What is the ruling on a truce with the Jews?

Question:
Many questions have come in regarding what the newspaper Al-Muslimun mentioned in its last issue. We will suffice with one question. The questioner says: Your Eminence, may Allah strengthen him through His obedience, the newspaper Al-Muslimun, in its issue last Friday, quoted from you that a truce is permissible with a Jew, whether absolute or temporary, if the one in authority sees the public benefit. As you know, Your Eminence, this peace signed by some countries is based on normalizing relations between Jews and Muslims, and it relies on demolishing the pillar of loyalty and disavowal. The treaty stipulates the removal of all forms of hostility, to be replaced by love, as the Prime Minister of the Jews said: Normalization is based on four principles: Turkish water, Egyptian labor, Gulf oil, and Israeli intellect. He says that normalization will not happen unless hostility is uprooted from the hearts of these people and replaced by peace and love. Also, among the objectives of this peace is striking the Islamic awakening and what they call the extremists. The effects of this have appeared and are no longer hidden, because they threaten the peace, as the leaders of the Jews and the Americans openly state. This peace also relies on modifying curricula and deleting any verses, hadiths, or historical stories that insult them. Amounts have been paid to some Arab countries to change the curricula. As you know, Your Eminence, this reconciliation did not stop some of them from harming others; rather, the harm to Muslims increased, and they were restricted. The massacres did not stop, as in the massacre of the Ibrahimi Mosque, which occurred after that peace was signed. They want from this reconciliation to tighten their grip on Muslims economically, media-wise, and security-wise, after having tightened it militarily. They say: We are now in no need of more Arab land, because that would ignite the awakening and increase its spread. We suffered greatly from Arab rule in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, so we relinquished its civil administration to the Fatah organization's municipality. However, we are in need of eliminating the awakening and developing our occupation. This cannot be done except through what is called normalization. So, Your Eminence, they do not desire reconciliation in the known legal sense, but they want to seize the Arab countries security-wise, economically, educationally, and media-wise, after having seized them militarily. What is your guidance?

Answer:
We have written what is obligatory by the Shari'ah on this matter, which is reconciliation if the one responsible for the public benefit sees it, so that everyone lives in safety and well-being. Reconciliation does not necessitate the absence of affection or love. No, it is obligatory to have hostility and hatred for the disbelievers and not to show loyalty to them. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) made a treaty with them and did not love them. He made a treaty with them for ten years, and they were more disbelieving than the Jews. He made a treaty with them for ten years, and that did not necessitate affection or love. Likewise, he made treaties with many of the Arabs and wrote covenants between him and them, and that did not necessitate love or loyalty. It is only about safety: the safety of the land, traveling in the land with safety, people going out for their needs with safety, and going out to their schools with safety. Indeed, we have written at length on this that reconciliation does not necessitate affection or love. Rather, it is obligatory that enmity and hatred remain between the Muslims and the enemies of Allah. Reconciliation is for preserving safety and cooperating on what benefits everyone. This is the reconciliation that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did, and that the scholars, the people of faith, and the righteous rulers did. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) elaborated on this reconciliation in his book Ahkam al-Dhimma, explaining its meaning and what is intended by it. If some people exploit it for falsehood, that is not upon him who exploits it, and what Allah has permitted is not forbidden because of the exploitation of some people. No, reconciliation, whether for a specific period or absolute, if one of the parties sees the abandonment of the reconciliation, he throws his covenant to them. And Allah says in His great Book: He did not say do not incline to it. And if they incline to peace, meaning the disbelievers, then incline to it, meaning proceed to peace for the benefit in it, until Allah opens [the way], until the strength for jihad and the ability for jihad come.
Reconciliation with them, or with others such as the Christians or others such as the communists, if the ruler of the land sees reconciliation in any country he owns or rules, if he sees the benefit for his people, the benefit being safety and the absence of harm, killing, and injury, so that he and his people live safely instead of being killed, then this is a public benefit. But reconciliation does not necessitate that he loves them or has affection for them. No, he deals with them in the manner of reconciliation in buying and selling, with ambassadors between them, the existence of buying and selling between them, this one brings and this one takes, in other matters that reconciliation requires. As for love, no, and affection, no. Yes.