Transgressing the Terms of Covenant in the Islamic Jurisprudence of International Relations: The Cases of Socotra and Cyprus in Comparison

Abstract

The breaching of treaties between Muslims and Non-Muslims and
their legal repercussions is an important topic in the Islamic jurisprudence of
international relations. This article compares two cases of breach of covenant
in Islamic history: Cyprus (1st-2nd century AH) and Socotra (3rd century AH),
with regard to the events, their depiction in historical sources, and scholars’
legal evaluations of them. These cases reflect different regional backgrounds
regarding maritime engagement: the Rightly Guided Caliphate and early
Umayyad State were reluctant to initiate engagement in the Mediterranean,
whereas Oman was a seafaring nation active in the Indian Ocean even before
Islamic times. The case of Cyprus took place concurrently with the formation
of legal schools (madhāhib) and numerous outstanding Sunni scholars were
asked for their verdicts; the case of Socotra was evaluated from an Ibadi
viewpoint. Neither case seems to have been discussed in the fiqh compendia of
the respective other school(s).