Abstract
The researcher started his paper with the clarification of the reality of Islam country and the enemy’s country in the language and usage of jurisprudents. Regarding the truth of Islam country, he stated that the views given by the old jurisprudents agreed that “ it was the country that the muslims settled in and in which the rules of Islam were applied”.
According to the meanings of the expressions of the contemporary jurisprudents, Islam country means (every country in which the rules of Islam is applied for being beyond the domain of Islamic sovereignty). Then the researcher explained the rules that govern the change of the enemy’s country to Islam country since the scholars agree among themselves that it becomes an Islamic country when the rules of Islam prevail and muslims have full mastery upon it.
As regards the change of Islam country to an enemy’s country, the researcher pointed out the differences among the jurisprudents in this respect. He pointed out the views of Al-Hanafiya and the conditions that concern the subject. He also clarified the views of Al-Malikiya concerning it. Then the views of Al-Shafi’ya and Al-Hanabila were mentioned.
The researcher also clarified the rule given by the jurisprudents concerns the countries of muslims which become under the control of the unbelievers. This particular subject is divided into two sections: the countries that could their people publicly practise their religious duties besides applying some rules. These countries are neighbour to the countries of muslims from each side. The other section is about the countries that their people leave them or remain humble in them since they could not reveal the rituals of Islam and its rules. These countries are not neighbour to the countries of muslims.
The researcher also work about the view that concerns the relationship with the warmongers of non-muslims and how to deal with them. Also the definition of the term ‘warmongers’ by the linguists and the jurisprudents were stated.
The researcher divided the warmongers of non-muslims into three sections and he clarified the rule of each section. The first section: those who did not fight muslims and did not urge to fight them. The second section: those who revealed their enemity to muslims and waged war against them and fought them because of their religious identity. The third section: those who did not fight the muslims directly but they revealed their enemity to them and they supported those who fought the muslims materially and morally.
Then the researcher mentioned the most important results and effects that caused by the occupiers. He classified them into: economical effects, intellectual effects, safety effects, medical effects, social effects, political effects and military effects. Then the researcher mentioned the kinds of aggressions of the foreign occupation and their negative effects. Then explained what muslims should do to liberate their countries from those aggressors and how to treat their bad effects. This was divided into several duties each of which is suitable to one aggression among the various aggressions which were stated in this work. Then the researcher presented the most important results and recommendations that he arrived at including the rule that concerns Iraq as the country of muslims; the rule that concerns the aggressive occupiers that are found in the countries of muslims and the legal judgement that concerns who supported the occupiers against the countries of muslims by any means.
Keywords
)
