Battles in Prophet’s (PBUH) life

What about the battles that the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ fought after he established his political power in Medina? Was that for the purpose of imposing Islam upon others?

Let us briefly look at the major battles of that era:

2 AH, The Battle of Badr:

Muslims confronted the Meccan forces at Badr—80 miles from Medina, and 200 miles from Mecca. The location and the circumstances are quite clear that the Meccan infidels were the aggressors.

3 AH, The Battle of Uhud:

Named after a mountain just outside Medina. Meccans came to extract revenge for the defeat in Badr.

5 AH, The Battle of Ahzab (or Khandaq):

The Meccan unbelievers, in alliance with the Jews of northern Arabia, came to attack the Muslims in Medina.

6 AH, The Peace-Treaty of Hudaybiyya:

In the 6th year after the Prophet's ﷺ migration, accompanied by Muslims, he decided to go for pilgrimage to Mecca. The infidels prevented the Muslims from entering the city of Mecca. After lengthy negotiations, both parties signed a peace treaty for the term of ten years.

The implications of this peace treaty were very far-reaching:

Firstly, until the signing of this treaty, the Muslims were mostly busy in defending themselves against the Meccans (their external enemies) and the Jews (their internal enemies).

Secondly, only after the signing of this treaty, did the Muslims feel safe and secure enough to travel to regions and countries outside Medina. The peace-treaty gave Muslims the opportunity to start an organized campaign to propagate Islam among surrounding tribes and countries.

Thirdly, from the 6th year of the Prophet's migration to the 9th year, so much propagation and missionary work had occurred that almost the entire Arabian Peninsula came into the fold of Islam–without the force of sword! As a result, the 9th year is known as 'Amul Wufũd—the Year of Delegations: because many delegations of Arab tribes were coming to Medina to declare their acceptance of Islam.

9 AH, the Conquest of Mecca:

Only when the Meccans violated the conditions of the peace-treaty, did the Muslims take over the city of Mecca without bloodshed—thereafter, in 9th AH, Mecca was declared as a holy city where idol-worshipping was forbidden.
Even then the idol-worshippers of Mecca were given four months' grace period to stay and study Islam. If they were still not convinced of Islam's message, then they were to be asked to leave the holy territory of Mecca. (See the Qur'an Surah at-Tawba, 9:3)

Two Phases of Prophet Muhammad's ﷺ Life :

First Phase: Meccan era of the first 13 years. He was in a minority, and so force not possible.

Second Phase: Medinese era of the last 11 years of his life.

1st to 6th year: defending against the aggression of the Meccan forces and their allies.

7th to 9th year: propagation & outreach to others resulting in conversion of almost the entire Arabian Peninsula

In all such cases, we see that neither sword nor force was used to convert people to Islam. Especially for the Jews and the Christians —whom Islam recognizes as Ahlul Kitab, the People of the Scriptures— Islam guaranteed them freedom of their faith and religious practices under Islamic rule.

The Conquests after the Prophet  ﷺ :

After the death of the Prophet Muhammad, the Muslims gradually conquered Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran.

During the reign of Abu Bakr, Iraq was conquered in 633 CE. During the reign of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, Syria was conquered in 635 CE, Palestine in 637 CE, Egypt in 642 CE, and also two-thirds of Persia was conquered. The rest of Persia was conquered during the reign of 'Uthman bin 'Affan.

Many historians look at the conquests of the rulers who came after the Prophet as a proof of “conversion by force to Islam”. However, we have a different perspective on these conquests made by Muslims after the Prophet's death. It is true that Muslims conquered these neighbouring lands and countries BUT does that mean that Islam, the religion, was spread by force?

The confusion arises when writers and historians interpret the expansion of the Muslim/Arab Empire as the expansion of Islam, the religion.

It is undeniable that the Muslim/Arab Empire spread by military force all over the Middle East; but this did not automatically translate into the spread of Islam as a religion.

Ira M. Lapidus, in his A History of Islamic Societies writes:
“The question of why people convert to Islam has always generated intense feeling. Earlier generations of European scholars believed that conversions to Islam were made at the point of the sword and that conquered peoples were given the choice of conversion or death. It is now apparent that conversion by force, while not unknown in Muslim countries, was, in fact, rare. Muslim conquerors ordinarily wished to dominate rather than convert, and most conversions to Islam were voluntary.”

In majority of cities, the inhabitants continued to follow their own religions. The Muslim conquerors signed treaties guaranteeing to the conquered people the freedom to practice their religion as long as they paid the required tribute to the caliph's treasury.

The late Marshall Hodgson, in his famous book, the Venture of Islam, says: “There was no attempt at converting the peoples of the imperial territories, who practically all adhered to some form of confessional religion already…In the chiefly non-Arab agricultural lands, the object was not conversion but rule…The superiority of Islam as religion, and therefore in providing for social order, would justify Muslim rule: would justify the simple, fair-dealing Muslims in replacing the privileged and oppressive representatives of the older, corrupted allegiances…”

Ira M. Lapidus, writes the following in earlier quoted book A History of Islamic Societies: “The second principle…was that the conquered populations should be as little disturbed as possible. This means that the Arab-Muslims did not, contrary to reputation, attempt to convert people to Islam. Muhammad had set the precedent of permitting Jews and Christians in Arabia to keep their religions, if they paid tribute; the Caliphate extended the same privileges to Middle Eastern Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, whom they considered 'People of the Book,' the adherents of earlier written revelations…