Stephen Coughlin on the Quranic Concept of War

During last week’s OSCE/ODIHR conference in Warsaw, the Counterjihad Collective organized a side event entitled “Why Does Europe Hate Speech?” The following video from the event shows a talk given by retired Maj. Stephen Coughlin on the Muslim Brotherhood’s long-term plans for jihad — both kinetic and non-kinetic — which are even now bearing fruit, both at the OSCE and elsewhere.

In his talk Maj. Coughlin discusses, among other things, The Quranic Concept of War, a book that was written in 1979 by the serving Brigadier General S. K. Malik when he was chief of staff of the Pakistani army.[1] President Zia ul Haq declared the book to be his country’s military doctrine.[2] The Advocate General in Pakistan, a man named Brohi[3], affirmed that it was law.

So it’s a significant book, and well worth paying attention to.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for editing and uploading this video:

In his book Gen. Malik writes:

So spirited, zealous, complete and thorough should be our preparation for war that we should enter upon the ‘war of muscles’ having already won the ‘war of will’. Only a strategy that aims at striking terror into the hearts of the Enemies from the preparation stage can produce direct results and turn Liddell Hart’s dream into a reality. (p. 58)

He also says, “We do not even start the fighting war until we have already assessed that the war has been won. We have already made the enemy surrender mentally.”

From pages 57 to 58, he includes the four following quotes from the Koran to make his point.[4]

I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. (Qur’an 8: 12)

Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers. (Qur’an 3: 151)

And those of the People of the Book who aided them, Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts, so that some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners [the women and the children]. And he made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things. (Qur’an 33: 26-27)

Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the Godly): they will never frustrate them. Against them make ready your strength of the utmost of your power, including steeds of war to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah any your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. (Qur’an 8:56-60)

Based on the above citations from the Koran, Gen. Malik concludes:[5]

TERROR struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means; it is an end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent’s heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved. It is the point where the means and the end meet and merge. TERROR is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose upon him.

Thus his conclusion is that the Quranic concept of war is terror, with four quotes from the Koran to back up his argument. His final sentences at the end of the same chapter are very important:

Terror cannot be struck into the hearts of an army by merely cutting its lines of communication or depriving it of its routes to withdraw. It is basically related to the strength or weakness of the human soul. It can be instilled only if the opponent’s Faith is destroyed. Psychological dislocation is temporary; spiritual dislocation is permanent. … To instill terror into the hearts of the enemy, it is essential, in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate his faith. An invincible faith is immune to terror.[6]

The object of jihad is therefore the destruction of faith. It intends to destroy our faith in our God, in our government, in our legal system, in our entire world. Once we lose faith in our world, we become the object of a Da’wah mission that aims to convert us to Islam.

At the very end of his book, Gen. Malik’s chilling final sentence reads:[7]

This rule is fully applicable to nuclear as well as conventional wars.

Concerning this book, in another context Maj. Coughlin once remarked:

So this is the “Quranic concept of war”. Do you think General Malik was mistaken? Do you think his understanding of Islamic doctrine is incorrect?

Even if someone were to argue that the general’s understanding of Islam is wrong, all we have to do is show that this was published doctrine in Pakistan. The Pakistani government creates policy and executes it as if this doctrine were correct. Furthermore, their written doctrine includes a statement that they can use nuclear weapons in furtherance of jihad.

Do we really need anything else?

Our job is not to know true Islam. Our job requires us to understand the doctrines that drive the enemy’s behavior in his self-declared war.

Notes:

1.   The Quranic Concept of War by Brigadier S.K. Malik (Lahore, Pakistan: Wajid Al’s Ltd., 1979, with a forward by General Zia-ul-Haq). First Indian Reprint, New Delhi, India: Himalayan Books, 1986. Cited hereafter as S.K. Malik.
2.   S.K. Malik, xi.
3.   S.K. Malik, xiii.
4.   S.K. Malik, 57, 58.
5.   S.K. Malik, 59.
6.   S.K. Malik, 60.
7.   S.K. Malik, 60
 

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.

4 thoughts on “Stephen Coughlin on the Quranic Concept of War

  1. NOTHING to see here folks.
    Nothing at ALL.
    Now, go about your business–all you nice happy little people–and don’t worry your pretty little heads about anything.
    Anything at all.

    LOOK! A SHINEY!!
    ……………………………………………………………..Squirrel!!

  2. Coughlin has all the information in his book, https://www.amazon.com/Catastrophic-Failure-Blindfolding-America-Jihad-ebook/dp/B00X6GH8PA/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8, still an unbelievable $6 on Kindle at Amazon. He gives a thorough review of Malik, details the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of US institutions, and and an almost too-detailed description of the stratagems used by Muslim Brotherhood agents to squelch any factual public discussion of Islamic doctrine.

    The use of terror, or the loss of confidence by a non-Muslim population in their government, parallels almost one-to-one the philosophy of cultural Marxists, who take as a primary motivation to destroy the structures, culture, history, and institutions of the West. The thousand-mile journey of the cultural Marxists and the jihadists run along a common road for 950 miles. In the last few miles, of course, the Muslims will kill the cultural Marxists who don’t accept the authority of Islam. My feeling is that those cultural Marxists with any brain at all know this. However, they don’t care. Their hatred of the West and its institutions trumps their instinct for survival…assuming they have any residual instinct for survival.

  3. It appears to be the case that the Pakistani military literally supports the use of nuclear jihad as a means to achieve the stated goal of all jihad, to strike terror in the enemy, such that his very soul quakes, his religious faith, his belief in his government, his world, it all collapses utterly in the face of such total terror.

    It seems inevitable Pakistan will deploy nuclear jihad against India at some point. Historically the most horrific jihads were those mounted against the Hindu kingdoms, in terms of sheer scale and the level of viciousness employed.

    In a frank moment Obama, when asked which Muslim country he found the most worrisome, replied that nation was Pakistan. Perhaps he feared what Pakistan’s doctrine of the legitimacy of nuclear jihad could lead to.

    I suspect that the MB, the umbrella Sunni jihad organization, silently espouses the same doctrine.

  4. Stephen Coughlin originally reported in one of his videos that Pakistani generals circulated a memo that they had asked Islamic scholars to determine whether a NUCLEAR FIRST STRIKE UPON THE USA was “okay” with the teachings of Islam and that their conclusion was YES. This from our alleged ALLY.

    Even if you eliminate terror, it changes nothing of the ‘demographic bomb’ places like Israel face where if they don’t act in what others would call a ‘racist’ fashion for daring to insist there be one safe country where jews can be jews (since that in no way prevents the other 50 countries where muslims run everything from being safe for muslims, merely asking 2% of what muslims demand elsewhere of running a full quarter of the worlds countries) since if they dont they will be outbred in the country they built so that it can be run into the ground.

    Right now there is dabbling with Saudi Arabia apparently claiming it’s turned over a new leaf and Mr Trump apparently believing these promises to unite against ‘common enemy’ Iran when it’s been decades since Iran did anything and the Saudi’s are actively funding extremist teachers all over the US and mosques RIGHT NOW in a proactive takeover.

    I HAVE to believe that widespread ignorance of things like this is just that – correctable ignorance – and not willful denial all the time. It is why I keep insisting why it is more important to promote the right people with the right understanding of Islam (such as Stephen Coughlin, John Guandolo, Bill Warner) far moreso than “anyone who simply dislikes Islam” because it is a very different message when the latter can be dismissed as a racist or xenophobe and tuned out by the general population. I can only believe that “if the general population truly knew” they would not pander to, tolerate or compromise with the nonsense. Lots of people dislike Islam but if their rejection lacks merit, it cannot propagate effectively. Better to have one truly informed “islamic rejectionist” than a dozen semi focused generic dislikers.

Comments are closed.