A few weeks ago a group of Saudi religious scholars issued a “fatwa” concerning the matter of armed resistance to the occupation of Iraq by US, excuse me, I mean coalition forces.

This prompted a huge outcry in the press condemning this fatwa and accusing the 26 scholars of all kinds of evil intentions.

Now that the hullabaloo has quieted down, I would like to discuss this issue soberly, thoughtfully and without hysteria.

To begin with, it is important to explain just what exactly a fatwa is.

A fatwa is quite simply a juridical opinion. This opinion naturally is of greater or lesser importance depending on who issues the fatwa.

For example, a legal opinion issued by a group of US lawyers will have less weight and significance than an opinion given by the US Supreme Court.

Similarly a fatwa’s weight and significance is according to who issues the fatwa.

Many Westerners believe that a fatwa has the same significance for a Muslim as a Papal bull has for a Catholic. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Fatwas can be followed or ignored depending on who issues the fatwa and whether the fatwa is on a controversial matter or not.

In instances of controversy, Muslims may follow the fatwa that they are most comfortable with.

In this particular instance, the 26 scholars do not represent official fatwa-issuing organizations nor do they represent official Saudi policy. They do, however, represent a significant body of opinion in the Muslim world on the proper manner for dealing with the foreign occupiers of Iraq.

To claim that the publication of this fatwa will encourage hundreds of young Saudi men to volunteer to fight US soldiers in Iraq is nonsense.

To be perfectly frank, they don’t need this fatwa to encourage them to go; all they need is the US’ own behavior in Iraq and other Muslim countries.

It is important to note that the United Nations itself has described the situation in Iraq as an “occupation” and the coalition forces there as “occupying forces”.

In other words, US forces in Iraq are not a group of friendly boy scouts out to help elderly Iraqi ladies cross Baghdad streets.

These scholars were merely expressing their opinion and the US itself is constantly accusing the governments of the Middle East of not allowing proper freedom of expression for their people.

It seems, however, that freedom of expression must be confined to following the American line and any opposing opinion is to be squashed.

As for the question of some Saudi youths who cross our borders to join the resistance forces in Iraq, we officially are doing everything in our power to stop this from happening. We discourage them and we even threaten them and if any are caught on the border they are arrested and jailed.

Why should some of our government officials then volunteer to take the responsibility for those youths who cross our border into Iraq?

The US is the single most powerful country in the history of mankind and if they are incapable of protecting Iraq’s borders with neighboring countries from the infiltration of non-Iraqi mujahedeen, why should we be expected to do a better job?

I have a couple of questions for the mandarins who are in charge of our foreign policy.

Have you ever heard of an occupying power who has spent so much effort in men and treasure as the US has in occupying Iraq to just pack up their bags and leave when the occupied ask them to?

Is it in the national interest of any of the nations surrounding Iraq to see it calm, peaceful and under the unchallenged control of the US?