Interview with Group Proposing Peace with ISIS: Possible or Far Fetched?

I was contacted by a group of professional Muslims who, along with their religious advisors, have put together a framework for a lasting peace between ISIS and Mujahideen factions in Syria.  They are trying to circulate their initiative to the various groups including ISIS to gain support and hopefully see the different sides sit down at a negotiating table. 

They believe that it is still possible for a reconciliation for the good of all concerned.  I raised some serious concerns regarding the peace initiative with Abu Yusuf, the representative of the group pushing the peace initiative.  He maintains that it is a work in progress and general framework that must be discussed between the hostile groups.  After the interview below, I am posting the full text of their peace initiative.

BAK: As salaamo alaykum wa rahmatullaah.  Welcome and thank you Abu Yusuf for taking the time to sit with us today.  You’ve crafted a peace treaty that, if accepted, would effectively end the fighting between ISIS and the major factions in the Syrian territories.  Why did you feel this was needed and are you a member of any of the potential signatories?

Abu Yusuf: Wa alaykumus salaam wa rahmatullaah.  Thank you for having me.  Firstly, I am not the sole author and had the assistance of some friends. It is a commandment of Allah Ta’ala to make reconciliation between disputing Muslims, either as individuals or as groups. There are many ayat which command this and I have referred to some in the treaty itself. The need is clear and the treaty is a response to the commandment. I am not a member of any of the groups disputing at the moment and if I bind myself to the treaty it is only as a Muslim.

BAK: Why do you feel this document has the potential to succeed when other efforts to quell the fighting have failed?  What is unique about it?

Abu Yusuf: The treaty is based on the Medina Charter. This was the first constitution in Islam and was a document binding the believers . It was and remains a profound document ,divinely inspired and it brought peace to the waring factions of Al khaws  and Al azraj. It remains relevant today as a source of guidance for the Ummah.   The success or failure of the document is in Allah’s hands. I am just trying my best with what I have to bring brothers together. I am not aware of ALL the efforts made by others and may Allah reward them for their trying as well. I do not believe that there is a time limit for reconciliation amongst the believers .  I hope that this document is a good starting point as it draws directly from the sunnah and it is proposed by an individual who is not a member of any group and accordingly has no agenda that any of the groups would be suspicious of. It is difficult in this fitnah to find a completely neutral party and it is hoped that the groups will receive the effort in same sincerity with which it is proposed.

BAK: As you know ISIS has declared many of the other factions to be outside of the fold of Islam, most notably Jabha Anusra, Ahrar Asham, Islamic Front and others.  This means, according to ISIS, their blood is permissible for them to shed and property is permissible for them to take.  One of the clauses in the peace treaty states:

“Each territory under the control of each party will be a sanctuary for all Believers”.  

Would ISIS accept this as a clause as they do not believe that any of the groups outside of theirs are “Believers”?  Or would they be obligated to take back their statement of apostasy in order to potentially sign this agreement?

Abu Yusuf: One of the greatest difficulties in this fitnah is the use of labels. I consider all the factions fighting to establish shariah as brothers and place no labels on any. Labelleing groups to justify fighting is not new and is not exclusive to ISIS, other labels have been used by other groups such as the label of khawarij  and takfeer has been a common characteristic of groups involved in jihad even before ISIS. I have specifically included a repentance clause for everyone to remove all doubt as well as a proclamation of the shahadah by all so that we begin with belief in Allah and belief that all those participating are Muslim. This removes the hinderance of anyone having to retract anything from the past. The idea is to join and look forward as believers and InshaAllah discard all labels moving forward.

BAK: One of the clauses states:

“If anyone attacks anyone who is a party to this agreement the others must come to his help.”

It is unlikely that, should this agreement be accepted by the major factions, it will have any impact on the western powers that are currently hunting ISIS leadership and strongholds.  Therefore it would mean that some of the groups operating in the territories who only now have local enemies such as Bashar Assad or Hizbollah etc., have now inherited much of the world’s most powerful governments as enemies.  Is this within the interest of the Syrian struggle?  Should Syrians now be willing to almost infinitely increase their list of enemies for the sake of the treaty?

Abu Yusuf: The clause is taken directly from the Medina Charter and there can thus be very little reason to reject it. The dispute is not based solely on the Syrian conflict. Most of the parties have not limited the struggle to regional goals. Those who want shariah have taken up arms in response to the commandments of Allah and have not limited their enemies. Their enemies are the enemies of Allah no matter how many they are. Only those with nationalistic objectives may object to this clause, but we believe that if Muslims are sincere they would want to help their Muslim brothers wherever they are. This clause emphasizes the need for unity as the open enemies are many- there is no time to still be fighting one another.

BAK: There is a clause that refers to the “Dispute Council”.  According to the potential agreement:

“Each party to this agreement shall appoint 1 person to a council that is hereby established and is known as the dispute council”. 

Being that there are quite a few factions that are opposed to ISIS, that would mean mathematically ISIS would be the minority in any dispute.  For example if 1 person is appointed from Ahrar Asham, 1 from Jabha Anusra and so on, this would mean that ISIS is always at a disadvantage.  Given the fact that they do not accept the judgment of anyone outside of their ranks as a principle, is it reasonable they would accept such a potentially crippling clause?  Is this clause open for negotiation?

Abu Yusuf: The proposed representation in the council must be negotiated by the parties.This is a draft document . I don’t expect everyone to be happy with everything. It is of course open to negotiation and discussion . That is the point. We should find a mechanism that is fair in regard to representation. Once the parties exhibit a willingness to talk we can take their feedback and amend the document with their suggestions until we find a solution palatable to all InshaAllah. In its current form it is a niyah and an idea. It’s an opportunity to change what went wrong and replace it with what is best for the ummah InshaAllah.

BAK: What steps are you taking to bring the warring factions to the negotiating table?

Abu Yusuf: The draft has been circulated and some journalists have picked up on it. I am hopeful that it will  reach the decision makers and that we receive some feedback InshaAllah. I am open to ideas on how to bring them to the table.

BAK: You do not want your identity to be revealed.  Why is that?

Abu Yusuf: I have no objection to my name being revealed if there is benefit in it and if it is in order to establish credibility. It was withheld initially for security reasons.

End of Interview

——————————————————————————————————————————————-