Answer to Question
Dealing with States That Are Actually at War
To: Abu Muhammad Salim
(Translated)

Question:

As-Salamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh

Abu Muhammad Salim

I ask Allah Almighty that you are in good health, and may Allah grant you a mighty victory. I ask Allah to open all doors of goodness at your hands.

I direct this question to our Sheikh and beloved, the Ameer of Hizb utTahrir, Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah, saying:

A brother asked me about working in a factory in the Barkan settlement for manufacturing containers. Recently, part of this factory was converted for the benefit of the ‘Israeli’ army, and it manufactures trailers for transporting electric generators and other military-related items. Is it permissible to work in this section that manufactures trailers for the army?

May Allah bless you and reward you with the best reward.

May Allah shelter you, grant you victory, protect you, empower you, and bring victory and empowerment through your hands.

If possible, a prompt answer would be appreciated—may Allah reward you.

Answer:

Wa Alaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Regarding the mentioned factory (which recently had a section converted for the benefit of the ‘Israeli’ army and manufactures trailers for transporting electric generators and other military-related items), it belongs to the Jewish entity, which is a state actually at war. The answer depends on two cases:

1. Muslims living under occupation.

2. Muslims outside of occupation.

First case:

Muslims under the Jewish occupation are like the Muslims who remained in Mecca after the state was established in Medina. It is permissible for the people of Palestine under the occupation of the Jews to engage in buying, selling, etc., except in work that strengthens the enemy. Likewise, for a Muslim who holds, for example, American citizenship, his ruling is like that of Muslims in Mecca who did not migrate, so it is permissible for them to deal with the Dar al-Harb (abode of war) in which they reside, except in matters that strengthen the disbelievers against Muslims, based on achieving the legal application (tahqiq al-manat).

Second case:

We have previously answered similar questions in multiple responses, including:

Answer to a Question on 31/03/2009:

1. Working directly with states that are actually at war is not permissible, nor is it permissible to work with companies of those states, because the relationship with actual belligerents is a war relationship, not a peaceful business one.

2. Working with institutions that deal with states actually at war is examined as follows:

a. If the project the institution is working on is for states actually at war, it is not permissible to work with the institution on that project.

b. If the project is not for belligerent states, but for local people, such as building a school or constructing a road, then the sin is upon the institution that deals with the belligerent states, but the work is permissible as long as the project is not for the states actually at war.

Answer to a Question on 24/07/2011:

"... Contracting directly with companies and organizations of occupying states of Muslim lands (those that are actually at war) is not permissible, because it is a form of dealing with states that are actually at war. As for contracting with a local government or local organization not affiliated with the occupying state but having a relationship with it, the following is considered:

1. If the relationship involves military projects with the occupying state, it is not permissible.

2. If the relationship involves commercial projects that do not harm the country, it is permissible, but it is better to avoid it due to the suspicion of causing harm.

3. If the worker is employed by the local state, but his contract is directly with the occupying state, it is not permissible.

4. If the worker is employed by the local state and his contract is with it, then it is permissible, even if the local state receives financial aid from the occupying state.

5. If the worker is employed by the local state, his contract is with the local state, but he receives his salary directly from the occupying state, then it is not permissible.

The evidences for this are the rulings of dealing with states that are actually at war."

I hope this is sufficient, and Allah Knows Best and is Most Wise.

Your brother,
Ata bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah

12 Muharram 1447 AH
Corresponding to 07/07/2025 CE 

The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page.