Jihad as "struggle to improve society"is more akin to the way we in the U.S. have used the phrase “war on poverty”. A “war on poverty” does not mean literally killing those who impoverish others—it means attacking the conditions of poverty in a vigorous though non-violent way.

There is also what is called “the greater Jihad” which refers to the inner struggle for faith by the individual believer. It is the “greater” Jihad, many Muslims believe, because it the more difficult struggle and also the most worthwhile.

But, it is also the case that Jihad can and is used to mean armed struggle and all Muslim leaders I know acknowledge this both historically and in the contemporary context. In this sense, the meaning of Jihad it is very like the concept of “Just War” in Christianity. This is certainly true historically as there are rules in Muslim commentarial texts that parallel the criteria of Just War theory. These Muslim rules for the conduct of violent struggle include not killing women, children and non-combatants, as well as not damaging cultivated or residential areas. It is clear that this concept of Jihad can (and is) used as a religious critique of terrorism as un-Islamic in the same way that I and others have criticized the pre-emptive war tactics of the Bush administration in attacking Iraq as violating Christian Just War thinking.

There is an internal struggle today especially within Islam, Christianity and Judaism, over whether war can ever be considered "holy". This is a concept of war I and many other religious leaders reject categorically but there is no denying that the idea that war can be waged for divine purposes is a major motor of violence in the world today.

In 2005 an important statement was published by the Muslim-Christian dialogue group of which I have been a part. A group of religious leaders and scholars, Muslims, Christians and others, was convened by the Islamic Society of North America, the Managing the Atom Project of the Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Churches’ Center for Theology and Public Policy to consider the danger of nuclear weapons. We produced a consensus statement and I have appended it below in its entirety.

More recently, several from this same group of Christians and Muslims (with some key additional members) has reconvened with an equal number of Jewish leaders to work on a joint Jewish/Muslim/Christian statement on the practical steps of peacemaking (what are called “practice norms”) in the developing Just Peace perspective. We anticipate publishing a joint monograph this fall through the United States Institute of Peace on “Jewish, Christian and Muslim Approaches to Just Peacemaking”. Just Peace is an emerging fourth paradigm beyond the long-recognized three theories of Just War, Pacifism and Crusade. In addition, this group is also working on a longer volume explicating their individual religious texts that justify violence and that promote peace.

The following is the consensus statement on the dangers of nuclear weapons and the names of the original signers. Thousands of others have also signed this document when it was made available online with the invitation to join us. The struggle for a better world must include the absolute rejection of the production, possession and use of nuclear weapons from a religious perspective. It is an crucial starting point.

We Affirm Our Belief in the One God
A Statement Regarding Muslim-Christian Perspectives on the Nuclear Weapons Danger

Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund
May 23-25, 2005

We affirm our belief in the One God, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe.

We agree that the Christian and Muslim traditions are unambiguous on the sanctity of human life and on the protection of all forms of creation, including the environment. We believe in the dignity of all human beings and their roles as trustees and humble custodians of the earth and their responsibility for the needs of future generations.

We believe that chemical, biological and particularly nuclear weapons do not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants and inevitably destroy innocent human life, even as they destroy other forms of life such as animals and vegetation, cause irrevocable damage to the environment for many generations to come and cause human suffering and disease. Therefore, we hold that these weapons are contrary to our religious and ethical principles.

We agree that the ideal response to the nuclear threat is a total and universal ban on all such weapons, including low yield tactical nuclear weapons, their development, production, possession, acquisition, deployment, use, and the threat of use. We hold further that any weakening of the nuclear "Non-Proliferation Treaty" is a setback for world peace.

We agree that all nations, without exception, must abide by international treaties, agreements and other international covenants of which they are signatories.

We further agree that the possession of nuclear weapons is an unacceptable risk for the human community in these times and is a continuing threat to the entire planet and its fragile ecosystem. The risk of theft of nuclear weapons or materials by non-state actors for nuclear terrorism as well as the continuing risk of accidental use of nuclear weapons by nation states themselves makes even the possession of nuclear weapons a danger to God’s creation.

We agree that the enormous resources spent on nuclear weapons can be put to much better use to deal with the problems of poverty, disease and ignorance and to promote a peaceful pluralistic civil society, free of hate and prejudice.

We encourage engagement on the part of civil society in the debate and policy making decisions relating to nuclear weapons.

We therefore believe that the common position held by both of our traditions, expressed as the sanctity of human life, leads us inexorably to say that the only real security for the world and the most responsible position for people of faith in our two traditions is to call upon the United States and other countries of the world to, gradually and in a verifiable manner, finally eliminate these weapons from the face of the earth.

Endorsed by these participants:
Asma Afsaruddin, Muslim
Associate Professor, Dept. of Arabic & Islamic Studies, University of Notre Dame

Sadida Athaullah, Muslim
Woodbridge, Virginia

Dr. Jamal Badawi, Muslim
Islamic Society of North America

Mohamed Elsanousi, Muslim
Director of Communications and Community Outreach, Islamic Society of North America

Muneer Fareed, Muslim
Associate Professor, Dept. of Near Eastern & Asian Studies, Wayne State University

Rev. Barbara Green, Presbyterian
Executive Director, Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Rabia Terri Harris, Muslim
Coordinator, Muslim Peace Fellowship

Sherman Jackson, Muslim
Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies, Dept. of Near Eastern Studies
University of Michigan

Rev. Richard Killmer, Presbyterian
Program Director, Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Ibrahim M. Abdil-Mu'id Ramey, Muslim
Director of the Disarmament Program, Fellowship of Reconciliation

Anna Rhee, United Methodist
Board of Directors, Churches’ Center for Theology and Public Policy

Dr. Louay Safi, Muslim
Executive Director, Islamic Society of North America

Muhammad Shafiq, PhD, Muslim
Imam/Executive Director, Islamic Center of Rochester, NY and Executive Director, Center for Interfaith Studies and Dialogue, Nazareth College, Rochester

Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, Muslim
Chairman, Fiqh Council of North America

Bishop Walter F. Sullivan, Roman Catholic
President of the Board of the Churches' Center for Theology and Public Policy

Rev. Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, United Church of Christ
President and Professor of Theology, Chicago Theological Seminary

Joe Volk, Religious Society of Friends
Executive Secretary, Friends Committee on National Legislation

Dr. Jim Walsh
Executive Director, Managing the Atom, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

Peter Weiderud, Church of Sweden
Director, Commission of the Churches on International Affairs, World Council of Churches

Dr. Christine Wing, Presbyterian
Member of South Presbyterian Church, Dobbs Ferry, NY

This statement reflects the views of the signatories and not necessarily those of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Organizations are listed for identification purposes only.

Religious leaders of all faiths are encouraged to endorse this statement. Those of other faiths have joined with their Muslim and Christian brothers and sisters in affirming the sanctity of human life and the need to eliminate nuclear weapons.