Saquib Salim
On September 30, a nightmare scenario unfolded in the skies over Jordan in West Asia. Aboard Flydubai Flight 1073, en route from Dubai to Tel Aviv, an Omani co-pilot allegedly attacked the captain, Smit Machchhar, sending the Boeing 737 MAX 8 into a terrifying, rapid descent. Within minutes, the aircraft plunged thousands of feet before the passengers sensed trouble and entered the cockpit left open by the badly injured pilot before falling unconscious. They overpowered the attacker, and safely diverted the plane to Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.
While a catastrophic mass-casualty event was miraculously averted, the implications of this are deeply unsettling. The weaponisation of a commercial airliner carrying civilians instantly evokes the dark memory of September 11, 2001. It forces a critical reflection not only on aviation security but on the catastrophic damage such acts inflict upon the very causes they purportedly champion.
Had the attacker succeeded in crashing Flight 1073, the geopolitical shockwaves would have been disastrous. The 9/11 attacks did not liberate oppressed Muslims or deliver justice to them as the stated motive of the perpetrators was. Instead, they triggered a global "War on Terror," the invasions of Muslim nations, and a virulent wave of global Islamophobia.
Innocent Muslims across the world continue to face suspicion, surveillance, and hate crimes. Another aviation terror attack -- mercifully averted by the brave Indian pilot and conscripted Israeli passengers over the Jordanian skies -- would reignite fires of Islamophobia.
It could have happened at a time when there is widespread international outrage regarding Israel’s policies, military actions, and the prolonged suffering of the Palestinian people. Millions across the globe view the actions of the Israeli state as deeply unjust and a violation of human rights. In the last few years, the world has been questioning Zionist nation more than there is islamophobia.
However, this single event had the potential to reverse the trend. Just as the 9/11 attacks severely hindered the global advocacy for Muslim rights, the attempted destruction of Flight 1073 does nothing to aid the Palestinian cause; it only serves to validate the narratives of those who seek to paint all resistance to Israeli policies as inherently terroristic.
At this stage, the precise motive behind the unnamed Omani co-pilot’s action is unclear as the investigation is underway. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz described it as an “attempted jihadist terror attack”. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that it is too early to say whether Iran was involved. No evidence establishes Iranian involvement at this stage.
Caution matters, particularly because aviation terrorism has a history of producing consequences far beyond the immediate victims.
Furthermore, framing such attacks as "Jihad" is a gross distortion of Islamic jurisprudence. In Islamic theology, Jihad, linguistically meaning "struggle" or "striving", encompasses both a spiritual struggle against one's own ego and a physical struggle (Qital) to defend oneself against oppression. However, when physical force is necessary, Islamic law (Sharia) imposes incredibly strict rules of engagement that absolutely forbid the targeting of non-combatants.
The Quran is unequivocal regarding the sanctity of human life. In Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:32), it states: "Whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely."
Even in the context of a declared, legitimate war, the Quran strictly prohibits aggression against non-combatants: "Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed, Allah does not like transgressors" (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:190). Islamic scholars have universally interpreted "transgression" to include the killing of women, children, the elderly, and those not engaged in combat.
The Prophet Muhammad strictly forbade the killing of non-combatants, instructing his armies: "Do not kill a decrepit old man, or a young infant, or a child, or a woman" (Sunan Abi Dawud). The first Caliph of Islam, Abu Bakr, famously codified these rules of war, telling his commanders not to harm civilians, not to destroy places of worship (including churches and synagogues), and not even to cut down fruit-bearing trees.
Attempting to crash a passenger plane filled with civilians is the very definition of the "transgression" the Quran condemns. It is not Jihad; it is Hirabah (unlawful warfare and terrorism).
Major Islamic scholars and authorities have spent decades debunking the ideology of modern terrorism. Sheikh Abdullah bin Bayyah, a preeminent Mauritanian scholar and President of the Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies, has unequivocally stated, "Terrorism is not jihad; it is unadulterated criminality."
Similarly, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, one of the highest authorities in Sunni Islam, has consistently condemned attacks on civilians, reiterating that Islamic law strictly prohibits the targeting of innocents regardless of the political context.
In 2010, the prominent scholar Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri published a comprehensive, 600-page Fatwa on Terrorism and Suicide Bombings, drawing on classical Islamic texts to prove that terrorism can never be justified under the guise of Jihad. He wrote, "The killing of Muslims and the perpetration of terrorism are not only unlawful and forbidden in Islam, but they also represent the rejection of faith."
ALSO READ: Why is it important for Muslim organisations to do introspection?
The horrific intent behind the Flydubai Flight 1073 incident must be condemned not just as a violation of international law, but as a severe violation of Islamic law. True Jihad is rooted in honour, courage, and the defence of the vulnerable, even when force is required. It is never found in the cowardice of slaughtering unarmed civilians on a commercial airliner. To achieve true justice, the means must be as honourable as the ends.