Have the KSA become disbelievers as a result of entering into the UN treaty?


Some people brandish this government as disbelievers due to its entering the United Nations treaty, and they reinforce this (claim) by using (as proof): “The UN treaty entails terms of disbelief which opposes the Sharīʿah, therefore being pleased with it is disbelieving in Islam, and thus entering a peace treaty with them is falsehood.

Likewise (their proof) from another angle is, “It is not allowed to enter a treaty with disbelievers on a permanent basis, because upon the fact that the Muslim Ummah, at its time of strength and ability, is to carry out offensive jihād and Daʿwah, thus entering a peace treaty on a permanent basis with them means abolishing offensive jihād, and this is repelling that which Allāh has legislated.”

I (Muḥammed Bazmūl) say: “Generalising a statement in this manner and making it a reason to label (Saudi) as disbelievers is incorrect, and I will clarify the truth for you Inshā’Allāh – so pay attention (including myself) to that which follows:

1 – The Time Period of Treaties According to the People of Jurisprudence:

That which the jurists – may Allāh have mercy upon them – mentioned regarding the time period of the treaty is of three circumstances:

  • A General Treaty – which has no time reference however it is not permanent, as it occurred with the Messenger (may the peace and salutations of Allāh be upon him) – when he entered a treaty with the Jews in Khaybar, it stated we (the Muslims) allow them to remain in it as long as we wish. [See Saḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī 2338]
  • A Time Restricted Treaty – just as occurred when the Messenger (may the peace and salutations of Allāh be upon him) entered a pact with al-Quraish for a time period of 10 years.
  • A Permanent Treaty – which states that the treaty is permanent and this type of treaty is false and impermissible since the principle upon the Muslims at times of strength and ability is offensive jihād or daʿwah. Therefore it is not allowed to enter this type of pact with the disbelievers, rather they are called to Islam and if they reject they are to be fought against. Ibn Taymīyyah (raḥimahullāh) said: “And it is permissible to conduct it (i.e. peace treaty), either general or limited by time, and it is necessary for the one limited by time, that both parties fulfil and comply with it as long as the enemy does not break it, and it should not be broken due to mere fear of treason, (according) to the most correct opinion of the scholars. As for the general treaty, then it is a permissible contract which the leader can enter upon due to a benefit or interest” (al-Ikhtiyārāt pg. 455).

2 – The Treaty of the United Nation:

The treaty of the United Nations is a general treaty, which is not restricted to a time period, therefore it is a treaty that is permissible which the leader may carry out according to what he sees beneficial.

Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz bin ʿAbd-Allāh bin Bāz (raḥimahullāh) said, “It is allowed to enter a pact with the enemies (this pact being) either general or time restricted, if the leader sees a benefit in entering a treaty.”

 Allāh the most High said,

۞ وَإِن جَنَحُوا لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ ۞

“But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it and (put your) trust in Allāh.
Verily he is All-Hearer, the All-Knower” 
[Sūrah al-Anfāl: 8: 61]

And likewise the Prophet (May the peace and salutations of Allāh be upon him) entered, and performed all of this, just as he entered a pact with the people of Makkah abandoning war for 10 years, wherein the people were under safety and security, and they withheld from fighting one another. Similarly, he entered general pacts with many Arab tribes, and when Allāh allowed him to conquer Makkah he threw their covenants back at them, and he set for those who had no covenant an appointed period of 4 months, just as in the statement of Allāh – Glory be to Him,

بَرَاءَةٌ مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ إِلَى الَّذِينَ عَاهَدتُّم مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ۞
۞ فَسِيحُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ أَرْبَعَةَ أَشْهُرٍ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّكُمْ غَيْرُ مُعْجِزِي اللَّهِ ۙ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ مُخْزِي الْكَافِرِينَ 

“Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allāh and His Messenger to those of the mushrikūn, with whom you made a treaty. So travel freely for 4 months (as you will) throughout the land, but know that you cannot escape (from the punishment of) Allāh and Allāh will disgrace the disbelievers.”
[Surah al-Tawbah: 9: 1-2]

And he, (may the peace and salutations of Allāh be upon him) – sent a campaign accompanied by Abu Bakr al-Siddīq in the 9th year of Hijra after the conquest of Makkah, where he made his pilgrimage due to necessity and Islamic interest which was required for this general treaty. It was then to be terminated when there was no further need or necessity present for a treaty, just like the Prophet (may the peace and salutations of Allāh be upon him) did. And Ibn Qayyim expanded on this in his book “Aḥkām Ahl al-Dhimmah” and (this opinion) was chosen by his teacher, Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymīyyah and a group of the people of knowledge, and Allāh is the source of success.”

3 – Does it Involve Disbelief?

The affair of conducting a treaty which contains terms that oppose the Sharīʿah does not necessitate disbelief, because this government (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) reserved itself from every term which opposes Islam when making the covenant with the UN.

And we have not ceased reading every year, the Committee of Human Rights in the UN, mentioning the name of the Kingdom (Saudi Arabia), amongst other governments, who do not apply the human rights due to its carrying out Islamic legislated punishments. And the speech against the Kingdom is repeated in the media due to its rejection of some UN stances pertaining to women and freedom of religion, thus Saudi Arabia has reserved itself from everything in the covenant which opposes the Sharīʿah.

Additionally, there are some terms which are not mandatory such as the affair of returning back to the Courts of International Justice to settle disputes. The Kingdom does not return back to this court; rather it solves jurisdiction problems with its neighbouring countries with that which Allāh has bestowed upon the Kingdom of love and trust.

Likewise, KSA has never agreed with point 101 of the “Human Rights” which states: “when the man and woman reach the age of puberty they have the right to marry without restriction of religion”2 so the government of Tawḥīd said in a memo it sent to the UN, “The marrying of a Muslim male to an idol-worshipper or a woman who does not believe in the existence of God is an affair which Islam prohibits, as for a non-Muslim man marrying a Muslim woman then this is not allowed.”

4 – 18th Point of the Universal Declaration for Human Rights3

The government of Tawḥīd did not agree with the 18th point of the International Declaration for Human Rights which gives each person the freedom to change religion.

The Kingdom did not join two international treaties:

1) in relation to economic, social and cultural rights.

2) in relation to political and civil rights, because these two treaties entail things which are not in accordance with the teachings of Islamic Sharīʿah.

 5 – Certainty is Not Removed by Doubts:

Therefore this report assures that declaring KSA disbelievers because of this is nothing but assumptions and doubts and certainty is not removed by doubt, so we remain upon the certainty which is – KSA is an Islamic land both the government and its citizens.

And with Allāh lies success.

1 [TN] – The Shaykh may be referring to article 16 of the UN Human Rights.

2 Article 16 (1): ‘Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.’

[3] Article 18: ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance only with the permission of the person and not by force.’