The genesis of the hatred against Gulen and the Hizmet Movement

Fethullah Gulen

Every now and then, we are subjected to a purportedly investigative report by a ‘respected’ (pun intended) journalist about famed Turkish Scholar, Fethullah Gulen and the movement he inspired: TheHizmet (service) Movement. On reading the said article or report, we realize it is the same innuendos, fabrications and the macabre claims of stealth  infiltration in the state bodies of someone’s own motherland and the supposed takeover of the state. Along the same lines, some facts are given in order to make the article look credible. Theirs is mixing good and evil with evil being their real intention.

For example, Dan Bilefsky and Şebnem Arsu’s recent article in the International Herald Tribune (“Shadow Force Grows in Turkey,” published on April 18) about Gulen and the Hizmet Movement is a classic example of shoddy journalism that’s judgmental and less factual. It is a comically weak article, full of highly questionable characterizations and buttressed by anonymous quotations that don't actually demonstrate what they're supposed to be. 

Everything aside, I want to comment on this bizarre but repeated claim that Gulen and his followers are hell-bent on infiltrating the state and taking over it with the supposed aim of establishing of a (I) conservative and a (II) shari’a based Islamic state in Turkey. There are two elements here: one represents Sebnem Arsu and other Dan Bilefsky. The third element which is always found in articles like these are those written by elements that hate Erdogan and his government and want to pick a bone with the Hizmet movement for their support of the Erdogan government. This can either be internal elements or some people who are driven by geo-political security issues.

In this case, Arsu, (probably) a 'white' Turk, is driven by disdain. The disdain for 'black' Turks, the Anatolian hinterland folks who flooded in the last two decades Istanbul and Ankara’s posh areas with their ‘filthy’ and long clothes, bearded faces and headscarves. These folks who form the majority of the Gulen followers decline to drink, fast during Ramadan, wear headscarves, remain communal, hold Islam in high regard but are very tolerant of others and many are conservative in mannerism. But in the last two decades, they have made it big in every sphere you can think of. That’s scary for some people. For them, these peasants have infiltrated the state which was the exclusive domain of some hardline secular mandarins.

These ‘infiltrators’ were the people who were banned from walking on certain streets in Istanbul and Ankara during the early days of the Republic for they could dirtify it. These are the people the regime labeled “internal enemies of the Republic” and waged a perpetual, crippling war against them. These are the people whose daughters were denied university education because they wore ‘un-modern’ clothes. It is worthy to note that Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, undoubtedly Turkey’s most powerful politician after Ataturk, was even forced to send his daughters to the US after the regime guardians denied his daughters to join the public universities because they wore headscarves and therefore were ‘infiltrators’. 

His wife once tried to visit a friend admitted at a military hospital and she was turned away because as a headscarf-wearing woman, she was an infiltrator. That was the way of protecting secularism in Turkey. President Gul’s daughter lived with the indignity of putting on a wig over her headscarf every morning in order to get university education. As they defend the gruesome guardians of a past but suffocating Turkey like Ahmed Sik, neither Dan nor Arsu decries the bizarre and the inhumane treatment meted on the overwhelming majority of Turks in the name of secularism.

For Dan Bilefsky, probably his concern is Islam. As much as he engages in sophistry, you can taste Islamophobia in his article. The language he uses is the smart one used by Islamophobes. Don’t show any enmity to Islam, but show purported concern, legitimate concern of others, particularly fellow Muslims about Islam itself or those who choose to live by it. He depicts a scary picture, the language used is potent. The shadowy nature depicted is terrifying. The secretive nature-call it takiyya is real. The West must be wary of Gulen and his followers. The world must defend the civilized and the secular people in Turkey who are being brutalized by the “Islamic” forces who want to establish shari'ah based state. 

It is interesting how the illiberal elements of yesterday are depicted as the perpetual sufferers of today as the defend an ideal; the secular ideal, while nothing is said about Turkey’s bizarre understanding of secularism, brutality against observant Muslims in their own country, against the Kurds and the minorities who were subjected to unspeakable crimes.

Gulen inspired schools that serve millions across the globe are depicted in a conspiratorial tone and portrayed as a grand scheme of global stealth Jihad and infiltration but with no evidence. One wonders if this is journalism or hatchet man’s work! If Turkey wants to turn a page on an ugly history that involved coups, assassinations, executions, imprisonment, inhuman treatment and the worst of all, a bizarre mentality that gave some people the exclusive duty to run Turkey as a fiefdom without any accountability and do to the Turkish citizens as wished, and the Gulen movement supports turning that page forever, then they are right in supporting the new development for they have been the primary victims of the coups and military guardianship. 

This battle is not about secularism. Gulen and his followers are fine with it, in fact advocate for it. What they are not fine with is military tutelage and an ideology that was experimented with in the last century and failed. What they are not fine with is less democracy, less freedom and less equality. What they are not fine with is to be subjugated to in the name of secularism while it is not. 

No one denies that Gulen followers have had or do have a role in Turkey just like other citizens or grouping in Turkey. And in this regard, some may have wronged others, others may have been less open about any mistaken role or engagement, others may have given unlimited support to Erdogan’s ruling AK Party and others may seem to have over-zealously supported the purge against the gruesome Maoists in the Military who opposed liberalism, market economy, personal freedom, engaged in coups and executions and perverted the constitution and the rule of law. While criticism in light of these issues or positions may be legitimate or credible, engaging in innuendos and sweeping condemnation, and using a McCarthyrite witch hunt tells more about those who do it than Gulen and his followers.

Gulen has inspired millions of people to do good. The evidence is there. The schools that were established by his followers have assisted millions of poor people across the globe to make a leap into the brighter side of life and have been beacons of hope and multiculturalism. The media that his followers established helped in opening up Turkey and making it a force to reckon with in the region. But more importantly, this media has assisted in the democratic process that Turkey desperately needed and Turkey deserves no less freedom and democracy than any other nation that enjoys full freedom and democracy. This media has been the greatest supporter of freedom for all including the non-Muslim minorities and the Kurds. 

Neither Gulen nor his followers are angels who are not burdened with human pitfalls, desires or failures. But every critical article that I have read about Gulen and his followers has centered on the ludicrous and ironic claim that they are infiltrating the state. This can only be said by those who still subscribe to the military’s “internal enemies” policy which designated observant Muslims, Kurds and minorities as enemies who must be prevented from integrating and kept at the gates. Today, observant Muslims have less fear. The Kurds can openly speak their language and name their kids in Kurdish. The minorities continue to get back their foundations that were appropriated by the secularists and the juntas. That’s something worth celebrating not decrying; unless we are held captive by the disdain some were brought up with or the benign Islamophobia that’s evident in many articles critical of Gulen and his followers.

Published on the Tales of a Kenyan Nomad Blog, 02 May 2012, Wednesday

The PKK, piety and the Gülen movement

by Adem Palabıyık*

PHOTO Cihan, İsmail Avcı

29 March 2012 / ,

A Chinese proverb notes that if you kill somebody, you intimidate thousands of others. To this end, the assaults against the Zaman offices in Europe by Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) supporters in recent times appear to be relevant to this proverb. Intimidation… But why the Gülen movement? The reason for this could be summarized as follows.

PKK’s concerns
It has been observed that the Gülen movement has been involved in the Kurdish issue recently because of its education policies and that it has been making efforts towards the resolution of the issue. For instance, the first activity of the movement in Turkey’s Southeast was noted in 1984 or 1985. The activities that started in houses through private and intimate conversations have expanded to cover almost all places in the East and Southeast. Today, the number of people benefiting from the study halls and reading houses run by the movement has exceeded 100,000. Even those who strongly oppose the Gülen movement in local politics prefer its schools for their kids. The launch of Gaziantep-based Dünya TV, which along with TRT Şeş, broadcasts in Kurdish, is one of the most important issues that disturbs the PKK. The PKK was particularly disturbed by the fact that the movement carries out extensive activities in the Kurdish region in Iraq. The PKK is unnerved also as the schools over there are protected by Neçirvan Barzani and that the Abant Platform meeting was held in Arbil. Growing attention by the movement to the region, the launch of reading and study halls in the region, its greater degree of institutionalization in places like Yüksekova, Hakkari province, funds allocated to sponsor talented kids for their study in their private schools and the distribution of the meat for the Feast of the Sacrifice (Eid al-Adha) may be viewed as visible interest in Kurds and the region.
The fact that the Gülen movement has a religious aspect makes the PKK and the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) furious. The emergence of a religious generation is the greatest fear among the PKK, PKK supporters and the radical pro-Kurdish movement because the secular religion approach advocated by the PKK cannot hold its ground in the face of the Ahl-i Sunnah approach promoted by the Gülen movement. The Ahl-i Sunnah approach upholds Shariah Islam, whereas the PKK argues that Islam is not a religion to govern but a lifestyle and that it serves as a reference for different issues.
In addition, the Gülen movement’s focus on youth, the weakened power of the PKK associated with the wave of migration from rural areas to urban ones and its failure to preserve its domination in the cities make the PKK uncomfortable. This is where the Gülen movement has started: Efforts have been made to reintegrate young people, who hold prejudices against Turks due to events of the past, with society, and the most visible positive outcome of these efforts is observed in the families of these young people.
The parents of the youngsters have confidence in the structures of the movement, such as schools and residences, and this prevents the spread of separatist activities through the families and their children. In terms of linguistic efforts, the Turkish Olympiads organized by the Gülen movement and their eagerness to make Turkish the lingua franca of the world is not welcomed by the PKK/KCK because they are working hard to ensure that Kurdish is declared an official language, and for this reason, the spread of the Turkish language displeases PKK supporters.
Another reason for the growing discomfort is the attention paid to Said Nursi within this movement as a Kurdish Islamic scholar. It is in fact easy to understand why those who seek to raise a non-religious generation are strongly opposed to close contact of young people with Said Nursi considering that the Kurds have always been religiously inclined and that most of the scholars in the region are of Kurdish origin, because secular youth would be the main source of further igniting the conflict, and religion is the only force that would address this destructive storm. Religious people hold a religious approach towards the issues in the region. The PKK is an organization that has been trying to resolve its issues by armed violence, whereas the Gülen movement strongly relies on nonviolence and education. And for this reason, the PKK is unable to deal with such an entity because they know nothing other than violence. In addition, the Gülen movement is based on voluntary work; it is civilian and it protects the interests of its country. Even though the PKK presents itself as the defender of the rights of the working class and the peasants and it argues that it sides with the victims and the weak, it is apparent that this is not the case. A general look at the outlook of the Gülen movement in the world would reveal that it is able to stand against the international status of the PKK/KCK. And lastly, it could be said that the good relations between the Gülen movement and the political administration is a source of jealousy. The support the Gülen movement extends to the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) offers great advantage for this party to become influential in the region.
From this perceptive, the Gülen movement has identified the main focal point of the solution and it appears that it has been acting through this perspective for many years. And this focal point is education. As noted by Nursi, illiteracy, one of the three biggest problems, could be addressed by education; to this end, awareness is raised among young people and the probable mistakes are prevented beforehand. This is the main reason why Roj TV -- a Kurdish satellite channel which Turkey claims is the mouthpiece for the PKK -- declares the education services of the Gülen movement to be attempts at abuse and exploitation. But of course, there is also something different with this movement: piety. Then why are the PKK supporters so eager to adopt hostile attitudes regarding pious people? This is a legitimate question considering that there are religious people within the PKK. But why they are not allowed to have a say? The answer is simple: They are doing so because education and piety take people away from the PKK.
And the PKK is aware of it as well; for this reason, it realizes that pious people pose a great danger for them, and the emergence of a pious generation is the greatest fear for the PKK, PKK supporters and the radical pro-Kurdish movement. Attendance at Friday prayers, the spread of the headscarf, Quran courses and the emergence of a young generation that is familiar with Islam is the last thing that they would like to see because members of such a generation would not go to the mountains; instead, they would attend Friday prayers and they would fast in Ramadan. Moreover, they would not kill others, they would not be hostile to their state and they would have an Islamic code of ethics. What is interesting is that Islam is a reference for the secular acts because Friday prayers are a unique Islamic precept; there is a different interpretation in regards to Islam. And this interpretation is the attempt to secularize Islam. Could Islam become secular like Christianity? Of course not because the inscription of the Holy Book of Christianity is a secular process, but this is not the case with the Quran. Therefore, what has been done should be viewed as attempts to legitimize Islam as a faith rather than the secularization of Islam.
The impasse of the PKK and its supporters
The PKK is aware that it has to renew its outdated strategies, and in doing so it becomes evident that it is acting relentlessly because the PKK has trouble with Islam. But it is not easy or wise to confront Islam; the Quran notes that the only religion that Allah considers legitimate is Islam. The sociological reality that the radical pro-Kurdish movement attaches importance to is the Kurdish identity held by the religious Kurdish people. True, pious Kurdish people still view themselves as second-class citizens. This is attributable to some sociological and historical reasons, and the pious Kurds are still attached to this historical bond. The sociological reality that keeps them away from the radical pro-Kurdish movement is Islam.
It is obvious that things are getting harder for the PKK because a religious generation is emerging. And everybody knows that the only factor that would address the problems associated with the emotional and political detachment is religion. As the number of religious sociologists studying the PKK, Kurdish movement or Kurdish issue increases, it becomes apparent that the core of the problem could be accessed and discussed. A religious generation employs a religious approach towards the regional issues rather than a nationalist perspective. Kurdishness or Turkishness holds no meaning, whereas Islamic brotherhood matters considerably. And in such an environment, those who justify their existence through nationalism are unable to have a say. In fact, it should be noted that there are attempts to create a reactive young generation; this generation holds secular, modern and non-traditional sentiments, and it also bears nationalist ideologies and an affinity with PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan. On the other hand, the pious generation holds modern and traditional sentiments; they are pious and have faith in the Muslim brotherhood bond and in Quranic precepts. And the future could possibly be shaped by these two different strands of young generation. A religious generation could offer a lasting solution to the longstanding disagreement between the founding principles of the Republican regime and the people in the region. The method and steps that pious people adopt vis-à-vis the regional problems continues to displease the PKK and its supporters. And we have observed its reflections in France, Germany and the Netherlands. It is obvious that a religion is created against the religion, and the war stems from the weakness of one religion vis-à-vis the other.

---

*Adem Palabıyık is a research assistant at Muş Alparslan University’s department of sociology.

Published on Today's Zaman, 29 March 2012, Thursday

“Hizmet is rooted in the culture of dialogue” says Dr. Marcia Hermansen

Victor Edwin, SJ

Prof. Marcia Hermansen

Dr. Marcia Hermansen, the Director of the Islamic World Studies Program and a Professor in the Theology Department at the Jesuit Loyola University Chicago, presented a lecture onHizmet Movement (here after HM) at Indialogue Foundation, New Delhi on 7 March 2012. Dr. Hermansen teaches courses in Islamic Studies and the academic study of religion. In the course of her research and language training she lived for extended periods in Egypt, Jordan, India, Iran, Turkey and Pakistan. Her personal contact with the followers of HM made her lecture personally attractive. I am grateful to Ali Akiz and Ahmet for inviting me to this program. I was also given the happy opportunity to moderate the session which was enriching.

In this short article, I will spell out what I have learnt about HM and its founder. HM is a global movement that is inspired by the Turkish Muslim thinker and activist Fethullah Gülen. He stresses that ignorance, poverty, and conflict are the three greatest enemies of humanity. He encourages his fellow citizens to root out these evils from the human family. The followers of Gülen in the HM through education and dialogue tackle these vices and work for a more humane society.

What impresses me most about Mr Gülen is that he is a moral exemplar. His words and deeds inspire followers towards action for the transformation of society through service to the less privileged. He motivates his followers to make sacrifices in their personal lives in order to serve others. This is seen from the fact that his followers volunteer to go to different parts of the globe, even leaving their families, to serve those who are in need. There is no discrimination at the schools and other centers established by HM. Moreover, the business men who finance these projects around the world do not just give from their excess but generously with a deep concern for the other. It could be said that their service is qualified by their commitment to the other. As a Christian I cannot but notice the sacrificial content of such service that is also very much part of the Catholic Church’s devotion to humanity, which becomes truly holy when it is rooted in the personal element of sacrifice.


read more!  

They won’t believe

by AHMET KURUCAN

Fethullah Gülen

20 April 2010 / AHMET KURUCAN *,

“They won’t believe,” he said. “They won’t believe that we work for peace and the salvation of humanity. They won’t believe that we endeavor to create an island of peace where all of humanity can live in brotherhood. They won’t believe that you do not have expectations for this world or the next. They won’t believe that you do not want anything other than securing God’s contentment.”

As he said this, his body was extremely tired and his voice so low that only a few people near him could hear, but his logic and reasoning was, as can be understood from the integrity of what he said, quite solid and whole, and his determination and commitment were, as usual, apparent with their customary calm, and his spirits and enthusiasm were as fervent as what would be expected from a young person.
He then turned and asked, with an air of self-questioning: “Why don’t they believe? Why do they, inside and outside, enter a process that can explained only with reference to the psychological disease called paranoia? Why can’t they get rid of their doubts and qualms? What has been said and done is evident, and despite there being nothing adding substance to their suspicions, why do they still look suspiciously at us?”
Answering, he said: “They do not look at the world from the same window as we do. They don’t believe in the hereafter as we do. The values that are dear to us mean nothing to them. We seek the hereafter, paradise, the divine beauty, and we say, ‘We do it to please God without any other motive,’ but they focus on this world, seeing everything other than that. We say we are not motivated by fame, glory, position or money, while they put them at the center of their lives. While we say, ‘One should not be deceived by this transient world, and we should do whatever we do in this ephemeral world with the hereafter in mind and to please God,’ they think and believe exactly the opposite. Knowing that ‘the tastes of this world are like a poisonous honey and pleasures are always accompanied by woes,’ we believe that all pleasures, legitimate or illegitimate, are means for being tested in this world, but they do not have such criteria in their hands.”
After uttering these words, he sighed deeply and said he was tired. He was really tired because for several days he had been suffering from a disease that should be treated at a hospital. He sighed because he was not or could not be understood. Obviously, what upsets, distresses and aggrieves people like him is not being understood. Especially when the people who cannot penetrate his world entertain the same values or are from the immediate vicinity of the same atmosphere, his sufferings can grow “towering high,” to borrow a phrase from Ziya Gökalp. In such cases, he would frequently quote the following lines: “If you are aggrieved, you should not complain about troubles / Do not expose your troubles to the unaggrieved people by sighing.”
Well, you may then ask why he is talking about them. I think this question betrays one’s perspective on life and even one’s quality or footing. Indeed, here we are talking not about an ordinary person, but one who is in love. We are referring to his inner world, his heart-oriented perspective, the lens through which he views the world and his horizon of objectives.
People who are in love with their troubles make remarks that seem to come out of nowhere. They are not bound by time or space. They adjust their style or wording according to the level of their addressees and express their troubles in any environment with carefully tuned dosages. They then direct people to what they think are the remedies for those troubles. A number of times I have heard him say: “If I had the capability or opportunity to do so, I would sow seeds of trouble, suffering and sorrow in the hearts of people and wait for their coming to leaf. The biggest trouble for today’s world is the lack of troubles.”
Perhaps, you noticed. I did not simply say “troubled” but “who loves his troubles.” This is because it would be an insult to characterize those who “love their troubles” as “troubled.” I have frequently heard him say: “O my Lord! Make me acquainted with the grief [trouble] of love. Do not separate me from the grief of love even for a moment!”
‘We should not develop despair’
At this point, he looked around, glancing appraisingly at every person in the room. Who knows what he had in mind? Apparently, he was worried that his words might be misunderstood as he resumed, saying: “But we should not be desperate. Yes, we should not develop despair. Lack of hope is characteristic of the unbelievers, according to the Quran. This does not mean that a Muslim who becomes desperate will become an unbeliever. Still, desperation is an attribute of disbelief. You should not grow desperate under any circumstances. If your intentions are sincere and if your goal is to please God, why should you be desperate? Even if you are at the bottom like Prophet Joseph, do not lose hope. Look at the story of Joseph. His story is depicted in great detail, but he never voiced any complaint before or after being thrown into the well. So we can conclude that these troubles did not affect him. He kept on his way. When he was jailed, he remained unaffected. He continued to have full faith in his Lord and did not deviate. And eventually he became a popular vizier.”
He then came back to the beginning: “Even if they do not believe and continue to be suspicious, you will not change your way. You will go on with your plans and projects for revival and the strengthening of universal values. Your attitude and behavior will continue to show that you are unfazed by worldly wants or goals. Without giving rise to paranoia, and by using various means, you will say strongly that you do not have motives other than achieving peace and the salvation of humanity. You will use everything from painting to music, from novels to poetry, from cinema to sports as a means. Some may raise objections. So be it. Some may have doubts if this is the right thing today. Let them. Why should we not use these means for revival and repair when they have been used for destruction up until now? I am a child of my time. I don’t think anyone who is sane and who can make sense of the world properly will object to them. Even if they do, it means nothing. And you will be patient. You cannot treat chronic and gangrenous wounds all at once and magically.”
Who am I referring to? As you may have guessed, to Fethullah Gülen, also known as hocaefendi.
* Dr. Ahmet Kurucan is a theologian.

Gülen movement will be liquidated; KCK suspects will be released

By Emre Uslu

The title summarizes the gist of the whole discussion of the most recent crisis. This is the plan commonly held by MİT, BDP/KCK (Peace and Democracy Party and Kurdish Communities Union) circles and some pro-negotiation intellectuals.

Public opinion was ready for the implementation of this plan when the prosecutor summoned the MİT undersecretary. Recall that one of the texts included in the agreement between MİT and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) read, “The parties shall work to establish a constitutional council, peace council and truth and justice commission over the same period; and to this end, they are forwarding the names they prefer for inclusion in these commissions and councils.” We have seen that the articles in the agreement are being executed. Some of the intellectuals who sided with MİT in the recent crisis were named for inclusion in the peace council and truth and justice commission spelled out in the agreement. Some of them also joined team efforts that could be viewed as forerunners of the peace council and truth and justice commission. The recent columns and writings by one of those names are important in that they demonstrated the details of the operation in the process. This writer, who has been referring to the presumption of innocence since the Feb. 28 era and stressing that others cannot be held responsible for an offense by an individual, is now requesting the removal of the pro-Gülen movement figures within the bureaucracy in his writings and the TV programs on which he appeared. There are two problems with this call. First, how would you decide who is pro-Gülen and who is not within the bureaucratic establishment, and which legal criteria would you use? Are you going to flag people like they did in the Feb. 28 process? Are you defending the flagging? read more!

Foreign Policy's emotional and biased journalism on Turkey

 by İhsan Yılmaz

Journalist Nedim Şener (c) waves upon arrives at a courthouse in İstanbul in this March 5, 2011 file photo. (Photo: Reuters)

15 January 2012 / ,

On Jan. 11, 2012, Foreign Policy magazine published a piece titled “Behind the Bars in the Deep State” by Justin Vela.

The piece is neither objective nor accurate. It is one-sided and biased. It is also prejudicial against the Hizmet (Gülen) movement. It fails to give a balanced picture of Turkish politics and democracy and thus betrays its readers. Here are my specific reasons why:
The first sentence of the piece which is in much bigger font refers to Fethullah Gülen as a “shadowy mullah.” Is “shadowy” an objective or unbiased adjective to use for Gülen? His personality and ideas are known by almost everyone in Turkey and he is always a part of discussions and debates in the public sphere, but he is still shadowy? I find this usage strange, to say the least. Then, what about the word “mullah”? Is it an objective term in Western media and its audience or does it bring to mind “mad mullahs” and all these anti-civilization archetypes? The piece also refers to him as an “Islamist,” which I will discuss as well. But before that, let me ask what has happened since Aug. 13, 2008 when Foreign Policy together with Prospect magazine announced Gülen as the top public intellectual? I ask this since at that time FP referred to Gülen using objective adjectives, either as a cleric or an Islamic scholar, not with loaded terms such as Islamist or mullah. So let me ask again, what happened between Aug. 13, 2008 and Jan. 11, 2012? Why is this a huge change?
Let us look at the term “Islamist”; unfortunately, it in not a neutral academic term. When you refer to someone as Islamist, you most probably mean that he is a dodgy guy who wants to end democracy and establish a sort of dictatorship. Is there even a shred of evidence that would suggest that Gülen is against democracy? Has he established a political party so that he would be labeled Islamist? Or is he offering daily political solutions based on Islam? Voicing one's concerns in the public sphere, lobbying governments, etc. do not make one political. If you loosely define politics then everybody is a politician. Then who is a non-political person and just a member of civil society? If you claim that it simply refers to socially active and organized Muslims, then why do we need the term Islamist? If you empty the content of the term Islamist that refers to a post-19th century anti-Western modern phenomenon, then you need to call every practicing Muslim, including the Prophet (PBUH) an Islamist. What is more, there are hundreds of academic papers and books on Gülen and they concur that Gülen is not an Islamist. So why does FP deliberately use such a loaded term? Or is it ignorance?

'Thousands in detainment'

Vela also states that “in the past two years, thousands of citizens who have voiced criticism of the government have been detained.” This is really unbelievable and inaccurate to say the least. FP wants its readers to believe that the Turkish government simply imprisons anyone who criticizes it. So how come all these opposition deputies, not only the current ones but former ones, in addition to many journalists, writers, intellectuals, artists, etc. who are also critics of the government are not in prison? Do they not criticize the government? Or is Vela claiming that those who are imprisoned criticize the government more effectively than the opposition deputies? Then who are those people? Is there one single piece of concrete evidence that their criticism made the government fearful of them? Before the Ergenekon case the Justice and Development Party (AKP) received 47 percent of the votes and in 2011 it received 50 percent. Why would it bother to imprison these suspects based on fake evidence just because it fears their criticism? It is on the contrary, those imprisoned suspects became more vocal after they were put behind bars. Several of them keep publishing anti-AKP books. More importantly, why does FP not give an honest and accurate picture of the Ergenekon terrorist organization case? The European Union states on every occasion that the case is an opportunity for the consolidation of Turkish democracy. Why does FP not mention that the majority of the suspects are not intellectuals or journalists, but men with weapons -- either military officers or gang men? Why does FP never mention the concrete evidence found against the suspects, their fingerprints on weapons, their legally wiretapped conversations, the handwritten maps of buried weapons, several confessions even by full four-star generals and so on?
There may be some faults and mistakes in the indictments or in the judicial process that need to be criticized, but this can only be done by giving a complete and objective picture of the cases and a bigger picture of the fragile Turkish democracy that suffered heavy blows by coups in every decade. But FP readers are not informed on these very vital historical facts and background information. FP readers were not even informed that as late as April 27, 2007, the military threatened the government with a coup in order to prevent someone with a headscarved wife being elected as president. FP does not mention that Turkish democracy was so fragile because of the military thereat that opposition parties did not attend the presidential election in Parliament because of fear and prominent Republican People's Party (CHP) politicians, such as Onur Öymen, supporting the military against the AKP. Even some liberal columnists, such as Taha Akyol on CNN Türk, asked the AKP government to resign, instead of siding with the democratically elected government against the threatening generals.     
The FP piece then frames Ahmet Şık's case. I use the academic term framing deliberately as FP does not give a full account of freedom of speech in Turkey, but by only framing one or two cases wants its readers to believe that every critic of the government or the Hizmet movement is sent to jail.
There are many problems in Turkey with regards to freedom of speech, free journalism, judicial processes, judges' inclination to side with the state against liberties and rights, their habit of imprisoning suspects, long detention periods (on this see the most recent Fair Trials International [FTI] report on EU countries' terrible record) and so on. We also criticize these issues and keep asking the government to modify legislation in line with the EU acquis. However, the full picture also tells us that Turkey has become more democratized under the AKP rule during the last 10 years despite a few mistakes and its recent Euro-fatigue for which not only the AKP but also the increasingly right-wing EU under the leadership of Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel should be blamed.

A ‘high profile detainee'

Vela refers to Şık as “one of the country's most high-profile detainees,” but fails to add that he has became high profile after he was detained. I have been reading papers for about three decades, but I only heard his name after he was prosecuted. At the time of prosecution he was unemployed and as far as the public was concerned he was an unknown quantity. There are several more high-profile critics of the Hizmet movement, such as Mehmet Şevket Eygi who keeps writing that the movement signed a secret agreement with the Vatican to Christianize Turkey or Sheikh Haydar Baş in whose media outlets Gülen is portrayed as a secret cardinal of the pope. Or Emin Çölaşan who wrote that Gülen does not know Arabic but murmurs some meaningless words and his “idiot” listeners think that he knows Arabic. Newspapers such as Cumhuriyet, Sözcü, Milli Gazete, Yeni Çağ, Yeni Mesaj, etc. are filled with anti-Gülen insults and nothing happens to them. There are several columnists in the Doğan media group who constantly criticize either the Hizmet movement or AKP and they continue to write these things. Bookshops' windows are full of anti-Gülen books that claim that he is either a CIA agent or a secret Khomeini, etc. Some of these books claim that Gülen has an army that is the police force. As a matter of fact, Şık's book is based on these widely available books and actually Şık's book does not contain anything new. Several rival police factions within the police have always blamed each other for being followers of Gülen. These allegations are documented in official reports but sides could not prove anything. Several books have been published on these reports. For instance, Sözcü columnist Saygı Öztürk's book is more comprehensive than Şık's book. Nothing happened to Saygı Öztürk and on the contrary he appeared on a debate program on the movement's Samanyolu TV. Why would the movement that operates in about 140 countries target an unknown, uninfluential and unemployed journalist just because of a book that contains nothing new and harm its international reputation?
Vela writes that Gülen's followers “have established themselves in top positions within Turkey's bureaucracy, police force, and judiciary.” Yet, it does not say that this is just an allegation. Moreover, there are millions of people in Turkey who like and respect Gülen. Should they not work in the state? Are they not full and equal citizens? You may ask why even one of them does not openly say they like Gülen. Then you need to tell your readers that in this country bureaucratic oligarchy is still trying to eliminate practicing Muslims from the state. Former President Ahmet Necdet Sezer used to get help from doormen to learn if a candidate's wife covered her head. It is not a myth that state officials would go and check the garbage of candidates to see if they drank alcoholic beverages. If they could NOT find beer or wine bottles, that was a bad sign. Yes we now have the AKP government but what will happen next as the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and CHP keep talking about revenge? In short, the oligarchy oppresses people so they prefer to hide their religious, ethnic and lingual identity, then turns back and blames them, claiming that “if you are hiding something, then you must be a bad guy.” Why does FP not question why, in a country where about 30-40 percent of people say their prayers, there is not even one military officer who could say their daily prayers? Why does it not inform their readers about Professor İskender Pala's book “Between Two Coups,” his personal life story on how he was oppressed in the military after he was “caught” praying in his office and eventually evicted without trial and without any pension rights. There are thousands like him.
The FP piece claims that because of the movement Turkey is becoming a less free country but neither mentions nor explains the following “dilemma”: If the movement hates freedoms, liberties and criticism why it is still the biggest champion of the EU process, transparency and accountability of the state and a new democratic constitution?
If FP is honestly curious about liberties and freedoms in Turkey and wants to do accurate reporting then why does it not ask the opinions of liberal democrats, such as Cengiz Çandar, Mehmet Ali Birand, Hasan Cemal, Taha Akyol, etc., and also Armenian intellectuals, such as Etyen Mahçupyan and Markar Esayan who criticize the government whenever they see a need and are not participants of the movement or the Ergenekon cases.

The Freedom of Religion, the Concept of War, and Gulen

Ahmet Kurucan

Scholars have put forward varying ideas on the legitimacy of war in Islam. While there is consensus on the prevention of atrocity and self-defense, there are disputes on issues like preclusion from the freedom of teaching religion, violation of a peace agreement, assassination of envoys, etc. In this article, we would like to shed light on an issue that is particularly associated with the freedom of teaching religion. 

This particular kind of freedom is presented as one of the causes of war in the book Muhammad: The Messenger of God by Fethullah Gülen. If one approaches the problem from a partial analysis, rather than a holistic one, then one can easily come to the conclusion that "war can be waged to ensure spiritual guidance and communication." In the aforementioned book, Gülen basically says that force is allowed if there is a resistance against the preaching of Islam and others are prevented from listening to its message.

Viewing the issue from this aspect, it is not correct to reach a conclusion that Gülen, thus Islam, does not recognize freedom of religion and conscience. Those who reach such a conclusion means, they are disregarding Islamic verses and the literature on the traditions of the Prophet that pertain to the freedom of religion and conscience, as well as the important interpretations made by Gülen in this issue. There are also some circles who never tire of spouting their biased discourse, manifested by slogans such as, "Islam is the religion of the sword," "Islam is an oppressive and coercive religion," or "either Islam or death." 

In contrast, it is very clear in Gülen's message that no war can be fought in order to communicate one's faith. A war can be fought when faith, Islam in this case, is prevented from teaching its message "in peaceful ways."


Read more!