The policy of kindness and appeasement: Positives and negatives

A decision-maker of policy has a set of data with which he must deal during fulfilling his missions; some of which are related with realities and some with the general political vision of the country.

No matter what the current events are, political vision plays an important role in determining the ability to work in favor of decision-makers. We saw how Russia waged a disciplinary war against Georgia, ignoring the Western powers and their blocks in a time where Pakistan is unable to defend its borders before American air strike which usually kill tens of civilians.

One of the main factors for difference in reactions is: Different political visions. In a time where Russia considers itself a superpower, Pakistan builds its policy toward the west on achieving the utmost degrees of closeness. Consequently, a Russian politician has the chance to take brave actions, unlike the Pakistani politician who has to swallow bitterness.

Here, we see that the political vision played a bigger role in setting options through which enabled each side to deal with its cause, to Allah (may He be Exalted) returns all matters.

We shall not elaborate in talking about building political visions and their effects, however, we shall deal with one of them, which is the policy of kindness and appeasement.

We can feel this developed political vision in the first establishment was laid down by the Prophet (peace be upon him) in Madinah (Medina) when he concluded a truce with the Jews and entered in peace with them. He did not want to fight them even though they were not different from the pagans of Makkah without sacrificing his religion, achieving gains, one of the most important is establishing the pillars of the state and directing its energies against its outer enemies.

This did not prevent the Prophet from disciplining them, beating on their hands, and dealing firmly with prophetic guidance when he sees the pagans reneging covenants or turning against compacts and agreements (as they always do, may Allah curse them).

The Prophet (peace be upon him) killed Ka`b ibn Al Ashraf, evacuated Banu Al Nadir and Banu Qaynuqa`, and conquered Banu Qurayzhah in their homes then followed the Jews to Khaybar which he opened for Islam, evacuated them to the Levant (the region covering Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine), and drove them out of the Arab Peninsula, and destroyed their entities forever.

These are the positives of appeasement policy when there are not an end but a mean to make a remarkable status for the nation under which the Islamic call spreads, but what about its negatives?

In an article called "an open discourse with the Saudi" published in "Arab news Magazine," Tanya c. says: "Indeed, you (the Saudis) have many things to make you feel proud but your great manners have permitted the West to step over you with heavy boots and describe you as a source of threat to democracy and to the world." In these words, we can see the negatives of appeasement policy not on the tongue of a Muslim woman, but on the tongue of a non-Muslim woman who tasted the beauty of Islamic lifestyle to bear witness that we are the best communities on earth and that our kindness has exceeded limits to keep silent about those people who insult us day and night publicly in daytime.

Here, we have to pause with our sweet policy and direct it in order to be more effective in making a better future. Nothing prevents a person to be kind to others because that is one of the ways of calling to Islam. However, when this kindness is exploited in insults and informational pressure to affect certain decisions in regard of internal or external movements, we must strike at the hand of oppressors to deter them. When USA tried to attack China through the reports of human rights, China replied in the same manner, revealing the bad conditions of humans in USA; thus is the way of beasts, and thus we should treat these beasts.

With best regards!