Dear Sirs,

Gabriel Milland (Daily Express, Friday 16th April 2004) accuses the blessed Prophet Muhammad of having �agreed a hudna (truce) with a bigger, more powerful enemy purely for the purpose of attacking and winning later.�

This is a deeply insulting and demonstrably false remark. The facts concerning the Treaty of Hudaybiyya � to which Milland has alluded - are briefly:

1. The Prophet and his companions were prevented by the pagan Arabs from visiting Makkah to perform the voluntary pilgrimage ('umrah). Instead of engaging in fighting with the pagans, and despite the willingness of his followers to enforce their religious rights, the Prophet chose a peaceful settlement by signing the Treaty of Hudaybiyya in 628 CE with the pagan Arabs.

2. Two years later, the pagan Arabs broke the treaty by attacking and killing 20 allies of the Muslims as they slept. It is internationally recognized that when one party breaks a treaty, the other party is released from its obligations.

3. Even after this attack, no bloody revenge was taken against those who broke the treaty. In fact, when the Muslims finally entered Makkah, an amnesty was granted to nearly all former enemies.

As the Foreign Editor of the Daily Express, perhaps Mr Milland could be advised to concentrate his thoughts on the illegal Israeli land-grab of Palestinian land in the West Bank which has just been endorsed by President Bush.

Yours faithfully,

Inayat Bunglawala,
Secretary,
Media Committee,
The Muslim Council of Britain
Boardman House,
64 Broadway,
Stratford,