The Truth in Islam - Discover Authentic Islamic Knowledge

The Peace Treaty That Wasn't

In 628 CE, Muhammad signed a 10-year peace treaty with the Quraysh tribe of Mecca at a place called Hudaybiyyah. Two years later, he broke the treaty and conquered Mecca. Islamic sources celebrate this as brilliant strategy rather than condemn it as treachery. Understanding this event is crucial to understanding Islamic views on treaties, peace agreements, and negotiations with non-Muslims.

The Historical Context

The Situation in 628 CE

By 628 CE, Muhammad had been in Medina for six years. He had:

Expelled two Jewish tribes and massacred a third
Won the Battle of Badr against the Quraysh
Survived the Battle of Uhud
Defended Medina at the Battle of the Trench

However, he was not yet strong enough to conquer Mecca by force. The Quraysh controlled Mecca and prevented Muhammad from making pilgrimage there.

Muhammad's Pilgrimage Attempt

Muhammad traveled to Mecca with about 1,400 followers, claiming he only wanted to perform pilgrimage (umrah), not fight. The Quraysh blocked his path at Hudaybiyyah, about 9 miles from Mecca.

The Terms of the Treaty

What Was Agreed

According to authentic Islamic sources, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah included:

10-year truce: Complete cessation of hostilities for ten years
Muslims return this year: Muhammad and his followers would return home without performing pilgrimage
Pilgrimage next year: Muslims could perform pilgrimage the following year for three days
Return of fugitives: If anyone from Quraysh joined Muhammad, he must return them. If a Muslim fled to the Quraysh, they didn't have to return them.
Tribal neutrality: Other tribes could ally with either side without interference

Muslim Disappointment

Many of Muhammad's followers were furious with these terms, viewing them as humiliating. Umar ibn al-Khattab (who would become the second caliph) questioned Muhammad about accepting such unfavorable conditions.

"Umar said, 'Why should we accept such a degrading treaty when we are Muslims and they are polytheists?'" — Sahih Bukhari 3:50:891

The Quranic Response

Surah Al-Fath (Victory)

Shortly after the treaty, Allah revealed Surah 48 (Al-Fath, "The Victory"), calling this apparent setback a "clear victory":

"Indeed, We have given you a clear victory, that Allah may forgive you your past and future sins, and complete His favor upon you, and guide you to a straight path, and that Allah may aid you with a mighty victory." — Quran 48:1-3

But how was this a victory? Islamic sources explain that it gave Muhammad time to consolidate power, win over tribes, and prepare for the conquest of Mecca.

Breaking the Treaty

The Pretext

Less than two years later, a conflict erupted between the Banu Bakr (allied with Quraysh) and the Banu Khuza'a (allied with Muhammad). Members of Banu Bakr, allegedly with some Quraysh support, killed some members of Banu Khuza'a.

Muhammad used this as justification to declare the treaty broken—not by the Quraysh leadership (who didn't officially authorize the attack), but by individuals associated with them.

The Conquest of Mecca (630 CE)

In 630 CE, Muhammad marched on Mecca with 10,000 warriors. The Quraysh, unprepared for this violation of the treaty, surrendered without significant resistance.

"The Prophet came to Mecca in the year of the Conquest, and there were 360 idols around the Ka'bah. He started stabbing them with a stick he had in his hand and saying, 'Truth (Islam) has come and Falsehood (disbelief) has vanished.'" — Sahih Bukhari 4:52:233

Islamic Interpretation: Strategic Deception

Celebrated as Brilliant Strategy

Islamic scholarship celebrates Muhammad's actions as brilliant strategic thinking:

The treaty gave him time to build strength
It allowed him to win over new tribes
It demonstrated his "patience" and "diplomatic skill"
It ultimately led to the conquest of Mecca

The Sealed Nectar, a widely-read biography of Muhammad, praises this as exemplary prophetic strategy.

The Doctrine of Taqiyya

While taqiyya (religious dissimulation) is more emphasized in Shi'a Islam, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah provides a precedent for making strategic agreements with non-Muslims while planning eventual conquest.

The Broader Pattern

Other Broken Treaties

The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah wasn't Muhammad's only treaty with non-Muslims:

The Constitution of Medina: Agreement with Jewish tribes, later expelled or massacred
Banu Qaynuqa: Treaty broken, tribe expelled
Banu Nadir: Treaty broken, tribe expelled
Banu Qurayza: Treaty broken, men massacred, women and children enslaved

In each case, Muhammad found a reason to break the treaty when it became advantageous to do so.

Classical Scholarly View

Temporary Treaties Allowed

Classical Islamic jurisprudence, based on this precedent, allows Muslims to make temporary peace treaties with non-Muslims when Muslims are weak, but these can be broken when Muslims become strong enough to resume jihad.

The influential Islamic jurist al-Shafi'i wrote that peace treaties with non-Muslims should only last as long as Muslim interests require, with a maximum of ten years (based on Hudaybiyyah).

Modern Implications

Peace Negotiations with Muslim States

The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah provides a troubling precedent for modern peace negotiations:

Are treaties temporary? If a Muslim state views itself as temporarily weak, is a peace treaty merely strategic deception?
The "land for peace" problem: If Islamic law views all formerly Muslim land as permanently Muslim, can any peace treaty involving territorial concession be permanent?
The role of strength: Does a shift in power dynamics justify breaking treaties?

Contemporary Examples

Some scholars and critics point to modern examples:

PLO leader Yasser Arafat explicitly cited the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah when explaining his peace agreements with Israel
Some Islamic scholars have used Hudaybiyyah to justify temporary truces while planning eventual conquest
The concept appears in discussions of Muslim-majority nations' international agreements

Biblical Contrast

Jesus Christ taught the importance of honesty and keeping one's word:

"Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from evil." — Matthew 5:37

The Apostle Paul emphasized integrity in all dealings:

"Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another." — Ephesians 4:25

Christianity teaches that lying and deception are always wrong, even for strategic advantage:

"Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices." — Colossians 3:9

The contrast is clear: Jesus taught absolute honesty; Muhammad practiced strategic deception.

Defenses and Responses

Muslim Defense: The Quraysh Broke It First

Muslims argue the Quraysh violated the treaty first through their allies' attack. However:

The treaty specified individual tribes' actions
The Quraysh leadership didn't authorize the attack
Some Quraysh leaders tried to make amends
The response (conquering Mecca) went far beyond addressing the specific violation

Muslim Defense: It Was Allah's Plan

Muslims argue that Allah called it a "clear victory," so it must have been part of divine strategy. This defense essentially argues that deception is permissible if it serves Islamic goals.

Questions to Consider

If the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah was meant to be temporary strategic deception, what does that say about making peace treaties with Muslim states?
Is breaking a treaty after two years compatible with the claim that Islam values honesty and integrity?
If Muhammad broke multiple treaties with non-Muslims, can we trust that Islamic states will honor their agreements?
Does "they broke it first" justify conquering an entire city when the treaty specified how to handle violations?
What does it say about Islamic values that this broken treaty is celebrated as brilliant strategy rather than condemned as deception?
Can a religion founded on such pragmatic treaty-breaking truly promote lasting peace?

Conclusion

The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah reveals an important principle in Islamic practice: peace treaties with non-Muslims may be temporary, strategic, and breakable when circumstances change. While Muslims celebrate this as brilliant strategy, it raises serious questions about the trustworthiness of treaties with Islamic states and the Islamic view of international agreements.

For those investigating Islam or negotiating with Islamic states, understanding the significance of Hudaybiyyah is crucial. It's not just ancient history—it's an authoritative precedent in Islamic law and practice.

The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah: Muhammad's Strategy