The sites were inaugurated on Wednesday in the presence of Iraq’s Minister of Culture, Tourism and Antiquities, the President of the Sunni Waqf, the Governor of Nineveh, and the Chaldean and Syriac Orthodox archbishops. Local residents joined representatives of international partners who helped fund and carry out the restoration.

The projects were financed by the International Alliance for the Protection of Heritage in Conflict Areas (ALIPH) as part of its Mosul Mosaic programme, launched in 2019 with the Iraqi State Board of Antiquities and Heritage (SBAH). The initiative aims to rebuild the city’s cultural and religious landmarks destroyed between 2014 and 2017.

“These monuments, once symbols of Mosul’s diversity, now stand as symbols of its resilience,” said Bariza Khiari, chair of the ALIPH Foundation Board. “Their restoration shows what can be achieved through determination and cooperation.”

The Al-Tahira Chaldean Church, an 18th-century site revered by both Christians and Muslims, has regained its signature dome and ornamental carvings that were lost during the Daesh occupation.

The Mar Toma Syriac Orthodox Church, dating back to the seventh century, was rebuilt after being vandalised and partially destroyed during the battle for Mosul. Its thirteenth-century marble “Door of the Twelve Apostles” has been fully restored.

The Al-Raabiya Mosque, constructed in 1766 and badly damaged in 2017, now once again displays its distinctive Ottoman-era stone mihrab decorated with geometric motifs.

Since 2018, ALIPH has funded nearly 50 projects across Iraq, investing more than $25 million in Mosul alone. The Mosul Mosaic programme has also supported the rehabilitation of the city’s museum, scheduled to reopen in 2026, and several other historic sites including the Al-Masfi Mosque and the Beit al-Tutunji House.

Founded in Geneva in 2017, ALIPH supports the protection and restoration of cultural heritage in conflict zones. Backed by countries including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Morocco, and France, the foundation has financed more than 550 projects in 54 countries.

For the people of Mosul, the reopening of these sacred sites represents more than reconstruction. It marks, at last, the return of life to the city’s war-scarred heart.

The message, posted on their official X (formerly Twitter) account, read: “We wish our fellow citizens and neighbors celebrating the Eid al-Adha that their prayers and acts of sharing be accepted and make the world a better place for us all. The Alliance of Rabbis in Islamic States”.

The tweet concluded with #EidMubarak and the organization’s signature in both English and Arabic.

ARIS, which represents Jewish communities across Muslim-majority countries, has gained recognition for promoting peaceful coexistence, religious freedom, and mutual respect. The alliance’s mission, as outlined on its official website, includes supporting Jewish life within Islamic states, enabling religious practice, and building interfaith bridges—especially through dialogue inspired by the Abraham Accords.

Operating across Asia, Africa, and Europe, ARIS aims to empower local Jewish communities through kosher food accessibility, Jewish education, and spiritual leadership. The alliance has also launched initiatives to engage with local governments, support Jewish visitors in Muslim countries, and facilitate interfaith discussions with Islamic clerics and scholars.

Part of its long-term vision includes an annual summit hosted in a Muslim country, featuring interreligious dialogue, training, and strategic networking. The group also actively promotes its work through multilingual online content in Arabic, Hebrew, Farsi, and English, positioning itself as a leading voice for Jewish affairs within Muslim societies.

This latest gesture during one of Islam’s holiest festivals reinforces ARIS’s dedication to fostering trust and shared values between Jewish and Muslim communities—a rare yet vital alliance in an increasingly polarized world.

If any country, including Pakistan, ever invades India in the name of Ghazwa-e-Hind, they will find Indian Muslims defending their homeland

Among the many ideas that have found their way into the modern Islamic revivalist narrative, few are as persistently misunderstood—or dangerously misused—as the concept of Ghazwa-e-Hind. Popularized in contemporary times by figures like the late Dr. Israr Ahmed, it has come to be viewed not as a historical episode or a symbolic metaphor, but as a yet-to-be-fulfilled call to military conquest. This interpretation, though emotionally charged, is divorced from Islamic orthodoxy, historical context, and contemporary political reality.

This misreading of Islamic eschatology has become especially potent in Pakistan, where it has been weaponized by a segment of the clergy and even military-linked media. But what the masses often don’t see is that such a vision not only contradicts Islamic legal tradition, but also threatens the harmony of the Indian subcontinent, especially the future of Indian Muslims.

A Historical View—Not a Military Manual

The hadith that mentions Ghazwa-e-Hind is reported in Sunan an-Nasa’i (Hadith 3175), Musnad Ahmad (Hadith 23804), and al-Tabarani’s al-Mu’jam al-Kabir. The narration speaks of two groups saved from Hellfire—one that fights in India and another that accompanies Jesus, the son of Mary, during his second coming. However, Islamic scholars have long disagreed about the authenticity, context, and timeline of these narrations.

Renowned Hadith scholar Shaykh Nasiruddin al-Albani graded some of the chains as weak (da’if), while others like Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in Fath al-Bari considered them authentic but possibly fulfilled during the early Islamic conquests. Ibn Kathir, in Al-Bidaya wa’l-Nihaya, also noted that the interpretation of these ahadith was limited to earlier periods of conquest.

Classical historians like al-Baladhuri in Futuh al-Buldan detail the campaign of Muhammad bin Qasim into Sindh (712 CE) as a response to an appeal from Muslim merchants and not as a sweeping religious war. The conquest was confined to a narrow region and did not reflect any systematic plan to convert India. Furthermore, the Chachnama, a semi-legendary Persian text documenting this campaign, narrates how religious freedom was granted to local Hindus and temples remained operational under Islamic rule.

Islamic scholar Dr. Ayesha Jalal, in her book Partisans of Allah: Jihad in South Asia, asserts that Ghazwa-e-Hind has been inflated in Pakistan’s religious discourse not because of religious necessity, but due to state-sponsored ideology. She writes that this hadith has “resurfaced with renewed intensity in Pakistan’s strategic imagination, filtered through a millenarian lens.”

The Qur’anic Command: No Compulsion in Religion

The most authoritative source in Islam—the Qur’an—states unequivocally: “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256). This verse, supported by the consensus (ijma’) of scholars, has been interpreted as a foundational principle of religious freedom. In Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Imam al-Qurtubi elaborates that Islam forbids coercion because belief requires conviction, not force.

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), when inviting tribes to Islam, used persuasion, kindness, and exemplary character—not threats. As recorded in Sirat Ibn Hisham and Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, his approach to da’wah was rooted in wisdom, not warfare.

Moreover, Tafsir al-Tabari on verse 16:125—“Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching…”—explains that this verse sets the tone for all Islamic outreach. Any idea that religious dominance can be achieved through military force runs counter to the Qur’anic message and Prophetic model.

Prophecy ≠ Policy

Yes, Islam contains eschatological prophecies—many of which describe dramatic geopolitical changes in the end times.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) never told Muslims to build strategies around ghazwaat of the future. Instead, he focused on justice, reform, and internal purification.

Consider the Ghazwa of Abwa and Ghazwa of Ushayrah—expeditions that ended without a single arrow being shot. As documented in Al-Maghazi of al-Waqidi, many ghazwaat were precautionary or diplomatic. This is supported by Imam al-Nawawi’s commentary on Sahih Muslim, where he notes that military action in Islam is conditional on ethical, legal, and political necessities—not eschatological ambitions.

The Spread of Islam: A Moral Project, Not a Military One

Historically, Islam’s most significant growth occurred in regions where armies never marched. Southeast Asia, East Africa, and large swathes of India were introduced to Islam not through conquest but through trade and spiritual invitation.

Dr. Richard Eaton, in his landmark study The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, highlights how Sufi saints and local rulers facilitated Islamization in Bengal through land reforms, spiritual guidance, and social integration—not through war. Similarly, Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi in Islam and the World emphasizes that Islamic civilization at its best was spread through service, justice, and education.

The Prophet himself said: “I was sent to perfect noble character” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 8595). This foundational hadith is echoed in the works of Imam al-Ghazali in Ihya Ulum al-Din, who taught that spiritual excellence—not militarism—is the soul of Islamic revival.

Pakistan’s Fantasy vs Indian Muslims’ Reality

One of the more troubling developments is the Pakistani state’s occasional use of Ghazwa-e-Hind as a symbolic justification for cross-border ambitions. In textbooks, speeches, and even TV dramas, the narrative of a future campaign to “liberate” Indian Muslims is floated as a divine responsibility.

But such narratives overlook one major truth: Indian Muslims are not waiting for salvation. They are proud citizens of India, heirs to over a thousand years of Islamic contribution to the subcontinent.

India has produced towering Islamic scholars—Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlawi, Shah Waliullah al-Dihlawi, Maulana Azad, and countless others. Its institutions—from Darul Uloom Deoband to Nadwatul Ulama—have trained generations of global scholars. The Indian Muslim identity is not subordinate to any external power. It is deeply rooted in the land, language, and ethos of India.

If any country, including Pakistan, ever invades India in the name of Ghazwa-e-Hind, they will find Indian Muslims defending their homeland, not cheering from the sidelines. As the Qur’an instructs: “Stand firmly for justice…” (4:135). That includes standing against unjust aggression—even if it’s done in the name of religion.

From Brigadier Muhammad Usman, the hero of Nowshera, to Captain Haneefuddin, who laid down his life in Kargil, Indian Muslims have proven their loyalty with blood.

Let no one mistake their silence for weakness or their faith for disloyalty. The Prophet loved Makkah. The Indian Muslim loves India.

Time for Responsibility, Not Rhetoric

Dr. Israr Ahmed’s intellectual legacy is mixed. While he awakened many to the idea of Islamic revival, his fixation on militarism—untethered from contemporary fiqh and political wisdom—misguided many. Today, young Muslims must be trained not in war slogans but in the Qur’an, Hadith, ethics, law, and service.

The return of a Caliphate, if it happens, must mirror the model of the Prophet—founded on justice, consultation, and mercy. Not through firebrand nationalism or weaponized hadiths.

Ghazwa-e-Hind has become more of a political trope than a theological reality. When read responsibly, Islamic tradition offers no justification for cross-border aggression dressed in prophecy. The real ghazwa we need today is against ignorance, sectarianism, and political manipulation.

Let us turn our energies toward rebuilding our societies—through knowledge, reform, and character. That is the legacy of the Prophet. That is the path of the righteous.