Of those who have chosen an active engagement, the most notable are the Quakers; pacifists, who believe that there is something of God in every person and in the face of evil, that they should act in a way that is most likely to reach ‘that of God’ by turning an evil mind into a right one; something that cannot be achieved by violence. In Islam, there is a strong emphasis on justice and refusal of oppression; hence, there are times where self-defensive warfare is necessary. What the verses in the Qur’an about warfare do is to provide limitations on how warfare should be carried out. But this does not prevent the possibility and desire for non-violent resistance. “O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 49:13), from this verse, it is apparent that there is a reason for the diversity of communities and the aim is to coexist and not fight each other. Another verse (among many) that is mentioned in relation to preserving life is; “Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits in the land!” (Qur’an 5: 32). Preservation of life and not transgressing the boundaries of God are the focus of this verse; human life is sacred. Thus, in Islam, there is a clear tradition of non-violent resistance. Fighting should always be to defend oneself and the fear of transgression sets the boundaries.
On the other hand, some people choose to believe that non violent protests are undoubtedly futile. Violence tends to communicate the anger of the people further, thus leading to higher levels of attention and rates of success; vicious protests also lead to more legislative changes which generally have a larger impact. Some countries including the USA, have taught their population that blood alone shifts the wheels of history; a highly arguable statement. Even in the Bible, it states in Luke 22:36-38 “[Jesus] said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one..." The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.” – This is, to some, a justification for either self-defence or righteous violence. Faced with detention without trial, torture, even murder by corrupt authorities, Christians who ask "What would Jesus do?" will get very different answers. Some say "Love your enemies" others say "Freedom for prisoners" and "release the oppressed".
Ultimately, I believe that non-violent protests do work even though violent protests are more remembered, non-violence is more effective. As I stated above, non violence is not only morally correct, but also beneficial from a religious point of view. The problem with violent confrontation is with using violent strategies, they quickly escalate to the point where the parties' only worries are victory, revenge, and self-defence. In these cases, the moral arguments of people who are being unjustly treated become irrelevant. What matters is that they have used violent strategies and their opponent is, therefore, defensible in a violent response. This problem is complicated by the fact that both sides are usually able to dispute that the other side started the aggression. Therefore, nonviolence guarantees no automatic and unfailing success; no method of conflict resolution does.
