What is your opinion regarding the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) that occurred in the Gulf between Iraq and Kuwait?

The questioner : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Your honorable and distinguished Shaykh has clarified, in many tapes, the crisis that is being passed through, the Gulf crisis that was named. However, in Baghdad, we heard statements that may be contradictory. Some people say the Shaykh issues a fatwa (a scholarly legal ruling) like this, and the Shaykh issues a fatwa like that. And other people say, no, the Shaykh has changed his first fatwa and said something else after what happened and everything ended. The reality is, we do not want to prolong this. We have questions. If your honor allows for nine or ten questions, something brief. I do not want to burden you. In fact, I am embarrassed by this issue. I do not want to burden you. What is the state of the crisis? What do you say about what happened, in something brief, without burdening you?

The Shaykh : In any case, we have answered with detailed answers regarding the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) of the Gulf. And in accordance with your request, we say that the aggression of Iraq against Kuwait is undoubtedly a clear violation of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law), no matter what justifications and excuses were said by those who were partisan for Iraq and for what Iraq did in its aggression against Kuwait. This error was followed by another error. And the cause of both the first error and the second error, which will be explained, is, with great regret, that there is no strong Islamic government ruling by what Allah has revealed. By the meaning of this word, this Iraqi aggression against its neighbor Kuwait resulted in another error, which is the neglect of applying the Qur'anic text, namely the saying of the Mighty and Majestic: So, starting from this Qur'anic text, which falsehood does not approach from before or behind, it was obligatory for the Islamic states collectively, if they truly wanted to rule by what Allah has revealed, at least in this specific noble verse and this fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) that the Iraqi regime initiated, that the obligation was either to attempt reconciliation. It is said that there were many attempts by some Arab states to achieve reconciliation. This is said, and of course we do not know what was happening, as they say, behind the scenes. But what no person can fail to know is that the aggression occurred. So, if some Arab states performed the first obligation mentioned at the beginning of this noble verse and then this reconciliation did not benefit.

Another questioner : Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah. And then this reconciliation did not benefit, they had to apply the second command, namely the saying of Allah the Exalted: If there were correct and sincere attempts at reconciliation, then certainly the second command in the verse was not applied. And if there was no attempt at reconciliation, then the verse was violated fundamentally; it was violated in the command to reconcile and it was violated in the command to fight the rebellious faction. I said earlier that we do not know if there were actually attempts at reconciliation, as is said, or not. And this does not matter to the Muslim masses. Rather, what matters to them is what was witnessed and became a settled fact, namely the aggression against Kuwait. So it was obligatory, then, for the Islamic state that declares that it rules by what Allah has revealed, among the other Islamic states, that it fight the rebellious faction. But it knows, as we know, and this is one of the wonders of matters, that the individual among us knows, as the state knows, that it is not able to perform this obligation of fighting the rebellious faction. Why? Because this rebellious faction, by the admission of the oppressed and aggrieved state and the states that were obligated to repel the injustice from them, all of them know that they are not able to repel the tyranny of this tyrant, given what is known of its long-term experience with the Iranian Shi'ah, and that they finally overcame them. So the Saudi state implicitly admitted that it was not able to repel the aggression of Iraq against Kuwait, where this repulsion was obligatory upon the Muslims by the ruling of the previous verse . But I say, with regret...

Another questioner : Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace. That the Muslims addressed in this verse this command is not directed to a group of Muslims or to a state of Muslims, but rather this address is directed to the general Muslim community. So I say, with regret, these Muslims, governments and peoples, as we know from our bad Islamic reality, are scattered and differing in the most extreme difference. And so the practical result was that the Saudi state, which was expected to be the one to take the initiative to apply the Qur'anic text, did not do so. And its excuse from the material aspect is very clear: that it is not able to confront, with its few and weak power, the strong power of the Iraqi army. So what was obligatory upon it? It was obligatory upon it to seek help from the other Islamic states. But can these other Islamic states respond to the desire of the Saudi state to repel the harm from itself and its lands, and secondly, to repel the aggressor back to his heels? Do these Islamic states respond to the Saudi state to repel that tyranny? The answer, with regret, is .