islamic-jihad-legacy-of-forced-conversion-imperialism-slavery

The Arab–Islamic Imperialismthe cities like London, Paris, Amsterdam, Madrid and Lisbon owed their prosperity and affluence in thosedays to the wealth generated from economic exploitations overseas. Many prominent European families tothis day owe their comfortable and affluent status to the entrepreneurial and rags-to-riches success of acolonist ancestor, who made his fortune in tea, spices, rubber, sugar or shipping.But, what was the true motive of Islamic invasion and rule around the world? Was it not motivatedby economic exploitations as well? Let us go back to the foundations of Islam to see how ProphetMuhammad’s exploits in terms of economic extractions had influenced the later Islamic expansion.The model of plunder and economic exploitation, which the Prophet had established in hisconquests—of Khaybar, for example—became the modus operandi in subsequent Muslim invasions duringthe early centuries of Islam. After all, anything the Prophet did was, for Muslims, not only a stamp ofapproval to do likewise, but, theologically, was also the most ideal example Muslims must strive to emulate intheir actions and deeds. The Pact of Omar also gives a similar outline for extracting taxes from the conquereddhimmi subjects. When early Muslim invaders conquered Syria, Jerusalem and Egypt etc., the Christian andJews were made to pay jizyah to the treasury of the Medina caliphate and suffer other forms of humiliatingimpositions applicable to dhimmi subjects in a Muslim state. Furthermore, Caliph Omar devised a system ofland-tax, called kharaj, imposed on dhimmis in conquered Muslim territories.Making his successful inroads into Sindh in 712, Muhammad bin Qasim looted and plundered vastsums of treasures and wealth, and captured a great multitude of women and children as slaves after killing themen in large numbers. Qasim always sent the state’s share of one-fifth of the loot and captured slaves, thedivinely sanctioned "spoil of war" (anfal) as per the Islamic creed, to the caliph in Damascus. After everysuccessful campaign, the state’s one-fifth share of the booty was meticulously put aside for forwarding to thecaliph. Al-Kufi records in Chachnama that 20,000 captives of both sexes along with the looted wealth wereforwarded to the caliph in one occasion. 353 The caliph would add some of the prettiest of the young women tohis harem; others would be given as gifts to his nobles and generals; and the remainder sold for generatingrevenues for the treasury.Prophet Muhammad used to take possession of the most prized female captives, such as Safiya, thebeautiful young wife of Khaybar leader Kinana, for keeping as his own concubine. Qasim, likewise, sent thefemale captives of special value or significance—of exquisite beauty or royal and noble blood—as a specialgift and mark of respect to the caliph. When two daughters of King Dahir were taken captive by Qasim, heduly forwarded them to Caliph al-Walid, who made them part of his harem.The cost of Qasim’s initial assaults in Sindh stood at 60 million dirhams, financed by the treasury ofthe caliph. Months before Qasim was recalled from his three-year mission to Sindh, the one-fifth share of thebooty, sent to governor al-Hajjaj in Iraq, was counted to be 120 million dirhams. 354 Hajjaj quickly settled debtto the caliphal treasury and wrote a letter to Qasim, saying: ‘My nephew, I had agreed and pledged myself, atthe time you marched with the army, to repay the whole expense incurred by the public treasury in fitting outthe expedition to the Khalifa Walid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan, and it is incumbent on me to do so.’ 355Qasim imposed jizyah and kharaj taxes on the Hindu subjects according to the laws formulated byCaliph Omar, based on the principles set down in the Quran and Sunnah. Chachnama records: ‘MuhammadQasim fixed the poll-tax upon all the subjects according to the laws of the Prophet. Those who embraced theMuhammadan faith were exempted from slavery, the tribute (kharaj) and the poll-tax (jizyah); and from thosewho did not change their creed, a tax was exacted.’ 356 With the capture of Sindh, the Hindus simply becameserfs in their ancestral land of centuries, which became property of the Muslim state. They had to pay the353. Lal (1994), p. 19354. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. I, p. 470–71355. Ibid, p. 206356. Ibid, p. 182120