Sharing is caring!

Among the most resilient objections to the revival of the Caliphate is not one rooted in Islamic legal discourse or theological principle, but in a deeply ingrained psychological defeatism: the claim that such an endeavour is unrealistic because “the world won’t let it happen.” This argument, far from being an articulation of pragmatism, reveals the internalisation of global subjugation and the erosion of political agency within the Muslim collective imagination. It manifests in various forms:

• “The West will never allow it.”
• “Muslim regimes and their secret services would continue to crush any attempt.”
• “It would bring war, isolation, or sanctions.”

This line of reasoning is not a substantive critique of the Islamic obligation to establish the Caliphate, but rather an abandonment of it due to perceived futility. It reflects not a fiqhī evaluation, but a surrender to the dominant international order – a worldview that elevates the invincibility of global hegemons above the command of the Creator. Such a posture is not realism, but rather despair and cowardice masquerading as maturity.

This contentions explains that:

• The argument from geopolitical constraint is an abdication of Islamic obligation, not a principled stance,
• Opposition does not nullify divine command,
• Islamic history itself is a chronicle of revival amidst fierce antagonism,
• And true realism is grounded not in submission to dominant powers, but in tawakkul, prophetic method and struggle

1. The Obligation Remains, Regardless of Hostility

Islamic legal obligations are not suspended based on the presumed reactions of hostile powers. The command to establish the Caliphate – as a farḍ kifāyah validated by ijmāʿ (consensus) – exists independent of the permissibility of international actors. To suspend action upon divine command due to fear of worldly consequences is to invert the Islamic ethos.

The Qur’anic command:

فَٱسْتَقِمْ كَمَآ أُمِرْتَ وَمَن تَابَ مَعَكَ وَلَا تَطْغَوْا۟ ۚ إِنَّهُۥ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌۭ

“So be steadfast as you are commanded ˹O Prophet˺, along with those who turn ˹in submission to Allah˺ with you. And do not transgress. Surely He is All-Seeing of what you ˹believers˺ do.” (Qur’an 11:112)

illustrates that action is mandated, irrespective of outcome. The Prophet ﷺ was not tasked with guaranteeing results, but with fulfilling commands – despite Quraysh’s economic warfare, despite political rejection, despite plots of assassination.

The refrain “the world won’t let it happen” is also a modern reiteration of the statement of Banu Isra’il to Musa (ʿalayhi al-salām):

فَاذْهَبْ أَنتَ وَرَبُّكَ فَقَاتِلَا ۖ إِنَّا هَٰهُنَا قَاعِدُونَ
“So go, you and your Lord, and fight—we will remain sitting here.” (Qur’an 5:24)

This was not realism. It was rebellion against divine imperative.

2. Global Opposition to Islam Is a Constant, Not an Excuse

Throughout history, every prophetic call to transformation was met with resistance from entrenched powers:

• The Pharaoh’s statecraft weaponised religion and coercion against Musa.
• Quraysh mobilised tribal alliances to extinguish Islam in its infancy.
• The Mongols annihilated Baghdad and desecrated centuries of knowledge.
• Colonial empires dismembered the Caliphate and restructured the Muslim world into docile nation-states.

Yet, despite overwhelming opposition, the obligation remained. Revelation does not recommend political passivity. Rather, it inculcates endurance, planning, and sabr (steadfastness).

It is disingenuous to argue that today’s powers – America, NATO, China – pose a unique or unprecedented threat. The presumption of their omnipotence reflects an internalised coloniality more than any tangible constraint.

3. Power Is Neither Monolithic Nor Eternal

The contention assumes that current geopolitical arrangements are permanent, when historical evidence suggests the opposite. Empires fall, alliances shift, ideologies decline:

• The Crusader states were dismantled after nearly a century of occupation.
• The Mongols who once destroyed the Khilāfah later entered Islam.
• The Soviet Union, once regarded as an unassailable superpower, dissolved in less than a century

Today’s liberal international order, built upon the ruins of colonialism, is itself showing signs of decay: rising multipolarity, economic instability, transnational crises, and the erosion of state legitimacy all indicate a world in flux. The idea that Muslims must conform to a decaying world order rather than challenge and transcend it reveals a profound lack of imagination and confidence.

4. Realism Without Principle is Cowardice in Disguise

“Realism” devoid of reference to divine guidance is not maturity, it is capitulation. It is a form of moral relativism that surrenders obligation at the altar of expediency. In Islamic thought, political action is never driven by fear but by conviction grounded in the Shariah.

The words of ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (RA) highlight this point – while our fear may keep us from establishing Islam, any other path leads to humiliation both in this life and the next:

نحن قوم أعزنا الله بالإسلام، فإن ابتغينا العزة بغيره أذلنا الله
“We are a people whom Allah honoured with Islam. If we seek honour through anything else, Allah will humiliate us.”

To abandon the Caliphate out of fear of Western retaliation is to seek honour through appeasement, not principle.

Moreover, many who make this claim simultaneously lament the state of the Ummah – its humiliation, its division, its moral and political decline – without recognising that it is precisely the absence of the Caliphate that entrenches these crises.

5. True Realism is Anchored in Tawakkul and Strategic Struggle

Islamic realism is not about reading geopolitical tea leaves and bowing down to the status quo as is.

It is about tawakkul (reliance on Allah), coupled with strategic planning, fiqh al-wāqiʿ (awareness of reality), and commitment to action.

This is not naïveté; it is the realism of Prophet Nūḥ who built the Ark on dry land, of Prophet Ibrahim who challenged Nimrod, of Prophet Musa and Harun resisting the Phaorah, of our beloved Prophet Muhammad ﷺ who sent letters to Caesar and Chosroes at a time when Muslims had not yet consolidated power in Arabia.

To delay the obligation of political unification until such time as the West permits it (which is a fool’s wish) is to subject divine obligation to foreign approval. The Qur’an reminds us:

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ رُسُلًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِمْ فَجَآءُوهُم بِٱلْبَيِّنَـٰتِ فَٱنتَقَمْنَا مِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَجْرَمُوا۟ ۖ وَكَانَ حَقًّا عَلَيْنَا نَصْرُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ  
“Indeed, We sent before you ˹O Prophet˺ messengers, each to their own people, and they came to them with clear proofs. Then We inflicted punishment upon those who persisted in wickedness. For it is Our duty to help the believers.” (Qur’an 30:47)

Our victory is not conditional upon the acquiescence of disbelievers, but upon our sincerity, unity, and effort.

Conclusion: From Paralysis to Purpose

The argument that “the world won’t allow it” is neither a legal opinion nor a strategic insight – it is the cry of a colonised mind.

It rests on fear, not knowledge; submission to circumstance, not resistance; despair, not hope.

But the obligation of re-establishing the Caliphate does not hinge upon the calculus of power politics. It is rooted in nasṣ sharʿī, confirmed by ijmāʿ, and required of every capable Muslim community. The world may indeed oppose its re-emergence but that has never been the metric by which Islam determines its duties.

The real question is not whether “they” will permit it. The question is whether we will step up to our obligations and rely on Allah.

يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ إِن تَنصُرُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ يَنصُرْكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتْ أَقْدَامَكُمْ
“O you who believe, if you support Allah, He will support you and make your feet firm.” (Qur’an 47:7)

Dr. Reza Pankhurst is the author of The Inevitable Caliphate (Oxford University Press, 2012) and The Untold History of the Liberation Party (C Hurst & Co, 2016)