When a “Cease-Fire” is Not a Cease-Fire

FRONTPAGE MAG
by David Bedein
July 17, 2014

In the current conflagration between Israel and Gaza, news agencies mistakenly report that a “cease fire” is being discussed with Hamas. In the imagination of the media, such a “cease fire” might result in the kind of armistice that ended hostilities in World War I, on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the eleventh month on Nov. 11 1918, paving the way to the Versailles peace treaty and the genesis of the League of Nations.

However, the three Arabic nuanced terms being discussed with Hamas as a resolution to the current situation have nothing to do with a “cease fire”: Those terms are Hudna, Tahadia and Hudaybiyyah. All three terms imply continued war, after a respite.

Hudna: a tactical pause intended only for rearmament, a temporary respite in the war between Islamic forces and non-Islamic forces. The authoritative Islamic Encyclopedia (London, 1922) defines hudna as a “temporary treaty” which can be approved or abrogated by Islamic religious leaders, depending on whether or not it serves the interests of Islam; a hudna cannot last for more than 10 years.

Tahadia: a temporary halt in hostile activity which can be violated at any time.

Hudaybiyyah: An understanding that there will be no fighting for 10 years named for the “treaty of Hudaybiyyah” in 628 AD.

……Hudna, Tahadia and Hudaybiyyah – the only options on the table with Hamas – do not compare to the “mu’ahada” treaty of peace that Egypt signed with Israel in 1979, or the mu’ahada treaty of peace that Jordan signed with Israel in 1994….

READ MORE
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dbedein/when-a-cease-fire-is-not-a-cease-fire/

 

This entry was posted in Islam, Israel & Middle East and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.