Capital moves freely, but workers and consumers are kept immobile, confined within countries and even regions within countries, so competing labor pools can drive down wages and maximize corporate profits. Income flows out of the neoliberal colonies (euphemistically called independent countries), decision-making about domestic policy is controlled by Multi-(non-) national corporations, public assets are handed over to foreign private power, natural resources are divided up among mega-companies, vital infrastructure becomes the private property of corporate shareholders, etc, etc.
This is economic occupation, and it is far more powerful than military occupation, and far more permanent. If the process cannot be imposed through the collaboration of local elites, it can be imposed through military force, but military force is only an instrument for creating the conditions conducive to economic occupation
Obviously, if we are under military attack, it is Fard ‘Ayn to fight back. But I believe it is Fard ‘Ayn to fight back against economic occupation as well. This means disrupting the operational efficiency, profitability, and share values of the corporations being used to dominate us.
The 150 or so companies at the top of the power structure are able to transcend national borders and jurisdictions through ownership networks and supply chains, making borders irrelevant for them except insofar as they can be used to keep populations divided and to manipulate markets. However, those ownership networks and supply chains are within the reach of us all; we can ignore borders too, if we develop a strategy of confrontation that targets the mechanisms of capitalist imperialism wherever they are, and we work in solidarity regardless of borders. A small example of this concept is the activism in the Netherlands against Bechtel to pressure the company to withdraw from Bolivia.
As Muslims, we have strongest basis for global solidarity. Borders have always been arbitrary, and geographic location as a source of identity has always been superficial. Similarly, the idea that unity can only exist on the basis of shared geographic location, is also a mistake. It is both a mistake intellectually, and it is a mistake strategically.