable claims practically, implementation against "enemies" of offensive jihad.
* Article is executed within an internal grant of SFU № BHrp-07/2017-22 "Transconflict regions as a phenomenon of the geopolitical competition: social risks and resources of adaptation to humanitarian calls."
In this regard adherents of radical Islamism are quite often and fairly called takfirists-jihadi.
According to studies of Muslim theorists concerning some aspects of the theory of jihad, the whole world is divided into "the field of Islam" (Dar al-Islam) and "the area of war" (Dar al-Harb). The countries which are under the reign of Muslims refer to the first group, the second - "unorthodox" governors. "The field of Islam" theoretically always has to be in a state of open-ended war with "Dar al-Harb". In exceptional circumstances Islam allows a standstill truce for up to ten years. Except these categories of the countries some faqihs emphasize one more category of lands - "the area of the world" (Dar al-Sulh). These are such lands which do not belong to Muslims and are not governed by them, but their governors consider themselves vassals of Muslim states and render tribute for it.
During an initial period of Islam formation "jihad" first of all was thought of as fight in defense and for distribution of Islam as exerting intensive efforts on the way of Allah that meant cosmopolitan diffusion of faith in Allah, at the same time participation in "jihad" was considered as a direct way to paradise.
It should be noted, nevertheless, that even views of the Prophet Mohammed on the essence of jihad passed over notable time evolution: during the Meccan period which passed under the slogan "there is no coercion in religion" it was forbidden to enter confrontation with "kaafirs," and it was offered to incline them to proven faith with "wisdom and good exhorting." Heathen should have been inclined to proven faith by persuasion. However already during the Medina period when there were attacks on Muslims on behalf of the Meccan kaafirs, the war was authorized: it was originally authorized to wage defensive-minded war with enemies of Islam, then to charge at recreants, but so that military operations did not fall on sacred months, and finally - to attack them at any time and everywhere.
In other words, during the Meccan revelations "jihad" was considered rather as an effort at salvation, than fight for proselyting. Moreover, during that period of time there were no concurrent views concerning obligatory participation in "jihad" for members of Muslim community. In the Medina suras of the Koran war for faith was considered to be the responsibility of adherents of Islam as sacred, it is touted as accomplishment of divine mission supported by the authority of Allah. Confirmation of these facts are in ayats 76-78, 86.
It is obvious that religious preachers seeking to use Islam for political expediency make reference to those ayats of the Koran in which it is said that implementation of only religious sacral instructions is not enough to get to paradise. And whoever believes in Allah, performs Namaz, pays expiatory almsgiving, keeps the fast during Ramazan, carries out the Hajj, but refrains from war with pagans, is afraid of armed battle, is considered as the person, choosing rather mortal life over afterlife paradise. And such behavior is unworthy of a Muslim. Therefore, the Koran gives strong means of influence on consciousness of faithful. Those Muslims who do not want to take to fighting over faith, the Koran and Sunna threaten with the same painful punishments as pagans and infidels of Islam. Those who elude the fight the Scriptures are loomed up to be turned into nonMuslims (ayat 39).
If the first Muslims declared jihad against the Arab kaafirs, and then against infidels of Islam and "hypocrites," then after Mohammed's death similar wars for faith were waged against neighboring countries and nations and in unique historical conditions gained paramount importance in the world of Islam as performance of a sacred "holy" mission by Muslims.
Further over the course of elaboration on the concept of jihad the typology of this phenomenon in terms of object of armed attack began to include six versions: jihad against enemies of Allah (i.e. those who threaten existence of Islamic Ummah, those who pursue Muslims and also against heathen); jihad
against those who attempt inviolability of borders "Dar-al-Islam," jihad against recreants ("Munafiqun"); jihad against an oppressor ("al Bagi"); jihad against robbers; jihad against monotheists - non- Muslims refusing to pay "jizya."
However, until now owing to a certain disunity of the Islamic movement on various directions, ideological tendencies and comments (madhhab) of generally excepted classic doctrine of "jihad" it is not created, that just does not exist as there is no common orthodoxy for all Muslims. Everything is explained by the fact that Islam as an ideological system was historically formed and continues to function in fight of ideas and opinions, is in a state of search of a further way of development. In every country there are different groups which offer their way and are in favor of solution of evolving problems on the basis of the concepts offered by them. However, with reasonable certainty it is arguable that there is no single orthodoxy for all Islamic countries, all Muslims, as well as single Islamic way, nevertheless, it does not exist, and at the center of public attention there are various, quite often contradicting each other models. Told completely and utterly refers to the Islamic concept of "jihad": in Islam there is no such instance which could put the end to a dispute as to whether how it is necessary to treat and conduct holy war for faith.
Throughout all history of Islam, the concept of "jihad" exercised contradictory functions, was at the heart of domestic and foreign policy of various subjects of political process. The concept of "jihad" has various and often contradicting each other sense: it is fight for harvesting, fight against illiteracy, fight of new with old, "jihad" was considered and as class conflict.
The term "jihad" in Muslim "orthodoxy" (universally recognized Muslim "orthodoxy" really does not exist - I. D.) is understood as fight for faith which is conducted in the following main forms: "jihad of heart" - fight against own obliquities; "jihad of language" - "command of worthy approval and prohibition of worthy censure"; "jihad of a hand" - acceptance of
the appropriate punitive measures concerning criminals and violators of rules of morality; "jihad of a sword" - armed struggle with pagans, fallen in which it is prepared unending bless in paradise.
According to the traditional point of view, "jihad with him / herself" is "big jihad," more difficult, than "small jihad" (the armed jihad). Besides, according to ideologists of moderate Islamism, "internal jihad," especially self-education, there is a required condition through which it is necessary to pass for achievement of "the highest degree" of religious consciousness.
However "in the European public conscience jihad ingrained first of all as "jihad of a sword" whereas, according to the Koran and Sunnah, this concept is multiple-valued." As confirmation of all that was said in particular that in orthodox Islam the institute of "jihad" does not number among five "pillars" of faith ("shahadah" - confession of faith; "salat" - a prayer; "sawm" - a fast; "zakat" - a tax in favor of the poor; "al-hajj" - a pilgrimage).
In various ideological branches of Islam (traditionalism, modernism, fundamentalism) a concept jihad is also understood differently.
In traditional Islam jihad is understood more as an effort over him-herself, but not violence against others, but "small jihad" ("jihad in the form of a sword") - as a defensive war directed against oppression of Muslims by neo-traditionalists (modern traditionalists - I. D.) concerning one of the main Islamic edicts - conducting jihad it is preached the principle: "There is no coercion in religion." In this regard, though conducting "holy war" (jihad) is recognized as the Muslim's duty, proceeding from ideas that the mankind is divided into religious and unjust Muslims - unorthodox who are subject to conversion in any ways and sometimes even violent, nevertheless, jihad in traditional Islam, unlike fundamentalism, is perceived as an effort over him-herself, but not violence against others, but "small jihad" ("jihad in the form of a sword") - as a defensive war directed against
oppression of Muslims. Though in conditions of serious upheavals, positions of traditionalists concerning jihad can rally with views of fundamentalists.
The modern Turkish traditionalist Haruna Yaha understands jihad as "true" sees "any kind of ideologic fight against antireligious, atheistic, unholy teachings." Along with the above mentioned interpretations of jihad he also understands this term as a real war which "according to commands of the Koran can be only defensive and be conducted with adherence to moral principles of Islam. Using of the concept "jihad" in relation to any forms of violence directed against innocent people that is for the description of terror, is the greatest injustice and perversion of the truth."
In contrast with traditionalists and especially fundamentalists, reformers (modernists) claim that Islam is the religion of universal humanity (insaniya) preaching universal brotherhood. Insaniya is opposed to nationalism by modernists as the ideology dividing mankind. Proceeding from such paradigm, reformers insist that religious tolerance is a fundamental principle of Islam. Hence, for example, "jihad" is interpreted or as exclusively defensive war, or as "fight" for economic prosperity, or as fight for spiritual renewal. So, for example, the modern Muslim reformer Fazlur Rahman even insists on the necessity of "intellectual jihad": "Holy war" of this type has to be directed to change rules of the past according to new circumstances (assuming that these changes do not break general traditional principles and values) and at the same time to change modern situation where it is required to bring it balance accord with these general principles and values."
Then, fundamentalists consider jihad, first of all, as armed struggle. This circumstance, we think, is explained by those purposes and objectives which are set itself by fundamentalism as an ideological tendency. If traditionalists support saving of that version of Islam which developed in the certain territory today, and modernists defend an evolutionary way of its development, then fundamentalist "revolutionaries" demand
return to the past, in so-called "Golden Age" (7th century) of Islam. It stands to reason that, the voluntary valuable and worldwide outcome of modern people in earlier Middle Ages is hardly possible therefore it is not dismissed use of violence in some form by moderate fundamentalists and their radical adherents.
Jihad is an indispensable attribute practically of all modern ideological doctrines of Islamic radicals (Islamists). As the authoritative Israeli researcher of radical Islam E. Sivan emphasizes, "the theory of jihad in interpretation of Islamic radicals is premised on the idea that the conflict is and will be the rule, at least, until the Messiah (Mahdi) does not come to the end of the world. Therefore Islamists consider that only holy war in its power perception can be the unique answer of the Muslim world to the present regimes in the countries of Islam distribution where western ideals dominate. Only after overthrow of these regimes and restoration of unity of all Muslims as it was during the gold era of Caliphates, peaceful relationship can be established in Ummah."
Islamic radicals actually consider "jihad" the sixth "pillar" of faith. Such understanding of "jihad," as well as broad interpretation of the term "takfir" (accusation of distrust) differs Islamists from orthodox Muslims.
At the same time moderate Islamists put emphasis on the defensive nature of jihad, and ultra-radicals - exclusively on offensive aspect of "holy war."
"In Sharia language, - the most authoritative theorist and practician in the Islamic world of a moderate and radical wing Pakistani al-Maududi writes, - the word "jihad" is used for war which is waged for the sake of Allah against those who are Islam's enemies.... if the Islamic State takes fire from nonMuslims, in that case everyone has to come down on the side of jihad. In case of overextension for resistance, the neighboring Muslim states have to help their religious duty consists in it. If they fail, then Muslims of the whole world have to fight against
common enemy. Jihad is the same duty of a Muslim, as well as a daily prayer and a fast. Those who back out it, is a sinner." However, the same author always consistently opposed creation of the Islamic State by force. In one of his lectures, addressing youth audience, for achievement of the tasks which faces Islamic society, he did not recommend to carry out activities in the form of secret groups and urged to exclude use of violence and weapon to change the established order. Moreover, the violent method is characterized as hasty and unrealistic though he, it would seem, also means achievement of an objective in the shortest route. According to him, the most acceptable decision for the Muslim community and everyone who is engaged in distribution of Islamic appeal it is holding a peaceful and right revolution as its ultimate goal by means of open and broadest promotion turned to minds and hearts of people.
"Jihad in Islam, the Egyptian Islamic theorist of the moderate direction al-Ashmavi writes, is completely defined by Hadith of Prophet who addressed believers after fight close to Badra where they won: "We returned from Small jihad - to Great jihad." And war against enemies in which life and property is exposed to the risk, it is smaller, small jihad from the point of view of correct (orthodox - I. D.) Islam. As for the real Great jihad, this resistance of soul to tests, overriding of the damnable temperamental attribute and behavior by a person, contributing to that the temper [human] towered, schooling of own spirit to generosity."
This Hadith is at all ignored by ultra-radicals. They not only do not accept division of jihad into "big" and "small," but also categorically deny its defensive character. The most authoritative theorist of this wing of radicals Egyptian Seyyid Kutub categorically didn't favor the defensive nature of jihad: "... If we inevitably have to call the movement of Jihad in Islam a defensive movement, then we have to change a sense of the word "defense" and understand it as "protection of a person" . Islam, heading for the world, does not mean that cheap world which
aim comes down only to securing the territory in which the population which conceived Islamic teaching lives. Islam wishes such world in the shadows of which all religion would completely belong to Allah, so that people, all people of this world would worship only Allah ...".
S. Kutub's conception divided society into two types: Islamic society in which only Allah's power is admitted and Sharia functions, and society of jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic heathenry) in which people create laws and break the main principle of monotheism - autocracy of Allah (hakimiyya). Relying on such conclusion, most modern societies is pagan, including those which consider themselves Islamic, but do not live according to Sharia. Denial of hakimiyya, in fact, means apostasy propelling into unbelief. Islam and jahiliyyah are absolutely incompatible systems between which any peaceful co-existence or gradual transformation of jahiliyyah in Islam is impossible. It is possible to restore Allah's power on the earth only after jahiliyyah is destroyed by force, and participation in this fight is a duty of each Muslim.
S. Kutub offered the following strategy for the Islamic movement.
First, as in jahiliyyah society in general there are no visions of Islam, it is useless to demand introduction of Sharia-based ruling or to try to commit coup d'état for that purpose. It is necessary to begin with an explanation of the principles of Islam, and especially - the ideas of autocracy of Allah.
Secondly, those who accepted this appeal as though accepted Islam again and, therefore, have to behave according to the principles of "true" Muslims. For this purpose, such believers need to leave jahiliyyah society, but not literally, and in the way of the "spiritual gap" which does not exclude contacts in vital and everyday issues.
Thirdly, after the community of "true Muslims" will reach necessary spiritual and moral level, it is necessary to start creation of the Islamic organization - the particular vanguard
aimed at overthrowing jahiliyyah and establishing Allah's power on the earth.
Fourthly, on initial stage of such activity it is necessary to avoid direct collision with the regime as it can lead to death -blow for even weak Islamic movement.
Fifthly, when the Islamic movement reaches required force and power, it is necessary to begin jihad in its power, offensive understanding, without any concessions and indulgence.
Ideas of Seyyid Kutub were developed by Muhammad abd-al-Salam Faraj who in the late 1970s of the 20th century founded the ultraradical group "Al-Jihad" in Egypt, which especially actively operated in the last quarter of the last century and concerning murder of the president Anwar Sadat.
The novelty of views of A. Faraj unlike Hassan al-Banna and Seyyid Kutub's concepts consisted in utter Salafi character. He proved each statement by ayats of the Koran and dictas of the prophet Mohammed and also creative legacy of such Ulemas of the past as Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Kasir and Ibn al-Jawzi. Until the end of the 1980s the book of A.Faraj "Al-Fareeda of al-Gaiba" was almost the main ideological source of Al-Jihad.
A. Faraj as the main ideologist of the organization, analyzed all the experience of radical Islamism of the 60-70s, evidenced in the works of Seyyid Kutub, S alih Sariyya, Shukri Mustafa formulated classic basic principles of radical Islamism of Sunni sense. A. Faraj's ideas serve as the ideological platform of activity of most modern radical groups.
So, he considered that any Muslim ignoring Sharia - is "pagan, it is necessary to make war with him until he returns to Court of Allah and his envoy and will stop judging neither in big, nor in small other court".
Speaking about modern governors of Egypt, A. Faraj claims that they "have nothing from Islam, except Muslim names", and reckons them among secession (murtaddyn). A secessionist, he notes, is worse, than "unfaithful by birth" (i.e. the Christian, the Jew and so on) as they can not to know Islam, and a secessionist
L
consciously abjures a religion, knowing about its virtues. In reference to the opinion of founders-eponyms of Sunni madhhab, A. Faraj writes that Christians and Jews "unfaithful by birth" who are the patronized community cannot be killed. It is permitted to execute a secessionist, "he has no right to settle property on someone, his marriage loses legitimacy as he rejected basis of Islam, he is worse than a kaafir."
Having accused the Egyptian regime of infidelity, A. Faraj justified validity of the armed jihad with authorities from the religious point of view. In his work "The forgotten debt" he writes: "Today, despite all importance of jihad on which the future of Islam depends some Ulemas neglect this duty, knowing that it is the only way to ennoble Islam again... Without any doubts, today idolatry on the earth can be overthrown only by sword force."
According to A. Faraj while Ummah is under the reign of the incorrect regime, implementation of only five pillars of Islam becomes insufficient. In these conditions jihad as armed struggle automatically becomes the sixth pillar of Islam. Besides, jihad in A. Faraj's conception gets the offensive character. According to his opinion, "war in Islam is waged for the confirmation of a word of Allah on the earth both as the defensive, and offensive way . Islam extended by a sword, however infidel imams conceal it . Muslims are under the obligation to unsheathe their swords and to direct them to the regimes which cover the truth."
The general strategy of jihad according to A. Faraj is defined by ideas of "the near enemy" (Muslims who do not share ideological principles and actions of radicals), "the distant enemy" (non-Muslim opponents of radicals, first of all, representatives of the Western Christian civilization) and about jihad as an individual duty for each Muslim. According to A. Faraj, jihad becomes obligatory in three cases:
• If two armies met, then a Muslim mustn't leave his files;
• If pagans attacked the Muslim state;
• If the imam called his community for jihad.
In addition, A. Faraj mentions one more condition - the fourth. Relying on it if the governor of the Muslim state rejected the reign according to Sharia, then such governor must be overthrown, and jihad becomes an individual duty. For its maintaining special permission of Ulemas is not even necessary, jihad becomes the same individual duty as a fast and a prayer.
However, at the turn of 80-90s of the 20th century the new leader of Al-Jihad Abbud az-Zumr fulfilled the ideological doctrine of organization with new conceptions. Apart from him, Tarik az-Zumr was one more productive author of the movement. By the end of the 90s the new ideas were suggested by one of the leaders of foreign authorities of "Al-Jihad" Ayman al-Zawahiri who is nowadays considered as the main ideologist of Al-Qaeda and the "the World Front of Jihad" created by Osama bin Laden.
Their features of concept's representation of jihad almost do not differ from A. Faraj's ideas. So, according to Abbud az-Zumr, jihad is also fard al-ayn- an individual duty of each Muslim who has to participate in it to the best of his ability. Other theorist of Islamism Tarik az-Zumr considers that the highest demonstration of all forms of jihad is an armed struggle. He picks up sharply those leaders from among Islamic radicals who limit themselves to ideological fight. Moreover, jihad in that case has offensive character, and it is optionally that pagans were first who initiated attack, "it is enough that they only have some features of those people with who it is necessary to conduct war."
Ideologists of the organization back up their conclusions with religious arguments, referring to a number of authoritative Ulemas of the Muslim past among whom there are Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Kasir, Al-Qurtubi, An-Nawawi, etc. As a result, it is concluded that jihad becomes a duty of each Muslim in the following cases:
• When the head of the state is kaffir, so it is necessary to fight for his overthrow
• Jihad is conducted with the community backing out of Shariah injunctions. They are security guards, police and prosecutor's office members;
• Jihad is necessary for establishment of power of the Muslim Caliph. Relying on Ibn-Taymiyyah's opinion, Tarik az-Zumr supposes that force is necessary for implementation of such Sharia injunctions as "command of good and prohibition of impious, establishment of justice, Hajj, Friday prayer, help dejected, enforcement of punishments."
It is worth noting here that Al-Jihad rejects tactics of gradual "Islamization from below." Such strategy is based on society's change by means of exercising of Islamic appeal. However, Al-Jihad considers that it is difficult to change society until it is under the reign of the regime of pagans, capable to apply and use various methods preventing peaceful Islamization. According to ideologists of organization, the strategy of "Islamization from below" shows its restraint in activity of Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi Jamaats. The first ones become isolated by frameworks of the intellectuals and pull away from masses, the second ones almost lost grip of reality. Moreover, any participation in parliamentary activity is unacceptable for Al-Jihad: it would mean the recognition that Allah is not a source of laws, and his creation.
At the same time, in the late 1990s the outstanding theorist and the leader of Al-Jihad Ayman al-Zawahiri put forward the idea of global jihad, first of all, with "the distant enemy" -alliance of global kufr. He means preeminently, the countries of the West, first the USA and Israel; now Russia was included in this list which, according to Islamists, adhered to this union. A. al-Zawahiri writes, "it is not necessary to consider that fight for creation of the Islamic State is a regional war. The alliance of crusaders and Zionists headed by the USA will not allow Muslim forces to come to power in any Muslim country. We need to prepare that this fight will not take place within one region, it will be conducted both against the internal enemy - recreants,
and against external one - alliance of crusaders and Zionists." According to him, jihad with "the distant enemy" cannot be postponed as the alliance of Jews and crusaders does not give either time, or chances to produce defeat to "the internal enemy." Therefore A. al-Zawahiri suggests moving this war beyond the Islamic world to the territory of the enemy. In particular, he supported bringing successful jihad for liberation of Muslims from Afghanistan and Chechnya and to transfer it from the outskirts of the Islamic world to its heart.
After terrorist attacks in America on September 11, 2001 and the beginning of anti-terrorist operation A. al-Zawahiri called destruction of two New York skyscrapers a blessed deal and the ultimate in fight between Muslim Ummah and forces of great pagan kufr. He blamed J. Bush for the fact that he openly announced a new crusade against Islam under the mask of fight against terrorism. A. al-Zawahiri in his new book "Al-Wala Wal Bara" emphasizes that nowadays each Muslim has to counter invaders using hands, language or at least thoughts. In his book he published a specific fatwah in which it is said that for a Muslim is forbidden to take up with kaffirs, it is necessary to keep any secrets of Muslims. It is forbidden to do any business with kaffirs. It is forbidden to perceive any theories and the ideas of infidels. It is forbidden to help kaffirs with their war with Muslims and somehow acquit crusaders. It was ruled to Muslims to conduct jihad with faithless aggressors, secession and hypocrites (the two latter are meant as the Arab regimes which provided their territory for an anti-terrorist campaign and also the Ulemas publishing false fatwahs bought by the authorities).
Al-Jihad was one of the first which also put forth an idea of creation of a united front of Islamic organizations. In April, 1991 Abbud az-Zumr started a project of creation of the Islamic front. According to him, the organization realized that today it is extremely necessary to unite various Islamic organizations as "extensiveness of the challenge is too big to cope with it using forces of any one group apart." Besides, the modern political
situation leads to such measures, that is: rapprochement of Russia and USA and acceleration of European integration. At the same time apparent priority in such front is given to radical, "jihadist" groups.
In February, 1998 "a terrorist number one" of that time Osama bin Laden managed to unite a number of extremist Islamic groups around the organization of Afghan Arabs Al-Qaeda which was earlier created by him, having made the "World Islamic front for Jihad against Jews and Crusaders" which achieved prominence as World Front of Jihad (WFJ). Besides it founding parties of the "front" were: the head of the Egyptian organization "Al-Jihad" doctor Ayman al-Zawahiri; chairman of the advisory board of the al-Jamaa al-Islamiyya Rifai Ahmed Taha Moussa (Egypt); secretary of the Pakistani Islamic organization "Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan" ("Association of Ulemas of Pakistan") sheikh Mir Hamza; leader of the Pakistani movement "Harakat Al-Ansar" Fazlur Rahman and leader of the movement Jihad from Bangladesh Muhammad abd-al-Salam. MFJ also included the Pakistani organization "Al-Hadis," Libyan "al-Jamaa al-Islamiyya," Jordanian "Bayat al Imam" ("Swear of the imam"), the Algerian "Armed Islamic group," the Yemen Jihad, Lebanese Asbat al-Ansar, Jamaa Islamiyya, etc.
A. al-Zawahiri considers important for the strategy of the jihadist movement two moments. First, it has to grow constantly, change and be updated. Secondly, it is necessary to cultivate inflexibility, patience and firmness in mujahads. The main priority of the strategy of movement he sees military underground activity. In particular, he points that fighting groups of the jihadist movement have to use any weapon which is available or is not available and even forbidden. All known forms and ways of conducting effective war have to become a part of modern strategy. A. al-Zawahiri suggests to begin with the simplest and "easy" things: "Kill Americans with bullets, knives, packed mix of explosive, beat them with iron rods and throw Molotov cocktails." He suggests to focus on the following
tasks. First, it is necessary to concentrate on carrying out large-scale actions with a large number of victims, huge human losses are important. Such actions impress the western society, and give people pause for thought. It is the only language which the West understands today. Secondly, when conducting combat operations, it is necessary to found on actions of shahids (kamikaze). Such operations do not demand big losses from Muslims, but inflict heavy losses for the opponent. Thirdly, actions should be carefully prepared, it is necessary to carry out an authentic analysis of enemy's opportunities, his capabilities and between wind and water. Fourthly, elaboration of accurate strategy and ideology of fight is essential. Today fight "for our holy places, our homeland, houses, riches - this is a war of each Muslim, young and old." Each Muslim takes responsibility for protection of Islam and its relics. We have to give the society strong and expert leaders, to show the obvious enemy and to burst fear fetters.
