The Abrahamic Movement in Iraq
Words of Sunni scholar Abu Musa al-Iraqi, with the participation of teacher Tom Wegner
Research titled: Houthi Terrorism Strikes Mecca and Medina
Achieving the aims of the true divine promise requires adherence to the principles of our forefather, the Prophet Abraham, and to the project of peace, while confronting the use of religion in extremism and terrorism that Iran fuels through its regional arms in the Middle East.
Houthi attacks using missiles and drones are no longer merely another chapter in the region’s military conflict after their danger approached one of the holiest areas for Muslims: Mecca and Medina.
With reports speaking of the interception of a Houthi drone south of Mecca, a question emerges that goes beyond the boundaries of military confrontation: what does it mean for the area surrounding Muslim holy sites to become part of the arena of conflict?
The answer should not be military alone, but also religious, ethical and civilizational.
The Qur’an links Mecca to Abraham and to security, while the story of Moses is linked to confronting Pharaoh, tyranny and the oppression of the Children of Israel. From this wider perspective, current events raise a broader question: does the Middle East need more political and military use of religion, or a recovery of Abrahamic values that place security, peace and the protection of human beings at the foundation of relations among peoples?
Mecca: Abraham’s prayer for security
Mecca is not merely a city in Islamic consciousness. It is the site of the Sacred House associated with Abraham and Ishmael, peace be upon them.
God Almighty says:
“And when We made the House a place of return for people and a place of security, and [said], take the standing-place of Abraham as a place of prayer.”
(Al-Baqarah 2:125)
And He says:
“My Lord, make this a secure city and provide its people with fruits.”
(Al-Baqarah 2:126)
The word “secure” is not an incidental detail. It is part of Abraham’s prayer for Mecca. Any act that terrorizes the residents of Mecca or its visitors, or places pilgrims and those performing Umrah at risk, conflicts with the Qur’anic meaning associated with the House since Abraham’s prayer.
God also says:
“Whoever enters it shall be safe.”
(Aal Imran 3:97)
How, then, can a place that the Qur’an associates with security become part of the cycle of armed conflict?
Medina too is a protected sanctuary
The sanctity of sacred places does not end with Mecca. The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
“Abraham made Mecca sacred, and I have made Medina sacred…”
Mecca and Medina therefore occupy, in Islamic consciousness, a space associated with sanctity, security and worship. Islam does not give armed groups a license to turn sacred places into arenas of war.
Building Abraham’s House means building peace
Here begins the direct relationship with the Abrahamic project. Abraham is a central figure in the three Abrahamic religions. Invoking him in dialogue among Muslims, Jews and Christians does not erase theological differences; it seeks common values capable of preventing difference from becoming hatred and war.
In the Qur’anic vision, Abraham is not a symbol of war among religious communities. He is a symbol of monotheism, worship, building the House and praying for security. Abrahamic heritage can therefore become a basis for dialogue rather than a pretext for conflict.
Moses and Pharaoh: another lesson in confronting tyranny
If Abraham represents, in this context, building the House and praying for security, Moses represents resistance to tyranny and oppression.
The Qur’an says of Pharaoh:
“Indeed Pharaoh exalted himself in the land and divided its people into factions, oppressing a group among them, slaughtering their sons and sparing their women. Indeed, he was among the corrupters.”
(Al-Qasas 28:4)
Then God says concerning those who were oppressed:
“We desired to show favor to those who were oppressed in the land, to make them leaders and to make them inheritors.”
(Al-Qasas 28:5)
The story of Moses offers an important ethical rule: injustice does not become justice merely because the oppressor raises a religious or political slogan.
From Pharaoh to contemporary extremism
The Middle East faces a recurring problem when religion is turned into a political and military instrument. Instead of religion being a source of mercy and ethics, some groups use it to divide people into believers and enemies and then justify violence against the other side.
Yet the Qur’an says:
“Do not transgress. Indeed, God does not love the transgressors.”
(Al-Baqarah 2:190)
And:
“O you who believe, enter into peace wholeheartedly.”
(Al-Baqarah 2:208)
It also says:
“We made you peoples and tribes so that you may know one another.”
(Al-Hujurat 49:13)
A clear contradiction therefore appears when a group speaks in the name of religion while making intimidation, killing and attacks on civilians part of its tools.
The Houthis and Iran: the regional dimension
Houthi escalation cannot be separated from the regional context. Multiple international reports have documented forms of Iranian support for the Houthis, including weapons, technology and training, contributing to the development of the group’s missile and drone capabilities.
The Abrahamic Movement: can it be a bridge?
This is where the importance of the contemporary Abrahamic Movement appears. The basic idea of Abrahamic dialogue is that Muslims, Jews and Christians, despite their theological differences, can build shared space around mutual knowledge, dialogue, respect for holy places, protection of human beings, resistance to extremism and cooperation for peace.
This does not mean that Islam, Judaism and Christianity have become one religion, nor does it erase their different beliefs. It means that religious difference should not become a justification for war and hatred. Dialogical Abrahamism is a broader concept concerned with rapprochement among followers of the Abrahamic religions.
The real regional challenge is moving from peace signed by governments to peace that reaches societies and peoples. Government agreements alone are insufficient if Arab and Israeli citizens, Muslims and Jews, remain prisoners of rhetoric of hatred.
Sustainable peace needs religious scholars, intellectuals, young people, universities, business leaders, civil-society institutions, Muslim–Jewish–Christian dialogue and the protection of houses of worship and sacred places.
And here comes Iraq
Iraq is not merely another state in regional conflict. It is a central part of the region’s religious and civilizational history. The memory of Abraham is connected with the land of Iraq, Jewish civilizational history is deeply associated with Babylon, and great civilizations emerged there that shaped human history.
Iraq can therefore enter Abrahamic dialogue from a distinctive position: a country where religious and civilizational history meets contemporary political challenges.
If extremism and terrorism seek to divide the region along religious, sectarian and national lines, Abrahamic dialogue can offer the opposite model: recognition of difference while refusing to turn it into war.
The real battle: religion or the exploitation of religion?
This may be the most important point. The problem is not religion. For millions of people, religion is a source of faith, ethics and mercy. The problem begins when a group, state or organization uses religion to confer legitimacy on political violence, extremism and terrorism.
At that point, religious text is transformed from a source of guidance into an instrument of mobilization, conflict and killing. Confronting extremism does not require fighting religion; it requires freeing religion from its exploitation for terrorism and hatred. This is part of the Abrahamic Movement’s program: removing false religious cover from fanaticism, intolerance and extremism.
Attacks that threaten the security of Mecca or Medina place the Middle East before a moment that deserves reflection. Mecca, for whose security Abraham prayed; Medina, which the Prophet made sacred; and Jerusalem, which carries deep religious heritage for followers of the Abrahamic religions, should all be places of worship and peace, not arenas for missiles and drones.
The story of Moses teaches that confronting injustice does not mean committing injustice against others, and that religious identity does not make a person a legitimate target for hatred.
From here, the Abrahamic project can be part of an answer to the Middle East’s crisis: not as a new religion and not as an erasure of beliefs, but as a space for dialogue and coexistence among Muslims, Jews and Christians.
The real struggle is not between Islam, Judaism and Christianity, but between a culture of intimidation and hatred on one side and a culture of peace, dialogue and respect for human beings and sacred places on the other.
Perhaps the most important lesson from Abraham, Moses and Muhammad, peace be upon them, is that sacred places are not protected by hatred and religion does not need terrorism in order to prevail. Abraham prayed for Mecca’s security, Moses confronted Pharaoh, and Muhammad made Mecca and Medina sacred sanctuaries. Between these messages, peace can begin.
Abrahamic peace unites us. Peace for the Middle East. Peace for all humanity.
The Abrahamic Movement in Iraq — Abu Musa al-Iraqi