This is a Guest Blog written by Zharmukhamed Zardykhan, an Assistant Professor at KIMEP, the Kazakhstan Institute of Management, Economics, and Strategic Research.
The First World War was noted not only for its horrific physical destruction and tremendous financial ruin, but for the first time systematic international propaganda became one of the most effective means of warfare.
The incorporation of the notion of jihad into wartime propaganda had already gained strength during the Balkan Wars and, in fact, did not slacken its pace up until the First World War. Indeed, the very notion of warfare, whether offensive or defensive, obtained a certain character in traditional Islam and its interpretation, depending on whose part it is conducted, so that, according to Ibn Khaldûn, any warfare conducted by Muslims, including an offensive one, is not only legitimate, but also a holy war, or jihad, since in the long run it undertakes a mission of leading the world population to Islamic faith. (1) However, the long-established Turkic and Anatolian tradition established a difference between jihad and ghaza, referring, respectively, to the defense of Muslim lands against the aggression of infidel troops and to the actual invasion of infidel lands by Muslim troops empowered by the Caliph. (2)
But what about the Ottoman proclamations for jihad during the First World War? The traditional appeals to fight down the infidels would not work because of the German troops fighting alongside of Ottomans. The appeals to resist the enslavers and suppressors of Muslim populations would be impeded by Austro-Hungarian and Bulgarian participation in the Great War on the side of the Central Powers. Furthermore, throughout the First World War, the Ottoman troops had to stand against fellow Muslim soldiers among the Russian, British or French troops.
Here comes the Ottoman fatwa, the religious edict issued by Ottoman Seyh-ul-islam Urguplu Hayri Efendi that justified the religious and spiritual grounds of war. Structured in the traditional Ottoman pattern, this fetva-i Serif (3) contained five issues [mes'ele] concerning different features of the war and answers to them [el-cevab]. In brief, the fetva-i Serif assured that: (1) at the time when Islam is assaulted and Islamic population is threatened by annihilation and imprisonment, the physical and material contribution of every Muslim to the holy war is an individual and unavoidable obligation [farz-i "ayn]; (2) it is an obligation [farz] for the Muslim population of Russia, Britain and France to declare jihad against these governments and actually joint it; (3) even if they were threatened by death or the extermination of their families, fighting against the soldiers of the Islamic Government [i.e. Ottoman State] is absolutely forbidden [haram-i kat'i] by religious law and the infringers would be thrown to infernal fire [nar-i cahim]; (4) the fighting of the Muslim subjects of Britain, France, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro against Germany and Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman allies, would harm the Islamic Caliphate and those who fought would suffer grievous wrath [gazab-i elim].
Similarly, upon the Ottoman engagement into the First World War, numerous articles on the nature of jihad and its place and justification by the Islamic law started appearing in Ottoman periodical press. As "Religion and War" acknowledged thoroughly using quotations from Qur'an, "the Muslims do not fight for personal and arbitrary causes," while jihad is bound to the greater cause and is both permitted and obligatory.(4) At the same time, the outburst of the war came out as an opportunity to strengthen the image of the Caliphate not only outside, but also within the Empire, as did "What Kind of a Caliph the Enemies of the Caliphate Want?" by stating that "the Caliphate of Islam is not a weak [kuvvetsiz] and humble [Sevketsiz] institution like the Papacy that only has religious guardianship and spiritual governance."(5)
[1] See Abu-Sahlieh, Sami A. Adeeb. "The Islamic Conception of Migration." International Migration Review 30, No. 1 (Spring 1996): 37-57.[2] See Darling, Linda. "Contested Territory: Ottoman Holy War in Comparative Context."Studia Islamica No. 91 (2000): 133-163.[3] For the text of the fatwa see "Fetava-i Serife," Cihan-i Islam, No. 50; and "Fetava-i Serife," Donanma, No. 68-20 (16 TeSrin-i sani 1914).[4] "Din ve Harb," Islam Mecmasa, Year 2, No. 42 (7 Djumada "l-ala 1334) [1916].[5] "Hilafet Dusmanları Nasıl Bir Halife Istiyor?" Islam Mecmû'ası, Year 2, No. 46 (9 Dhu l'-Ka'da 1334) [1916].
