The Shaykh’s remarks on the ruling regarding Muslims seeking the aid of disbelievers to repel Saddam Hussein’s attack on Kuwait.

The Shaykh : If we look at this painful reality and the acknowledgment that we have no choice but to admit, namely that the Saudi state, with its pampered and comfortable army that has never entered a battle in its entire life and has not been seasoned in such bitter fighting in the desert, is this an excuse for them? We say no, because the Muslim people, or rather the Muslim army, are not expected to match their enemy in number and equipment to repel his assault on their land. Islamic history bears witness to such instances, especially the earliest and most radiant period. Nevertheless, in my opinion, it was obligatory for the Saudi state, the princes, and the scholars to be as one hand and to implement Allah’s command to mobilize in full force. Furthermore, instead of Saudi Arabia seeking the aid of disbelieving states, it should have sought the aid of Islamic states. I am certain that if it had sought their aid, it might have found it, and I mean what I say. In most cases, it would not have found it, because these states are politically colonized; they are colonies that cannot act contrary to the current master of states, which is America. Regrettably, they knew the reality of the situation, meaning Saudi Arabia, and therefore they did not move forward, neither for a lawful peace nor to fight the aggressor. But who did move forward? America moved forward to protect its interests. It was part of their policy to hint to the Saudi state to feign seeking aid to ward off the greater harm, because the harm of the Ba'athist army to the army of Tawhid, as they say, is more severe and evil than the harm of the Americans. We say it was obligatory for the Saudi state to do its best. Then, if it were defeated, God forbid, it would have its excuse before Allah (Mighty and Majestic). But to immediately surrender to incapacity and to contravene divine commands in all their types and forms, and to seek aid—or rather, to feign seeking aid—when the matter was settled in the night, and it was said to the Saudi state, “You have nothing to do but submit to the entry of the Americans into the Gulf and into much of Saudi territory, more than before.” Then the fatwas began to pile up to support this action. I believe it would have been more correct and more honorable to say, “This is all we can do.” But for them to come to the sacred texts, interpret them figuratively, and nullify their correct implications, and for these interpretations to become the creed of many groups of Muslims, this is a greater evil than the inability to resist. I do not say resistance to Saddam, but resistance to America. The scholars of Islam, even within the Hanbali school, addressed the issue of seeking the aid of a disbeliever. They differed, with some saying it is permissible and others saying it is not permissible. The opinion that it is not permissible is the one for which there is an explicit hadith. In addition, this prohibition is supported by many, many texts, including the prohibition by the Lord of the Worlds in more than one verse in the Noble Qur'an against taking disbelievers as allies. It is amazing that the Saudi shaykhs are among the most prominent scholars of Islam in condemning and warning against a Muslim seeking the aid of a disbeliever and Muslims taking disbelievers as allies. The verse is among the most well-known among Muslims: I wonder, as they say, what kind of taking as allies is more apparent and more dangerous than bringing disbelievers into the lands of Islam without shedding blood? This is the greatest taking of allies. This is in addition to what may result from it in terms of corrupting the morals of a large portion of the inhabitants of those lands, because imitation today has blinded the hearts of many Muslims. If the imitators were far from their lands, how much more would they be affected by their imitation if they are in the heart of the Muslims' homeland? I say that the scholars of Islam who permitted seeking aid stipulated that the strength and the dominance must belong to the Muslims who are seeking the aid of disbelievers. And this, even if there were no Shari'ah.
The student : To summarize, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh : I say, to summarize. We said that they are two groups: one group prohibited it based on the hadith, and one group permitted it but stipulated this reasonable condition that the dominance, the majority, and the state must belong to the Muslims. This is undoubtedly to prevent an internal reversal where the army being aided turns against the army doing the aiding. Therefore, those who sought the aid of disbelievers contradicted all the scholars of Islam. And I say the truth is that they have no excuse except the claim of dire necessity. And the answer to the claim of dire necessity has already been given, because they did not take the measures that would prevent them from falling into what would necessitate their taking of what is forbidden by the Shari'ah.