If any country, including Pakistan, ever invades India in the name of Ghazwa-e-Hind, they will find Indian Muslims defending their homeland

Among the many ideas that have found their way into the modern Islamic revivalist narrative, few are as persistently misunderstood—or dangerously misused—as the concept of Ghazwa-e-Hind. Popularized in contemporary times by figures like the late Dr. Israr Ahmed, it has come to be viewed not as a historical episode or a symbolic metaphor, but as a yet-to-be-fulfilled call to military conquest. This interpretation, though emotionally charged, is divorced from Islamic orthodoxy, historical context, and contemporary political reality.

This misreading of Islamic eschatology has become especially potent in Pakistan, where it has been weaponized by a segment of the clergy and even military-linked media. But what the masses often don’t see is that such a vision not only contradicts Islamic legal tradition, but also threatens the harmony of the Indian subcontinent, especially the future of Indian Muslims.

A Historical View—Not a Military Manual

The hadith that mentions Ghazwa-e-Hind is reported in Sunan an-Nasa’i (Hadith 3175), Musnad Ahmad (Hadith 23804), and al-Tabarani’s al-Mu’jam al-Kabir. The narration speaks of two groups saved from Hellfire—one that fights in India and another that accompanies Jesus, the son of Mary, during his second coming. However, Islamic scholars have long disagreed about the authenticity, context, and timeline of these narrations.

Renowned Hadith scholar Shaykh Nasiruddin al-Albani graded some of the chains as weak (da’if), while others like Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in Fath al-Bari considered them authentic but possibly fulfilled during the early Islamic conquests. Ibn Kathir, in Al-Bidaya wa’l-Nihaya, also noted that the interpretation of these ahadith was limited to earlier periods of conquest.

Classical historians like al-Baladhuri in Futuh al-Buldan detail the campaign of Muhammad bin Qasim into Sindh (712 CE) as a response to an appeal from Muslim merchants and not as a sweeping religious war. The conquest was confined to a narrow region and did not reflect any systematic plan to convert India. Furthermore, the Chachnama, a semi-legendary Persian text documenting this campaign, narrates how religious freedom was granted to local Hindus and temples remained operational under Islamic rule.

Islamic scholar Dr. Ayesha Jalal, in her book Partisans of Allah: Jihad in South Asia, asserts that Ghazwa-e-Hind has been inflated in Pakistan’s religious discourse not because of religious necessity, but due to state-sponsored ideology. She writes that this hadith has “resurfaced with renewed intensity in Pakistan’s strategic imagination, filtered through a millenarian lens.”

The Qur’anic Command: No Compulsion in Religion

The most authoritative source in Islam—the Qur’an—states unequivocally: “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256). This verse, supported by the consensus (ijma’) of scholars, has been interpreted as a foundational principle of religious freedom. In Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Imam al-Qurtubi elaborates that Islam forbids coercion because belief requires conviction, not force.

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), when inviting tribes to Islam, used persuasion, kindness, and exemplary character—not threats. As recorded in Sirat Ibn Hisham and Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, his approach to da’wah was rooted in wisdom, not warfare.

Moreover, Tafsir al-Tabari on verse 16:125—“Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching…”—explains that this verse sets the tone for all Islamic outreach. Any idea that religious dominance can be achieved through military force runs counter to the Qur’anic message and Prophetic model.

Prophecy ≠ Policy

Yes, Islam contains eschatological prophecies—many of which describe dramatic geopolitical changes in the end times.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) never told Muslims to build strategies around ghazwaat of the future. Instead, he focused on justice, reform, and internal purification.

Consider the Ghazwa of Abwa and Ghazwa of Ushayrah—expeditions that ended without a single arrow being shot. As documented in Al-Maghazi of al-Waqidi, many ghazwaat were precautionary or diplomatic. This is supported by Imam al-Nawawi’s commentary on Sahih Muslim, where he notes that military action in Islam is conditional on ethical, legal, and political necessities—not eschatological ambitions.

The Spread of Islam: A Moral Project, Not a Military One

Historically, Islam’s most significant growth occurred in regions where armies never marched. Southeast Asia, East Africa, and large swathes of India were introduced to Islam not through conquest but through trade and spiritual invitation.

Dr. Richard Eaton, in his landmark study The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, highlights how Sufi saints and local rulers facilitated Islamization in Bengal through land reforms, spiritual guidance, and social integration—not through war. Similarly, Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi in Islam and the World emphasizes that Islamic civilization at its best was spread through service, justice, and education.

The Prophet himself said: “I was sent to perfect noble character” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 8595). This foundational hadith is echoed in the works of Imam al-Ghazali in Ihya Ulum al-Din, who taught that spiritual excellence—not militarism—is the soul of Islamic revival.

Pakistan’s Fantasy vs Indian Muslims’ Reality

One of the more troubling developments is the Pakistani state’s occasional use of Ghazwa-e-Hind as a symbolic justification for cross-border ambitions. In textbooks, speeches, and even TV dramas, the narrative of a future campaign to “liberate” Indian Muslims is floated as a divine responsibility.

But such narratives overlook one major truth: Indian Muslims are not waiting for salvation. They are proud citizens of India, heirs to over a thousand years of Islamic contribution to the subcontinent.

India has produced towering Islamic scholars—Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlawi, Shah Waliullah al-Dihlawi, Maulana Azad, and countless others. Its institutions—from Darul Uloom Deoband to Nadwatul Ulama—have trained generations of global scholars. The Indian Muslim identity is not subordinate to any external power. It is deeply rooted in the land, language, and ethos of India.

If any country, including Pakistan, ever invades India in the name of Ghazwa-e-Hind, they will find Indian Muslims defending their homeland, not cheering from the sidelines. As the Qur’an instructs: “Stand firmly for justice…” (4:135). That includes standing against unjust aggression—even if it’s done in the name of religion.

From Brigadier Muhammad Usman, the hero of Nowshera, to Captain Haneefuddin, who laid down his life in Kargil, Indian Muslims have proven their loyalty with blood.

Let no one mistake their silence for weakness or their faith for disloyalty. The Prophet loved Makkah. The Indian Muslim loves India.

Time for Responsibility, Not Rhetoric

Dr. Israr Ahmed’s intellectual legacy is mixed. While he awakened many to the idea of Islamic revival, his fixation on militarism—untethered from contemporary fiqh and political wisdom—misguided many. Today, young Muslims must be trained not in war slogans but in the Qur’an, Hadith, ethics, law, and service.

The return of a Caliphate, if it happens, must mirror the model of the Prophet—founded on justice, consultation, and mercy. Not through firebrand nationalism or weaponized hadiths.

Ghazwa-e-Hind has become more of a political trope than a theological reality. When read responsibly, Islamic tradition offers no justification for cross-border aggression dressed in prophecy. The real ghazwa we need today is against ignorance, sectarianism, and political manipulation.

Let us turn our energies toward rebuilding our societies—through knowledge, reform, and character. That is the legacy of the Prophet. That is the path of the righteous.

Qatar has mastered the art of playing both victim and benefactor, using its immense wealth to bankroll global jihad while presenting itself as a progressive state.

For years, Qatar has skillfully played both sides of the geopolitical chessboard, presenting itself as a modern, progressive Gulf state while simultaneously acting as the primary financial hub for global jihadist movements. Despite its carefully curated image, Qatar has funneled billions of dollars into radical groups under the guise of humanitarian aid, enabling terrorism while avoiding serious repercussions from the international community.

Qatar’s Extensive Financial Reach

Qatar spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on lobbying, PR campaigns, and political influence operations. Its financial influence extends to think tanks, universities, media organizations, and even K-12 education, ensuring its covert activities remain hidden. By embedding its ideology within education systems and funding institutions worldwide, Qatar has successfully shaped narratives in favor of its geopolitical ambitions.

In June 2024, journalist Christopher F. Rufo of Manhattan International exposed documents from the Portland Teachers’ Union, which encouraged over 4,500 members to “Teach Palestine!” The materials, sourced from various organizations—many partly funded by Qatar—were organized as a complete K-12 indoctrination guide. These educational resources aimed to instill an anti-American, pro-Islamist worldview in students, from kindergarteners being taught to protest to high schoolers perceiving the U.S. as a “terrorist state” and glorifying violent resistance as “revolutionary” or “freedom fighting”.

Additionally, the indoctrination program incorporated elements of “Queer” and “Sex Education”, tying them to the Palestinian cause. Even subjects like math were politicized, embedding lessons that linked equations to the Palestinian struggle. To mitigate potential emotional distress from learning about the so-called “genocide” in Gaza, teachers were provided with resources to help students cope with psychological trauma.

The Role of Al Jazeera in Propaganda

Qatar-funded Al Jazeera played a significant role in disseminating this educational content. The network, known for its pro-Palestinian bias, has long been accused of having ties to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization. Al Jazeera’s subsidiary, AJ+, has repeatedly failed to register under the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), despite functioning as an overt propaganda tool.

Beyond merely supplying media content, Al Jazeera journalists have actively collaborated with Hamas operatives, ensuring Qatar’s ideological and financial support remains deeply embedded in global discourse. The network’s influence is so pervasive that it provides not only educational materials but also legal guidance for teachers facing pushback over the controversial curriculum they promote.

Qatar’s Decades-Long Infiltration of U.S. Public Schools

In addition to shaping narratives through nonprofit-backed teaching materials, Qatar has financially supported U.S. public schools for decades. The Qatar Foundation International (QFI), a Doha-based organization, has injected at least $30.6 million into public schools across the United States since its inception in 2009.

Investigative journalist Breccan F. Thies recently exposed Qatar’s extensive funding of K-12 education, with QFI financing Arabic language programs, teacher salaries, and school trips designed to push a pro-Qatar, pro-Palestinian narrative in American classrooms. Schools that accept QFI funding must report activities directly to Qatar and undergo oversight, including teacher evaluations conducted by Qatari officials. Some of these institutions even display maps that exclude Israel, labeling the region as “United Palestine”.

Beyond K-12 education, Qatar has also poured over $6 billion into elite U.S. universities—the same institutions where students today chant “Death to America” and “Globalize the Intifada”. By embedding itself within higher education, Qatar has successfully shaped anti-Western narratives and radicalized student activism against American interests.

Qatar: The Leading State Sponsor of Terrorism

Qatar has long been the world’s most prominent state sponsor of terrorism, funneling billions of dollars into jihadist groups under the pretense of humanitarian aid. Some of the most damning evidence includes:

• Financial backing for Hamas, which has received hundreds of millions of dollars from Doha.
• Hosting the Taliban’s political office in Doha while maintaining diplomatic relations with the U.S.
• Funding Al-Qaeda affiliates and providing safe harbor to their operatives.
• Sponsoring radical Islamist clerics who advocate for violence against the West.

Despite these activities, Qatar continues to operate under the guise of diplomacy, leveraging its financial power to maintain its reputation while simultaneously enabling terror organizations.

Qatar’s Role in the October 7th Massacre

On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a brutal attack against Israeli civilians, slaughtering innocent men, women, and children. As the world reeled in horror, Qatar’s response was to blame Israel—the very nation under attack. Instead of condemning Hamas, Qatar used its diplomatic channels to shield the terrorist group and ensure its survival.

Qatar has actively supported Hamas not only through funding but also by providing sanctuary for its leaders. The Qatari government advised Hamas to retain hostages as leverage, securing their position on the global stage. Additionally, Qatar’s state-funded media outlet, Al Jazeera, granted exclusive access to Hamas operatives, amplifying their propaganda while downplaying their atrocities.

The Depraved Hostage Negotiations

As bodies of murdered Israelis were returned, Hamas and Qatar played twisted games, using the dead as pawns in psychological warfare. Hamas handed over coffins filled with propaganda, some locked with keys that didn’t open, and in one of the most depraved acts, returned the body of an unknown person instead of the actual victim, Shiri Bibas.

The International Red Cross, instead of challenging Hamas’ manipulation, became complicit in these grotesque charades. In over 500 days, the Red Cross never once visited the hostages, failing in its duty to uphold humanitarian principles.

Why the West Allows Qatar to Evade Accountability

Despite overwhelming evidence of Qatar’s complicity in global terrorism, Western governments continue to turn a blind eye. The reasons are clear:

Economic Leverage: Qatar’s vast wealth, derived from its natural gas reserves, makes it a crucial economic partner for many Western nations.

Strategic Military Interests: The U.S. maintains its largest military base in the Middle East, Al Udeid Air Base, in Qatar.

Media Manipulation: Qatar strategically invests in public relations to maintain its influence, controlling narratives through Al Jazeera and other outlets.

Qatar’s Ultimate Goal: Global Influence Through Media and Politics

Beyond funding terrorism, Qatar is deeply invested in controlling global narratives. The establishment of Media City Qatar (MCQ) is part of a broader strategy to position Doha as a dominant player in the global media ecosystem. This initiative allows Qatar to infiltrate Western media from within, shaping perceptions while deflecting scrutiny of its terror ties.

A prime example of Qatar’s deception was its recent interview with Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani and Tucker Carlson. In a desperate attempt at damage control, the Qatari PM painted Qatar as a peaceful nation dedicated to humanitarian efforts. However, Carlson’s failure to challenge Doha’s role in enabling terrorism highlighted how Qatar has successfully manipulated even seasoned media figures into whitewashing its crimes.

Time to Hold Qatar Accountable

Qatar has mastered the art of playing both victim and benefactor, using its immense wealth to bankroll global jihad while presenting itself as a progressive state. This paradoxical strategy has allowed Doha to evade serious repercussions for far too long. It is time for the world to recognize Qatar for what it truly is: a terror state with blood on its hands.

The U.S. and its allies must take decisive action:

• Designate Qatar as a state sponsor of terrorism.
• Expel Qatari-funded entities from Western education systems.
• Sanction Qatari officials and freeze assets linked to terror financing.

The West can no longer afford to ignore Qatar’s duplicity. The time to act is now.

Article curated based on OSINT Leslie Kajomovitz.

The primary criterion is that Jihad should bring about greater good and not result in greater harm to the country and its people.

Saudi scholar Dr. Abdus-Salam Al-Suhaymi highlights the consensus among Sunni Salafi scholars that any form of fighting that inflicts greater harm upon a country and its people is considered unlawful and cannot be deemed Jihad.

Instead, these scholars stress the importance of patience, thorough preparation, and the acquisition of necessary religious and material equipment to deter potential threats.

Dr. Al-Suhaymi’s post references the teachings of renowned Salafi scholars of Saudi Arabia, including Sheikh Ibn Baz, Sheikh Al-Albani, Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen, and Sheikh Al-Fawzan, who have collectively advocated for the ethical limitations of Jihad.

The scholars argue that engaging in battles or conflicts that bring about greater harm to the nation and its inhabitants goes against the principles of Islam. True Jihad, they assert, requires careful consideration of the potential consequences and the ability to mitigate harm to the greatest extent possible.

Ibn Baz’s Stance on Ethical Jihad

Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baz, a highly respected Islamic scholar from Saudi Arabia, emphasized the importance of ensuring that any armed conflict, termed as Jihad, must not bring about greater harm than good.

In his view, the ethical dimension of Jihad is paramount, and careful deliberation is necessary to prevent unnecessary harm.

For more on Ibn Baz’s views, click here.

Al-Albani’s Contributions to Ethical Jihad

Sheikh Muhammad Nasiruddin Al-Albani, known for his contributions to Hadith studies, shared a similar viewpoint regarding the ethical dimensions of Jihad.

He asserted that Jihad should only be pursued after a thorough examination of potential consequences and that the greater good must always prevail.

To access Al-Albani’s perspective, click here.

Ibn Uthaymeen’s Advocacy for Caution

Sheikh Muhammad ibn Saleh Al-Uthaymeen, another prominent Islamic scholar, supported the idea that Jihad must not result in greater harm to the nation and its people.

He underscored the need for a measured and cautious approach, ensuring that the principles of ethics and justice are upheld.

For more insights from Ibn Uthaymeen, click here.

Al-Fawzan’s Commitment to Ethical Principles

While the post by Dr. Al-Suhaymi did not provide a direct reference to Sheikh Saleh Al-Fawzan, this contemporary scholar is also known for advocating ethical principles in various aspects of Islamic jurisprudence.

His views on Jihad align with those of Ibn Baz, Al-Albani, and Ibn Uthaymeen, emphasizing the ethical and compassionate dimensions of armed conflict.

The consensus among these eminent Sunni Salafi scholars emphasizes that Jihad is not a carte blanche for violence, it is subject to strict ethical conditions.

The primary criterion is that Jihad should bring about greater good and not result in greater harm to the country and its people. The preservation of human life and well-being is of paramount importance, underlining the importance of deliberation, patience, and the avoidance of indiscriminate violence.

This clarion call for ethical Jihad resonates in the modern world, where it serves as a reminder of the moral framework within which Jihad is understood within the Sunni Islamic tradition.

These teachings stress the importance of preserving human life, minimizing harm, and ensuring that armed conflict is only resorted to as a last, carefully considered resort.

Ouagadougou (AFP) — Jihadists killed at least three soldiers and eight civilian auxiliaries in an attack Saturday in Burkina Faso’s volatile north, security sources told AFP.

Maududi’s views continue to influence thousands of Islamist militants worldwide.

The 29^th of August 1966, a man who had the most significant influence on modern Jihadism and the one who considered Sayyid Abul-Ala Maududi to be a ‘great Muslim’, was executed for ‘plotting to overthrow’ the Egyptian regime. Syed Qutb was not the only prominent Muslim to hold Maududi in such high regard. From kings and head of states to the board scholars and thinkers, Syed enjoyed respect and support, but also suffered persecution and lengthy imprisonments. This article will look at controversies of his legacy. And whether he can be held morally responsible for crimes committed in the name of the Ideology he defended all his life.

Like other Muslim thinkers, Maududi was born to a middle-class Muslim family settled in Hyderabad, part of British controlled India. He started his learning journey from homeschooling where he excelled in Arabic language and entry-level Islamic disciplines. By the age of 11, he was able to translate fine modern Arabic literature into Urdu. One of his early influencers was Iranian Philosopher Mulla Sarda, including the concept of the necessity of Sharia to the bettering of individual Muslims and societies, (Hasan, 1984).

By the age of 16, when his father passed away. He interrupted his learning and moved to Delhi, where he enhanced his reading and built up only multidisciplinary education he had between Aurangabad and Hyderabad. Maududi adopted a comparative approach showing interest and appreciation for the rise of Europe. Attributed in his opinion to the work of the philosopher, and blaming Muslim scholars for not doing enough to enlighten the Ummah.

He restored his studies and obtained a license in Islamic studies, yet he never sees himself a scholar:

He said, “I do not have the prerogative to belong to the class of Ulema. I am a man of the middle cadre, who has imbibed something from both the systems of education, the new and the old; and has gathered my knowledge by traversing both paths. By virtue of my inner light, I conclude that neither the old school nor the new is totally in the right”.

Before returning to Hyderabad in 1928, he worked as editor of the influential and anti-British Al-Jamia newspaper. In his native district, he witnessed what he described as the decline of Islamic moral and inclination towards secularism. This fear probably shaped his politics and the way he perceived the need for change. Undoubtedly, Maududi was a sincere and humble person who witnessed enormous political and social changes taking place in India and the Islamic world. Not even the creation of Pakistan satisfied his eagerness to see Islam’s might as he read about it in the book of History.

His frustration in seeing the non-Muslim West progressing in science and humanism, compared to the Muslim world’s decline into poverty and political volatility. It was probably behind his reaching out to the broad Muslim world where he taught and learned theories about Islam, philosophy and politics. However, Maududi was never regarded as a man of peace. Years after his death, his views are said to be behind most of the political and violent Islam in modern days.

In one of His books called: A reminder for the caller to Islam, Maududi laydown his views in both spiritual and operational guidance for modern Islamic militancy. Setting objectives for his global view of Islam’s awakening, the book is not for a general audience. It could be not very easy to comprehend even for an educated Muslim who doesn’t believe in political and religious activism. The book calls for ‘migration to Allah’ a concept embraced by all Islamic groups in modern days from Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt to The Islamic State group in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere, (Faruqi, 1968).

This ‘doctrine takes its routes from Historical migration of the Prophet Mohammed PBUH, from Mecca to Medina to flee persecution and preserve the faith. Mawdudi builds on that event and its wisdom, considering that everything the Prophet PBUH did or said, is a source of knowledge and guidance for every Muslim.

The migration doesn’t take place necessarily by moving from a location to another, as in verse: “And I will leave you and those you invoke other than Allah and will invoke my Lord. I expect that I will not be in invocation to my Lord, unhappy.” (Quran, 19:48). Prophet Ibrahim tells his father about his intention to isolate himself from his people, for disagreement with their beliefs.

Calling Migration to Allah is perceived as one of the stages in the struggle for the call to Islam. In a liberal society, this can be seen as a matter of personal choice. However, this type of isolations in communities where families and friends play the central role in Muslim’s lives. The implications can bring the militant to spend more time segregated with other members who have the same ideology, which leads to more radicalization.

When Jamaa replaces family and tribe, loyalty to the group likely to take priority over the society and the country. Two extreme examples of how this doctrine can lead to disasters are:

• Al-Takfīr was al-Hijrah: Where the word migration explains half of its ideology. Members of this group ended up believing anyone who is not joining them is an apostate, who’s life money and relatives become the lawful target. Isolating themselves from society without physically leaving the country (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2020).
• The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: After they fled incarceration, founders of this group called for every Muslim to practice the duty of ‘Hijra’. Migrate to the territory under their control, this call was according to the binding to every Muslim which misled thousands to join them, 

In another instance, Maududi praised Japanese Kamikazes telling his audience of Islamist militants and students that that was the spirit they needed to serve the cause of Dawaa better. The words of the scholar known for his opposition to violence against innocents did set another controversial expansionist agenda for his concept of the Islamic state.

Maududi wrote: “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam, regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a state on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which nation assumes the role of the standard-bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State. Islam requires the earth—not just a portion, but the whole planet…. because the entire mankind should benefit from the ideology and welfare programme [of Islam] … Towards this end, Islam wishes to press into service all forces which can bring about a revolution and a composite term for the use of all these forces is ‘Jihad’…. the objective of the Islamic ‘jihad’ is to eliminate the rule of a un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of state rule”.

Maududi’s views continue to influence thousands of Islamist militants worldwide, his scholarly competence was compromised by changes to geopolitics during and after his lifetime. He may have had noble intentions in serving Islam, Muslims and humanity in his time and beyond. Unfortunately, he didn’t take into consideration that his work can be taken out of context (Robinson and Nasr, 1998).

Jassem Tamim is originally from Morocco, settled in United Kingdom. He holds MA degree in Terrorism and Security from King’s College London. He is currently doing PhD research in Digital Counter-Radicalization.

Nearly 800 Islamist Imams were arrested in a heavily criticized campaign by the west.

Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or in the Land of the Two Holy Mosques—is the Saudi branch of the global Jihad organization.

It was founded in the late 1990s by Suleiman Al-Awdah’s pupil, Youssef Al-Ayyari, known as “Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula”, it was a byproduct of the “Awakening” movement in Saudi Arabia, the group launched its activities mainly focusing on recruiting youth.

The Group plotted against the Saudi Government under the pretext of objecting to the American and international role in the liberation of Kuwait from the Iraqi invasion and the subsequent American presence in the region. The leading figure behind it all was Abdullah AlHamid.

3️⃣The Group plotted against the Saudi Government under the pretext of objecting to the American and international role in the liberation of Kuwait from the Iraqi invasion and the subsequent American presence in the region.
The leading figure behind it all was Abdullah AlHamid pic.twitter.com/r0YzInB0B3

— Khaled Homoud Alshareef ?? Saudi? (@0khalodi0) April 26, 2020

The “peaceful” sit-ins, that AlHamid led with the political arm of the “Sahwa” movement did not resort to violence on the surface, but the movement’s takfiri speechs and their calls for armed Jihad through the mosques, audio cassettes and books.

The militant arm of the group at the time was Al-Qaeda. Young man from the awakening group Abdullah bin Abdul Rahman Al-Hudhaif is called by pouring an incendiary substance into a colonel in the General Investigation Department called Saud Al-Shibreen resulting in his death.

The Islamists received the news of the execution of Al-Hudhaif angrily and called him a martyr, and the guest became a symbol for the Islamists. The Islamists accused the Saudi government of opening the “door to bloodshed”.

A group of Al-Qaeda followers were: Riyadh Al-Hajri, Khaled Al-Saeed, Abdul Aziz Al-Mutam, and Musleh Al-Shamrani who stated that he said: “By God, we will not be men if we do not take revenge for (Sheikh Abdullah) .”

The retaliation came in the form of a cowardly terrorist attack on November 13, 1995 by a booby-trapped car weighing 100 kilograms that targeted a compound used by the American Army vinyl company working to train National Guard staff in Riyadh.

As a result of the attack, five Americans, an Indian were killed, and nearly 60 others were wounded. After the Riyadh bombing. In January 1998, the Security Forces arrested a group of armed men equipped with Sager anti-tank missiles in southern Saudi Arabia.

Al-Qaeda wanted to use the missile smuggled from Yemen to target the American consulate in Jeddah during the visit of the Vice President of the United States Al Gore to Saudi Arabia.

According to US and Saudi official sources, Osama bin Laden was behind the plan to target the American consulate in Jeddah, and directed Abdul Rahim Al-Nashiri to lead the operation .

Upon discovering the plot, the Saudi government responded with a swift arrest campaign targeting the Islamists leadership and Imams calling for violence. Nearly 800 Islamist Imams were arrested in a heavily criticized campaign by the west.

1️⃣2️⃣Upon discovering the plot, the Saudi government responded with a swift arrest campaign targeting the Islamists leadership and imams calling for violence . nearly 800 Islamists Imam were arrested in a heavily criticised campaign by the west. pic.twitter.com/wGW7nMNtod

— Khaled Homoud Alshareef ?? Saudi? (@0khalodi0) April 26, 2020

The Saudi government was determined to put an end to the extremist group and sent Chief of General Intelligence Prince Turki al-Faisal to Kandahar in Afghanistan to pressure Mullah Omar to hand over Osama bin Laden to the Saudi authorities.

Al-Qaeda admitted in the Voice of Jihad magazine in 2004 that many Islamists who had returned from “Jihad” in Bosnia and Herzegovina were arrested in relation of the missile smuggling case that occurred in January 1998.

A second attempt was made in 1998 to smuggle Strella-2 missiles by Egyptian Islamists via Yemen, they planned to transfer the missiles to Saudi Arabia to shoot down American and Egyptian aircrafts, the Saudi government responded to this plan by arresting 300 Islamists.

Osama bin Laden acknowledged at a press conference in Afghanistan in May 1998 that he had seized the missiles, but he boasted that the missiles that were found were much less than what had not been found.

The founder of the military council of Al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia, Ali Al-Faqsi Al-Ghamdi, blamed the leaders of the Sahwa “Islamic Awakening”.

Al-Faqsi said that “inciting them to violence and charging them with enthusiasm and passionate emotions towards conflict areas in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya, as well as the religious climate in society in the 90s, within a set of reasons, which led him to prison.”

An Iranian Revolutionary Guards official recently admitted that “since then, Iran has been present at the intersection and cooperation with Al-Qaeda in Bosnia, under the cover of the Iranian Red Crescent.”

During an exclusive interview with Iranian television on May 30, 2018, Iranian Judicial Aide Mohammad Javad Larijani revealed that “Iran has facilitated the passage of Al-Qaeda militants who carried out the attacks of September 11, 2001 in New York,” according to Al-Arabiya.

The preachers who remained avoided prison, because they were less influential or kept a low profile, kept the awakening soul alive in their minds of their followers when they restored to a less confrontational approach by rebranding themselves and the group.

The Sahwa movement has been renamed the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association abbreviated as Hasm; a Saudi non-governmental human rights association.

Abdullah AlHamid, Salman Alouda and other Sahwa leading figures started to distancing themselves from the usual process of instigation, recruitment and operations. But that’s a story for another day, where I will talk in depth about the Academy of Change—Qatar and Turkey.

Khaled Homoud Alshareef holds PhD in Business and he earned Masters in Philosophy. He often writes about Islamism, Islamist factions and modern Terrorism. He tweets under @0khalodi0.

Foreign Minister told me that Qatar demanded al-Nusra my release via Israel because it was afraid of me being kidnapped again by other jihadists…

American journalist and essayist, Theo Padnos was abducted and imprisoned for 22 months by the jihadists of the Al-Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria.

During his captivity, he was subjected to various forms of torture, including waterboarding, as made famous by the CIA’s “intense interrogations” carried out in Guantanamo, and gruesome staged scenes aimed at making him believe that he would be hung or buried alive.

Yet he remained hopeful, convinced that he would be freed: as he understood Arabic, he got into the habit of discreetly listening to his jailers’ conversations. He thus came to understand that his captors had previously concluded a secret agreement with the Qataris aimed at obtaining financing under the guise of getting Doha to pay a ransom for his release!

How did you become a hostage of the al-Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria?

I was abducted in October 2012. I was in Turkey reporting on the Syrian refugees. I then wanted to report on the foreign voluntary doctors helping the victims of the war on the other side of the border, in Syria. It was at that time, in Antakya, that I met three individuals who told me that they were prepared to help me organise a two or three-day trip to Aleppo and then Idleb, and finally returning to Turkey.

However, as soon as we crossed the border, they beat me and put me in restraints and told me in Arabic: “We are from al-Qaeda and you are our prisoner”.

They held me for a further 24 hours before handing me over to Al-Nusra. It was a terrible day during which those three jailers subjected me to torture for the first time. They tied my hands to the ceiling and whipped me in the hope of making me confess that I was a spy. They kept asking me: “Who do you work for? Who trained you? Where did you learn to be a spy?”. Then they subjected me to waterboarding and laughed and said: “You see, it’s just like in Guantanamo”!

When did you first learn about a ransom for your freedom proposed by Qatar?

From the very first days of my detention, I heard that my abductors were in contact with a Qatari emissary. Little by little, through the fragments of conversations that I overheard, I finally understood that my abductors had been in cahoots with the Qatari from the very start, that they had agreed to take hostages in order to release them for a ransom. No-one told this to me explicitly, but I understood, little by little, that there was a secret deal with the Qataris; that these ransoms were a roundabout way for Doha to fund al-Nusra without being suspected of financing terrorism. I was convinced of this.

Did that help you to get through the ordeal of those long months of captivity?

Yes, it helped me to remain hopeful. However, my abductors took great pleasure in constantly letting me believe that they were going to kill me. On many occasions, they came to my cell and told me: “Get ready, we will be coming back in 5 minutes to execute you according to Sharia law”.

Once, they led me to a torture chamber that they called the “chamber of death”, made me climb up on a scaffold and put a noose around my neck. Their Emir then walked towards me and said: “You are a spy, admit it. I know that American spies are trained not to admit anything, but you are going to die anyway, and it is better to confess before going to hell”.

Another time, they came to get me and led me to a nearby field where a grave had been dug beforehand. They started beating me and haranguing me, saying “You will die like an animal, we are going to bury you alive like an insect”. They then pushed me into the grave and they began covering me with earth. I struggled with all my strength, but my hands and feet were tied, and I could not get the earth out of my eyes and mouth. They then suddenly stopped and left, leaving me there for another two hours before telling me to get out of the grave and taking me back to my cell.

Have you been subjected to other forms of torture?

I was regularly beaten, whipped, starved, tortured with electricity. I spent the first seven months of my captivity with the same clothes, I couldn’t even brush my teeth. I was infested with lice and in such a state of grime that I eventually came to wish my death …

Regarding your release and the ransom paid by Qatar, how did things go?

At that time, I was detained in Deraa, in southern Syria. One day, I was in my cell, when Abu Mariya came to see me and said: “Get ready, we will send you today to your mother’s house”!

They put me in the back of a pickup and drove south to the Jordanian border. I thought for a moment that they were going to liberate me via Jordan, but then they crossed the border to the Golan and handed me over to the UN forces stationed on the Syrian-Israeli border.

When I went to Doha later, two months after my release, the Foreign Minister told me that Qatar demanded al-Nusra my release via Israel because it was afraid of me being kidnapped again by other jihadists, if I was released via Jordan.

Who did you meet during your stay in Qatar? And what did you talk about?

I first met the head of the secret services [Saâda al-Qobeissi], then the Minister of Foreign Affairs [Khalid al-Attiyah]. I wanted to explain them that al-Nusra and al-Qaeda were one and the same organization. I naively thought the Qatari minister probably didn’t know the whole truth about al-Nusra’s activities in Syria. I tried to explain him that it was a terrorist organization that was destroying the country and executing innocent people. I told the minister: “By cooperating with al-Nusra, you support terrorists and help to destroy Syria”!

What did he answer?

I was in his office at the ministry and our discussion was friendly. He gave me a polite and diplomatic answer. He told me that he knew the people of al-Nusra well and trusted them completely. “We are sure of our intermediaries,” he added, “and they have always assured us that al-Nusra members are honest and sincere people who defend the Syrian people and work for the good of Syria.” I then told the Qatari minister that the people of al-Nusra were singing every day: “Our leader is Bin Laden. We destroyed the United States with a civilian plane. We have reduced the World Trade Center to dust. I sang this song in front of him, in his ministry. And he exclaimed: “At this point! Seriously? that’s what they sing!”

And with the head of the Qatari secret service, Saada al-Qobeissi, what did you talk about?

He told me that an American emissary came to see him in Doha, with my photo and those of other American hostages held in Syria, asking him if he could interfere on our behalf. The head of the Qatari service told me that he had replied to the American envoy: “I can’t promise you anything about James Foley, Kayla Mueller and Peter Kassig because they are in the hands of Daesh. But, for Theo Padnos, yes. I will make him free!

Did this statement confirm your doubts about the fact that your captors were in cahoots with the Qataris?

Yes. Absolutely!

Interview first published on Global Watch Analysis.

In a series of Tweets, Albukhaiti highlighted that the Houthis and ISIS have one thing in common that is—using religious texts of Jihad and spreading God’s religion as a pretext to spread their terror wings.

We have repeatedly said #Houthis are the Zaidi version of ISIS. They use the same texts used by #AQAP: jihad & spreading God's religion. The Intl community will pay a high price when they discover a terrorist state has formed near the most important international shipping lines/7

— علي البخيتي (@Ali_Albukhaiti) November 11, 2019

“If the world had let ISIS establish their own state in Iraq and Syria, they would have used residents in their religious, useless wars and threatened their neighbors and the international waterways, just like Houthis do in Yemen,” Albukhaiti tweeted.

The Int'l community is mistaken to consider #Houthis a political movement. If the world had let #ISIS establish their own state, in Iraq & Syria, they would've used residents in their religious useless wars & threatened their neighbors & Int'l waterways: like Houthis in #Yemen./1

— علي البخيتي (@Ali_Albukhaiti) November 11, 2019

He said that Houthis have committed the crimes which even ISIS might not have done, referring to blowing up homes of opponents.

#Houthis are also notorious than #ISIS in blowing up their opponents' homes & belittling tribal sheiks & local figures in areas under their control. Meanwhile, they present themselves to the West that they seek peace & sharing while their actions prove otherwise./4

— علي البخيتي (@Ali_Albukhaiti) November 11, 2019

Houthis are playing cleverly by not attacking the foreigners so that they can escape drawing the attention of International community, Albukhaiti said.

“Houthis have realized that they won’t draw the attention of the Int’l community to their terrorism as long as they don’t target foreigners. They learned from what happened to their partners in terrorism: ISIS & AQAP,” said Albukhaiti.

#Houthis have realized that they won't draw the attention of the Int'l community to their terrorism as long as they don't target foreigners. They learned from what happened to their partners in terrorism: #ISIS & #AQAP & the world hasn't realized it's a new style of terrorism./6

— علي البخيتي (@Ali_Albukhaiti) November 11, 2019

Eventually, he warned the International community that Houthis pretend to seek peace and power-sharing while their acts of terrorism speak otherwise.