Political Islam, both Sunni and Shia, poses a serious and ongoing threat to any society it seeks to control. In its ideology, the world is divided into two categories: Dar al-Islam (House of Islam)—where Islamic rule is established, and Dar al-Harb (House of War)—where all means, including deception and violence, are justified to bring it under Islamic rule.
This is not just a theoretical belief; it is a deeply rooted strategy followed by jihadist movements. A key historical example is the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, which Prophet Muhammad signed with the Jewish tribes when he was weak, only to break it once he gained enough power. Today, this same tactic is used by Islamist movements, whether Sunni—such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and Boko Haram—or Shia—led by Iran and its armed proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.
History Repeats Itself: Political Islam and the Hudaybiyyah Strategy
When Prophet Muhammad signed the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, his goal was to buy time until he could grow stronger. As soon as the balance of power shifted in his favor, he broke the agreement and attacked his former allies. This strategy remains a core principle of political Islam today. It is the foundation of Taqiyya, the Islamic practice of deception, where agreements are made only to be abandoned when power is secured.
A modern example of this Hudaybiyyah strategy is Iran’s nuclear deal with the West. When Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, it used Taqiyya to deceive the international community.
The Iranian regime presented itself as a responsible actor willing to limit its nuclear ambitions in exchange for economic relief. However, from the beginning, Iran never intended to fully comply. Instead, it used the deal to buy time, expand its regional influence, develop its ballistic missile program, and secretly advance its nuclear capabilities. The moment Iran felt strong enough, it openly violated the agreement, accelerating uranium enrichment and defying Western sanctions. Just like Muhammad’s Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, Iran’s nuclear deal was nothing more than a temporary truce—meant to be broken once the regime gained the upper hand.
Sunni and Shia Political Islam:
Two Sides of the Same Coin
There is no fundamental difference between Sunni and Shia political Islam. Both operate under the same principles of expansion and domination. Iran, the main force behind Shia political Islam, never views treaties as permanent. Instead, it uses them to expand its control—whether through so-called “settlements” in Lebanon and Syria or by infiltrating governments in Iraq and Yemen. Likewise, Sunni Islamist movements, such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Nusra Front, follow the same method: they negotiate, they deceive, and then they strike when the time is right.
Ahmad al-Sharaa’s Agreements in Syria: A Repeat of the Hudaybiyyah Deception
Ahmad al-Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Joulani, has become a key figure in political Islam thanks to Turkish and Qatari support, combined with Western naïveté. As an Islamist ideologue and a firm believer in the Hudaybiyyah strategy, his agreements with various ethnic and sectarian groups—such as the Kurds, Druze, and others in Syria—should not be mistaken for genuine peace efforts. Sharaa views his current agreements as temporary tools to consolidate power and the moment he feels strong enough, he will turn against his so-called partners, enforcing his Islamist rule through force and intimidation.
History offers countless examples of Islamist movements using deception to gain power before betraying their agreements. Iran did the same with its nuclear deal, and Hamas has done the same in every ceasefire it signed before resuming its attacks. Sharaa is no different. Those who trust his agreements are either unaware of history or deliberately choosing to ignore it.
The future of Syria under Sharaa is clear: any agreement he signs today will be meaningless tomorrow. He is an extremist who sees Syria not as a nation, but as a battlefield for Islamic rule. Those who believe they can coexist with him under negotiated settlements will soon learn the hard lesson that jihadist ideology does not recognize permanent peace—only temporary truces that are broken when the time is right.
The Final Message: No Middle Ground with Political Islam
No agreement with Islamist movements—whether Sunni or Shia—can be trusted. These groups follow the Hudaybiyyah strategy and practice Taqiyya, meaning they will make deals when they are weak and break them when they are strong. Iran’s nuclear deal is just another proof that political Islam cannot be contained with diplomacy. History is clear, and recent events confirm that these groups understand only one language: the language of power. Any compromise with them is not a step toward peace but a step toward future war and destruction.
