Islam & Weapons of Mass Destruction (Edexcel GCSE Religious Studies B): Revision Note

Exam code: 1RB0

Angela Yates

Written by: Angela Yates

Reviewed by: Bridgette Barrett

Updated on

The Problems and Benefits of Weapons of Mass Destruction

  • Weapons of mass destruction (WMDS) are weapons that can inflict death and destruction on a massive scale

  • The most powerful WMDs are nuclear weapons

    • The first nuclear weapon was used in 1945 towards the end of the Second World War, when the USA dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the Japanese had ignored an ultimatum from the American President, Harry S. Truman

    • The consequences were devastating, with some 200,000 civilians killed

  • Since then, peace has been kept between countries in possession of nuclear weapons by a policy known as mutually agreed destruction, or MAD. These nations will not attack one another because they know the other country could destroy them

  • Other WMDs include:

    • chemical weapons

      • Any toxic chemical that can cause death, injury or sensory irritation is considered a chemical weapon

      • Examples include nerve agents such as sarin, blood agents such as hydrogen cyanide and blister agents such as mustard gas

    • biological weapons

      • These are bacteria, viruses and fungi used as weapons of war, for example the bacteria which causes anthrax

      • Biological weapons can be used to target an individual, a group, or an entire population. 


The problems and benefits of WMDs

  • The benefits of WMDs are:

    • They are an effective deterrent because of the MAD policy

    • They can bring a swift end to conflict

    • They cause less suffering for the party using them

    • They do not require a country to invade another to attack

  • The problems of WMDs are:

    • They deliberately target innocent civilians and mass casualties are inevitable

    • The scale of destruction is immense

    • They cause damage that can never be repaired and will affect future generations

    • They threaten the extinction of the planet as we know it

    • Their use could be considered a war crime

  • NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) has said that WMDs "could have incalculable consequences for global stability and prosperity"

  • Many people have campaigned against the use of WMDs, supporting organisations such as the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)

Muslim Teachings Around Weapons of Mass Destruction

  • Most Muslims oppose the use of WMDs

  • A Muslim just war must avoid killing innocent civilians and cause the minimum amount of suffering

    • WMDs target the innocent and are indiscriminate in what they attack

“Do not kill any child, any woman, or any elderly or sick person” Hadith

  • Just war must use proportionate force

    • WMDs are never proportionate force, because they could destroy the world as we know it

    • They can never be justified because of the immense damage they can cause

  • Just war must end as soon as the enemy lays down their arms

    • WMDs would mean that the enemy would be destroyed

  • The influential Muslim leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, warned that 

‘In addition to nuclear weapons, other WMDs such as chemical and biological arms also pose a serious threat to humanity. We declare the use of such weapons as impermissible (haram) and believe that protecting mankind from this great disaster is a public duty.’

(Grand Ayatollah Khamenei)

  • Some Muslim scholars think that Islamic countries should have WMDs as a deterrent, but not use them 

    • They would support this because of the teaching in the Qur’an that believers should prepare themselves to be able to frighten off enemies of God

‘Prepare against them [disbelievers] whatever forces you [believers] can muster … to frighten off these enemies of God and of yours.’ (Qur’an 8:60)

  • Others reject the use of WMDs even in self-defence

Islam and Non-religious Attitudes Towards the Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction

  • Most humanists and many atheists would oppose the use of WMD given the extensive damage they can cause

  • Humanists believe human life is special and should not be destroyed, even though they don’t believe that life was given by God 

‘We should be against the possession of weapons which provide the potential for the murder of millions, if not billions of people, and the destruction of the one planet we’re able to call home.’ 

(Paul Simms, British Humanist, 2014)

  • Some would say it is acceptable to have them as a deterrent as long as other countries have them. They accept the concept of MAD has kept the peace

  • Some people might use utilitarian principles to justify the possession of nuclear weapons

    • Following MAD policy, those who possess them benefit from knowing they won’t be attacked and have to suffer the terrible consequences of war

    • Therefore possessing WMDs secures the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, as everyone is happier living in a state of peace than a state of war

  • Muslims would agree with the views of humanists and atheists because of the grave effects of using WMDs

    • However, they would apply the teachings of the Qur’an to support their views on these weapons

Worked Example

Explain two reasons why many Muslims would not support the use of weapons of mass destruction

(4 marks)

One reason why many Muslims would not support the use of weapons of mass destruction is that a Muslim Just War should avoid killing innocent civilians and cause the minimum amount of suffering, and weapons of mass destruction cannot avoid killing innocent civilians (2 marks)

Another reason is that any Just War should only use proportionate force. WMDs are never proportionate force, because of the immense damage they can cause. They could destroy the world as we know it and this can never be justified (2 marks)

Examiner Tips and Tricks

Evaluation questions on this topic may ask you to debate statements such as these:

'The use of weapons of mass destruction can never be justified.'

'There are more problems than benefits from the use of weapons of mass destruction.'

'Weapons of mass destruction may be terrible, but having them helps to maintain peace in the world.'

Think about what arguments might be made to support and oppose each of these statements. How would Muslims respond? How would non-religious people respond? How would you conclude each of these discussions?

You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week

Unlock more, it's free!

Join the 100,000+ Students that ❤️ Save My Exams

the (exam) results speak for themselves:

Angela Yates

Author: Angela Yates

Expertise: Religious Studies Content Creator

Angela graduated with a first-class degree in Theology and Religious Studies from the University of Manchester. After completing a PGCE and CCRS, she taught RE for around fifteen years before becoming a full-time writer and educational content creator. Angela is passionate about creating Religious Education resources to enable students to achieve their full potential.

Bridgette Barrett

Reviewer: Bridgette Barrett

Expertise: Geography, History, Religious Studies & Environmental Studies Subject Lead

After graduating with a degree in Geography, Bridgette completed a PGCE over 30 years ago. She later gained an MA Learning, Technology and Education from the University of Nottingham focussing on online learning. At a time when the study of geography has never been more important, Bridgette is passionate about creating content which supports students in achieving their potential in geography and builds their confidence.