Turkish Forum

Category: News

  • Fethullah Gülen’s Grand Ambition

    Fethullah Gülen’s Grand Ambition

    Turkey’s Islamist Danger
    by Rachel Sharon-Krespin
    Middle East Quarterly
    Winter 2009, pp. 55-66

    As Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP) begins its seventh year in leadership, Turkey is no longer the secular and democratic country that it was when the party took over. The AKP has conquered the bureaucracy and changed Turkey’s fundamental identity. Prior to the AKP’s rise, Ankara oriented itself toward the United States and Europe. Today, despite the rhetoric of European Union accession, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has turned Turkey away from Europe and toward Russia and Iran and reoriented Turkish policy in the Middle East away from sympathy toward Israel and much more toward friendship with Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syria. Anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-Semitic sentiments have increased. Behind Turkey’s transformation has been not only the impressive AKP political machine but also a shadowy Islamist sect led by the mysterious hocaefendi (master lord) Fethullah Gülen; the sect often bills itself as a proponent of tolerance and dialogue but works toward purposes quite the opposite. Today, Gülen and his backers (Fethullahcılar, Fethullahists) not only seek to influence government but also to become the government.

    In 1998, Fethullah Gülen left Turkey for the United States, reportedly to receive medical treatment for diabetes. Since his voluntary exile, Gülen has resided on a large, rural estate in eastern Pennsylvania, together with about 100 followers, who guard him and tend to his needs. It is from his U.S. base that Gülen has built his fame and his transnational empire.

    Today, Turkey has over 85,000 active mosques, one for every 350 citizens-compared to one hospital for every 60,000 citizens-the highest number per capita in the world and, with 90,000 imams, more imams than doctors or teachers. It has thousands of madrasa-like Imam-Hatip schools and about four thousand more official state-run Qur’an courses, not counting the unofficial Qur’an schools, which may expand the total number tenfold. Spending by the governmental Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet Işleri Başkanlığı) has grown five fold, from 553 trillion Turkish lira in 2002 (approximately US$325 million) to 2.7 quadrillion lira during the first four-and-a-half years of the AKP government; it has a larger budget than eight other ministries combined.[1] The Friday prayer attendance rate in Turkey’s mosques exceeds that of Iran’s, and religion classes teaching Sunni Islam are compulsory in public schools despite rulings against the practice by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Turkish high court (Danıştay).[2] Both Prime Minister Erdoğan and the Diyanet head Ali Bardakoğlu criticized the rulings for failing to consult Islamic scholars.

    Gülen now helps set the political agenda in Turkey using his followers in the AKP as well as the movement’s vast media empire, financial institutions and banks, business organizations, an international network of thousands of schools, universities, student residences (ışıkevis), and many associations and foundations. He is a financial heavyweight, controlling an unregulated and opaque budget estimated at $25 billion.[3] It is not clear whether the Fethullahist cemaat (community) supports the AKP or is the ruling force behind AKP. Either way, however, the effect is the same.

    Gülen’s Background

    Born in Erzurum, Turkey, in 1942, Fethullah Gülen is an imam who considers himself a prophet.[4] An enigmatic figure, many in the West applaud him as a reformist and advocate for tolerance,[5] a catalyst of “moderate Islam” for Turkey and beyond. He is praised in the West, especially in the United States, as an intellectual, scholar, and educator[6] even though his formal education is limited to five years of elementary school. After receiving an imam-preacher certificate, he served as an imam, first in Erdirne and later in Izmir. In 1971, the Turkish security service arrested him for clandestine religious activities, such as running illegal summer camps to indoctrinate youths, and was, from that time on, occasionally harassed by the staunchly secular military.[7] In 1981, he formally retired from his post as a local preacher.

    To build an image as a proponent of interfaith dialogue, Gülen met Pope John Paul II, other Christian clergy, and Jewish rabbis[8] and emphasizes the commonalities unifying Abrahamic religions. He presents himself and his movement as the modern-day version of tolerant, liberal Anatolian Sufism and has used the literature of great Sufi thinkers such as Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Yunus Emre, pretending to share their moderate teachings.[9] Quotes from their teachings adorn Fethullah’s Gülen’s propaganda material. The movement, its proxy organizations, and universities-including Georgetown, to which it donates money-hold conferences in the United States and Europe to discuss Gülen. In October 2007, the British House of Lords feted Gülen with a conference in his honor.
    Gülen was a student and follower of Sheikh Sa’id-i Kurdi (1878-1960), also known as Sa’id-i Nursi, the founder of the Islamist Nur (light) movement.[10] After Turkey’s war of independence, Kurdi demanded, in an address to the new parliament, that the new republic be based on Islamic principles. He turned against Atatürk and his reforms and against the new modern, secular, Western republic.

    In 1998, Gülen departed for the United States, reportedly to receive medical treatment for diabetes. However, his absence also enabled Gülen to escape questioning on his indictment in 2000 for allegedly promoting insurrection in Turkey in a series of secretly-recorded sermons. Since his voluntary exile, Gülen has resided on a large, rural estate in eastern Pennsylvania, together with about 100 followers, who guard him and tend to his needs. These servants are educated men who wear suits and ties and do not look like traditional Islamists in cloaks and turbans. They follow their hocaefendi’s orders and even refrain from marrying until age fifty per his instructions. When they do marry, their spouses are expected to dress in the Islamic manner, as dictated by Gülen himself.[11] It is from his U.S. base that Gülen has built his fame and his transnational empire.

    Gülen’s Education Network

    The core of Gülen’s network is his educational institutions. His school network is impressive. Nurettin Veren, Gülen’s right-hand man for thirty-five years, estimated that some 75 percent of Turkey’s two million preparatory school students are enrolled in Gülen institutions.[12] He controls thousands of top-tier secondary schools, colleges, and student dormitories throughout Turkey, as well as private universities, the largest being Fatih University in Istanbul. Outside Turkey, his movement runs hundreds of secondary schools and dozens of universities in 110 countries worldwide. Gülen’s aim is not altruistic: His followers target youth in the eighth through twelfth grades, mentor and indoctrinate them in the ışıkevi, educate them in the Fethullah schools, and prepare them for future careers in legal, political, and educational professions in order to create the ruling classes of the future Islamist, Turkish state. Taking their orders from Fethullah Gülen, wealthy followers continue to open schools and ışıkevi in what Sabah columnist Emre Aköz called “the education jihad.”[13]

    The overt network of schools is only one part of a larger strategy. In a 2006 interview, Veren said, “These schools are like shop windows. Recruitment and Islamization activities are carried out through night classes … Children whom we educated in Turkey are now in the highest positions. There are governors, judges, military officers. There are ministers in the government. They consult Gülen before doing anything.”[14]

    The AKP’s controversial education policies, coupled with the Islamist indoctrination in Fethullahist schools, have accelerated the Islamization of Turkish society. During AKP’s first term in government, the Erdoğan government has changed textbooks, emphasized religion courses, and transferred thousands of certified imams from their positions in the Directorate of Religious Affairs to positions as teachers and administrators in Turkey’s public schools.[15] Abdullah Gül, Turkey’s first Islamist president and a Gülen sympathizer, appointed a Gülen-affiliated professor, Yusuf Ziya Özcan, to head Turkey’s Council of Higher Education (Yükseköğretim Kurulu, YÖK). He has also used his presidential prerogative to appoint Gülen sympathizers to university presidencies.

    Beyond Turkey, the Fethullahist schools also serve as fertile recruiting grounds. In his Institut d’Etudes Politiques doctoral thesis on Gülen schools in Central Asia, Bayram Balcı, a French scholar of Turkish origin, wrote, “Fethullah’s aim is the Islamization of Turkish nationality and the Turcification of Islam in foreign countries. Dozens of Fethullah’s ‘Turkish schools’ abroad-most of which are for boys-are used to covertly ‘convert,’ not so much ‘in school,’ but through direct proselytism ‘outside school.’” Balcı explained, “He wants to revive the link between state, religion, and society.”[16] The schools of Gülen’s Nur movement in Central Asia have worked to reestablish Islam in a region largely secularized by decades of Soviet control. Balcı explained, “The aim of the cemaat is to educate and influence future national elites, who will speak English and Turkish and who will one day prove their good intentions towards Fethullahists and towards Turkey.” Several countries in the region have taken steps against Gülen’s educational institutions because of such suspicions. Uzbekistan has banned the schools for encouraging Islamic law,[17] and the Russian government, weary of the movement’s activities in majority Muslim regions of the federation, has banned not only the Gülen schools but all activities of the entire Nur sect in the country.[18]

    Neither Uzbekistan nor Russia are known for their pluralism, but suspicion about Gülen indoctrination has spread even to more permissive societies such as that of the Netherlands. In 2008, members of the Netherland’s Christian Democrat, Labor, and Conservative parties agreed to cut several million euros in government funding for organizations affiliated with “the Turkish imam Fethullah Gülen” and to thoroughly investigate the activities of the Gülen group after Erik Jan Zürcher, director of the Amsterdam-based International Institute for Social History, and five former Gülen followers who had worked in Gülen’s ışıkevi told Dutch television that the Gülen community was moving step-by-step to topple the secular order.[19] While the organizations in question denied any ties to the Gülen movement, Zürcher said that taqiya, religiously-sanctioned dissimulation, was typical in the movement’s interactions with the West. An unnamed former Gülen follower who also once worked in Gülen schools and ışıkevi reported that Fethullahists called the Dutch “filthy, blasphemous infidels” and that they said “the best Dutchman is one who has converted to Islam. All the Dutch must be made Muslims.”[20] Indeed, of the thousands of Fethullahist schools in more than one hundred countries that allegedly teach moderation, none are located in countries such as Saudi Arabia or Iran that exist under domineering strains of official Islam, and most appear instead geared to radicalize students in secular Muslim and non-Muslim societies.

    Eviscerating Checks and Balances

    Fethullahists have also made inroads into Turkey’s 200,000-strong police force. Their infiltration has had a compounding effect, as Fethullahist officials have purged officials more loyal to the republic than the hocaefendi. According to Veren, “There are imam security directors; imams wearing police uniforms. Many police commissioners get their orders from imams.”[21] Adil Serdar Saçan, former director of the organized crimes unit within the Istanbul Directorate of Security, confirmed these statements in reports he prepared on the Fethullahist organization within the security apparatus. In a 2006 interview, he said,
    Fethullahists began organizing inside the security apparatus in the 1970s. In police academies, students were being taken to ışıkevi by class commissioners. One of those commissioners is now the director of intelligence at the Turkish Directorate of Security. During my time at the [police] academy, those in the directorate who did not have ties to the [Gülen] organization were all pensioned off or fired in 2002 when the AKP came to power. … I was at the top of my class when I graduated from the police academy, and throughout the twenty-four years of my career, I maintained and was honored for my stellar record. After 2002, the AKP blocked my promotions. They promoted only those officers whose files were tainted with allegations that they were engaged in reactionary Islamist activities. … Belonging to a certain cemaat has become a prerequisite for advancement in the force. At present, over 80 percent of the officers at supervisory level in the general security organization are members of the [Gülen] cemaat.[22]
    Such statements, however, may have consequences.[23] In October 2008, Turkish police arrested Saçan on suspicion of involvement in the so-called Ergenekon plot to overthrow the Turkish state.[24] Most Turkish analysts believe that the Ergenekon conspiracy, short of any evidence of unconstitutional activities, is more a mechanism by which the Turkish government can harass critics.[25]
    Writer and journalist Merdan Yanardağ provided statistics to illuminate the Islamist penetration of the Ankara Directorate of Security. He explained,
    Prior to Ramadan, personnel at the Directorate of Security in Ankara were asked whether they would be fasting during Ramadan, in order to establish the number of meals that would be needed during that period. Of the 4,200 employees, only seventeen indicated that they would not be fasting. Considering that some of the seventeen might have been sick or taking medications, the numbers speak for themselves. [26]

    Wiretapping scandals in spring 2008 also highlighted Gülenist penetration of the security service’s most important units. After the Turkish Security Directorate obtained a blanket court permit in April 2007 to monitor and record all the communications in Turkey including mobile and land-line telephones, SMS text messaging, e-mail, fax, and Internet communications,[27] Turks have grown uneasy about having telephone conversations fearing intrusion into their privacy. Recent leaks to pro-AKP media of recordings of military personnel meetings, lectures, top secret military documents, strategic antiterrorism plans, private medical files of commanders, and contents of personal conversations between state prosecutors have shocked the nation as has the appearance on the Internet video site YouTube of some of those recordings.

    The alleged network of Fethullah followers in the security system has an impact on domestic affairs as they use restricted technology or privileged information to further their political agenda. In February 2008, for example, several websites posted the voice recording of a secret speech delivered by Brig. Gen. Münir Erten announcing the timing of an upcoming Turkish military operation into Iraqi Kurdistan, details of a private discussion with the chief of the General Staff, and private information concerning Gen. Ergin Saygun’s health.[28] The following month, several websites including YouTube posted a secretly recorded conversation between prosecutor Salim Demirci and a colleague regarding Erdoğan and Efkan Ala, then governor of Diyarbakir and subsequently a counselor of Erdoğan’s office. Erdoğan responded by ordering a criminal investigation against Demirci.[29] In June 2008, the Islamist Vakit published Saygun’s entire medical file, disclosing information about his diabetes as well as the treatments and medications he had received in the Gülhane military hospital.[30] Others whose tapped conversations appeared on Islamist websites and in Gülen’s newspaper network included Erdoğan Teziç, the former head of Turkey’s Higher Education Council, and prominent members of the center-left opposition Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, CHP). Many Turkish journalists believe that Fethullahist-dominated police tap their communications, and according to reports, the head of the wiretapping unit, who was appointed by Erdoğan in August 2005, is a Fethullah follower.[31] Islamist newspapers including Vakit, Yeni Şafak, Zaman, and the pro-AKP Taraf published leaks from private conversations held inside government offices and military headquarters. The Islamist, pro-AKP media has reported alleged confidential evidence relating to the police investigation of the so-called Ergenekon plot that posits a secularist cabal of military officers, journalists, and professors sought to overthrow the AKP government.[32] The net effect of such leaks is to tar the reputations of or intimidate AKP’s political opponents and the Turkish military.
    Islamization within police ranks also contributes to police brutality against anti-AKP demonstrators. On May 1, 2008, the police used gas bombs, pepper gas, water cannons, and clubs against workers who wanted to celebrate May Day peacefully in Istanbul’s Taksim Square, the traditional site of demonstrations in Turkey’s largest city; scores were injured.[33] Labor unions and opposition parties condemned the police brutality and accused Erdoğan of using police to silence opposition voices.[34] Police also suppressed labor protests in Tuzla (Istanbul) shipyards.[35] Similarly, police have harassed individual citizens after they criticized Erdoğan’s policies. Erdoğan’s own security guards abducted a 46-year-old man from Antalya for speaking out in public against his social security policies, taking the man to a deserted location where the guards beat and threatened him. The victim alleged that his attackers said they could easily plant guns or drugs on him and kill him.[36]

    While Turkey’s military is guarantor of the constitution, Veren alleged that Fethullahists had also entrenched themselves within the military, police, and other professions:
    The Fethullahist military officers were once our students, who we financially supported, educated, and assisted. When these grateful children graduated and reached influential positions, they put themselves and their positions at the service of Fethullah Gülen … [Gülen] directs and instructs, and, through them, maintains power within the state … When Gülen’s students graduate from the police or military academies-as do the new doctors and lawyers-they present their first salaries to Fethullah Gülen as a gesture of their gratitude. Newly graduated officers even bring him the swords that they receive during the graduation ceremony.[37]

    According to Veren, Gülen has argued that the military expels no more than one in forty Islamist officers; the rest remain in undercover cells. While such allegations may seem the stuff of conspiracy theory, recent leaks to pro-AKP media suggest a number of Islamist sources within the military ranks, creating speculation that followers of Gülen now populate the senior infrastructure of the Turkish General Staff. Such speculation gained additional credence after the August 2008 Supreme Military Council (Yüksek Askeri Şura, YAŞ), which, for the first time, declined to expel suspected Islamists from military ranks.

    The AKP government has also aided the Gülen movement with its reorientation of the judiciary. Over the first five years of his rule, Erdoğan replaced thousands of judges and prosecutors with AKP appointees. Now that the president is Islamist, it is unlikely that he would veto the appointment of Islamists to the bench, as did his predecessor Ahmet Necdet Sezer. Indeed, it now appears that the government intends to appoint thousands more to judicial positions.[38] The AKP has also enacted a law that would require applicants for judgeships to first interview with AKP bureaucrats in order better to gauge and adjudicate applicants’ adherence to Islam. The results of the AKP’s targeting of the judicial system are already apparent as anti-secular, pro-AKP officials have been at the forefront of some controversial trials, such as the case against Van University president Yücel Aşkın,[39] the Şemdinli investigation in which the prosecutor tried to implicate Gen. Yaşar Büyükanıt before he became chief of the General Staff, and, most recently, the Ergenekon probe.

    Indeed, it is such overtly political and vindictive prosecutions that have led some former Gülen sympathizers, such as University of Utah political scientist Hakan Yavuz, to a change of heart. In one interview, Yavuz told odatv.com that four important legal cases had changed his thinking: the case against Aşkın; the Semdinli case; the Atabeyler operation, uncovered in 2005, involving an organized crime group with alleged plans to assassinate Prime Minister Erdoğan;[40] and the Ergenekon probe. Yavuz explained, “The cemaat has attempted to steer all four cases. Look at the slanderous reports in archives of the cemaat’s newspapers, how they defamed Yucel Aşkın. And now it’s Ergenekon. Keeping [prominent] personalities in jail for over a year without indictment is inexplicable.” Yavuz also suggested Gülen’s cemaat spoke differently to its members than to outsiders and that it was pursuing a political agenda that conflicted with the founding philosophy of the modern Turkish republic. He accused Fethullahists of “co-optation” and said that they were recruiting people and paying them money-without any formal receipts or records-to write and speak favorably about the movement while criticizing the secular Turkish state.[41]

    The Fifth Estate

    If the police, military, and courts might normally protect rule-of-law from within official Turkish government structures, there might still be an external check to abuse of power in the Turkish media. The Turkish media has traditionally been relentless in its reporting of abuses of power and corruption. Soon after assuming office, however, Erdoğan proved intolerant of the concept of a free press. The AKP government has systematically sought to create a media monopoly to speak with one voice and on behalf of the government. Erdoğan lashes out at media organs that he does not control. In his first term, Erdoğan brought more than a hundred lawsuits against sixty-three journalists in sixteen publications, against many writers, as well as the leaders and members of parliament of all opposition parties. The number of lawsuits may be far greater. In 2008, Erdoğan declined to answer a parliamentary inquiry by a Democratic Left Party deputy demanding information on how many lawsuits Erdoğan had initiated against journalists-claiming that such information was in the realm of his private life.”[42] Most of Erdoğan’s lawsuits against journalists involve criticism that any other democracy would consider legitimate. In 2005, for example, he sued Cumhuriyet cartoonist Musa Kart for depicting him as a cat entangled in a ball of string. Last year, he sued the LeMan weekly humor magazine for ridiculing him in its January 30, 2008 cover.[43]

    Erdoğan lost some of his lawsuits, and courts threw out others, but the effect has nonetheless been chilling. Journalists know that not only does the prime minister seek to make them financially liable for any criticism, but that the AKP might even seek to assume control of their publications. During AKP’s 6-year rule, the government has seized control of several media outlets and subsequently sold them to pro-AKP holdings affiliated with the Gülen community. In April 2007, for example, the governmental Saving Deposit Insurance Fund (Tasarruf Mevduatı Sigorta Fonu, TMSF) seized Sabah-ATV, Turkey’s second largest media group in a predawn raid. The TMSF, staffed by Erdoğan appointees, then sold the group to Çalık Holding, the CEO of which is Erdoğan’s son-in-law. Çalık financed the purchase with public funds taken as loans from two state-owned banks and by partnering with a newly-founded, Qatar-based media company that bought 25 percent of Sabah shares. It was Abdullah Gül who introduced Ahmet Çalık to Qatari Emir Hamad bin Khalifa during his January 2008 visit in Syria; Çalık also accompanied Gül in February and Erdoğan in April when they visited Qatar. Media reports indicated that other consortiums that had initially shown interest in purchasing Sabah-ATV with their own money pulled out of the tender shortly before the bid after Erdoğan contacted them, leaving Çalik the sole bidder.[44] Sabah has since become a strong advocate of the AKP government. In September 2008, Erdoğan demanded all party members and aides boycott newspapers owned by the Doğan Media Group after it reported on laundering of money to Islamist charities.[45]

    Excluding the Islamist television and radio stations, newspapers such as Zaman, Sabah, Yeni Şafak, Türkiye, Star, Bugün, Vakit, and Taraf all have AKP and/or Gülen-affiliated ownership. By circulation, such papers represent at least 40 percent of all newspaper sales in Turkey.[46]

    What Are Gülen’s Intentions?

    Conglomerates have long had a dominant position in Turkish society. Secular businessmen such as Aydın Doğan and Mehmet Emin Karamehmet have interests not only in industry but also in media, the banking sector, and even education. Never before, though, has a single individual started a movement that seeks to transform Turkish society so fundamentally. Gülen now wields a vocal partisan media; a vast network of loyal bureaucrats; partisan universities and academia; partisan prosecutors and judges; partisan security and intelligence agencies; partisan capitalists, business associations, NGOs, and labor unions; and partisan teachers, doctors, and hospitals. What makes Gülen so dangerous? Gülen’s own teaching and sermons provide the best answers.

    In 1999, Turkish television aired footage of Gülen delivering sermons to a crowd of followers in which he revealed his aspirations for an Islamist Turkey ruled by Shari‘a (Islamic law) as well as the methods that should be used to attain that goal. In the sermons, he said:
    You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers … until the conditions are ripe, they [the followers] must continue like this. If they do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads, and Muslims will suffer everywhere, like in the tragedies in Algeria, like in 1982 [in] Syria … like in the yearly disasters and tragedies in Egypt. The time is not yet right. You must wait for the time when you are complete and conditions are ripe, until we can shoulder the entire world and carry it … You must wait until such time as you have gotten all the state power, until you have brought to your side all the power of the constitutional institutions in Turkey … Until that time, any step taken would be too early-like breaking an egg without waiting the full forty days for it to hatch. It would be like killing the chick inside. The work to be done is [in] confronting the world. Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all-in confidence … trusting your loyalty and secrecy. I know that when you leave here-[just] as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and the feelings that I expressed here.

    He continued,
    When everything was closed and all doors were locked, our houses of isik [light] assumed a mission greater than that of older times. In the past, some of the duties of these houses were carried out by madrasas [Islamic schools], some by schools, some by tekkes [Islamist lodges] … These isik homes had to be the schools, had to be madrasas, [had to be] tekkes all at the same time. The permission did not come from the state, or the state’s laws, or the people who govern us. The permission was given by God … who wanted His name learned and talked about, studied, and discussed in those houses, as it used to be in the mosques.[47]

    In another sermon, Gülen said,
    Now it is a painful spring that we live in. A nation is being born again. A nation of millions [is] being born-one that will live for long centuries, God willing … It is being born with its own culture, its own civilization. If giving birth to one person is so painful, the birth of millions cannot be pain-free. Naturally we will suffer pain. It won’t be easy for a nation that has accepted atheism, has accepted materialism, a nation accustomed to running away from itself, to come back riding on its horse. It will not be easy, but it is worth all our suffering and the sacrifices.[48]
    And, in yet another sermon, he declared,
    The philosophy of our service is that we open a house somewhere and, with the patience of a spider, we lay our web to wait for people to get caught in the web; and we teach those who do. We don’t lay the web to eat or consume them but to show them the way to their resurrection, to blow life into their dead bodies and souls, to give them a life.[49]
    Many Gülen supporters and members of the Islamist media affiliated with the cemaat suggested the sermons were somehow forged[50] but the denials are unconvincing given the video footage and reports by Gülen movement defectors.

    U.S. Government Support for Gülen?

    Many Turkish analysts believe that, prior to Erdoğan’s election, Gülen and his supporters in the U.S. government helped obtain an invitation to the White House for him at a time when Erdoğan was banned from politics in Turkey due to his Islamist activities-an event viewed as a U.S. endorsement ahead of the 2002 Turkish elections. That the U.S. government and, specifically, the Central Intelligence Agency support the Gülen movement is conventional wisdom among Turkey’s secular elite even though no hard evidence exists to support such allegations.

    When Turkish secularists are asked to defend the view that Gülen enjoys U.S. support, they often point to his almost 20-year residence in eastern Pennsylvania. After the Supreme Court of Appeals in Turkey (Yargıtay) confirmed on June 24, 2008, a lower court’s ruling to acquit Gülen on charges that he organized an illegal terrorist organization to overthrow the secular government in Turkey, Gülen won another legal battle, this time in the United States. A federal court reversed U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service decisions that would have denied Gülen’s application for permanent residency in the United States on the basis that Gülen did not fit the criteria as someone with “extraordinary ability in the field of education.” The Department of Homeland Security characterized Gülen as neither an expert in the field of education nor an educator but rather as “the leader of a large and influential religious and political movement with immense commercial holdings.”[51]
    While the court ruling that allowed Gülen to remain in the United States may provide fodder for Turkish analysts who suggest U.S. support for Gülen, the process is actually more revealing. Indeed, the U.S. government noted that much of the acclaim Gülen touts is sponsored or financed by his own movement. Gülen attached twenty-nine letters of reference to his June 18, 2008 motion, mostly from theologians or Turkish political figures close to or affiliated with his organization. John Esposito, founding director of the Saudi-financed Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, who, after receiving donations from the Gülen movement sponsored a conference in his honor, also supplied a reference. Two former CIA officials, George Fidas and Graham Fuller, and former U.S. ambassador to Turkey Morton Abramowitz also supplied references.

    The letters may have worked. On July 16, 2008, U.S. district judge Stewart Dalzell issued a memorandum and order granting Gülen’s motion for partial summary judgment and ordering the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service to approve his petition for alien worker status as an alien of extraordinary ability by August 1, 2008. The court found that the immigration examiner improperly concluded that the field of education was the only statutory category in which Gülen’s accomplishments could fit and that Gülen’s accomplishments in such fields as theology, political science, and Islamic studies should also be considered. The court further determined that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service Administrative Appeals Office erred in concluding that Gülen’s work was not “scholarly” by applying an unduly narrow definition of the term. Finally, with regard to the statutory requirement that the applicant show that his or her entry into the United States would substantially benefit the United States, the court found that Gülen had met the requirement.[52]

    Regardless of the legal rationale behind his current stay, the U.S. decision to grant Gülen residency will enable his movement to continue to imply Washington’s endorsement as the AKP and its Fethullahist supporters seek to push Turkey further away from the secularism upon which it was built.

    Conclusions

    Gülen enjoys the support of many friends, ideological fellow-travelers, and co-opted journalists and academics. Too often, concern over Gülen’s activities is dismissed in the Turkish, U.S., and European media as mere paranoia. When Turkey’s chief prosecutor indicted the AKP for attempting to undermine the secular constitution, the pro-Islamist media in Turkey along with Western diplomats and journalists dismissed the case as an “undemocratic judicial coup.”[53] Yet at the same time, many of the same outlets and officials have hailed the Ergenekon indictment, assuming a dichotomy between Islamism and democracy on one hand, and secularism and fascism on the other.[54] The repeated branding in Islamist outlets of Turkey’s Islamists as “reformist democrats” and of modern, secular Turks as “fundamentalists” has to be one of the most offensive but sadly effective lies in modern politics.
    Indeed, Turkey has never seen a single incident of attacks on pious Muslims for fasting during Ramadan, whereas in recent years there have been many incidents of attacks on less-observant Turks for drinking alcohol or not fasting.[55] While women who cover their heads in the Islamic manner can move freely in any area of the country, uncovered women are increasingly unwelcome in certain regions and are often attacked.[56]

    Contrary to the impression prevalent in the West-that the conflict is between religious Muslims and “anti-religion, secular Kemalists”-the fact remains that the majority of Turks, secular included, are traditional and observant Muslims many of whom define themselves primarily as “Muslims first.”[57] While the Turkish constitution recognizes all Turkish citizens as “Turks,” the dominant sentiment in the country has always been that in order to be considered a Turk, one must be Muslim. The complete absence of any non-Muslim governor, ambassador, or military or police officer attests to the prevalence of Islam’s dominance in the Turkish establishment. Therefore, it appears Gülen is not fighting for more individual freedoms but to free Islam from the confines of the mosque and the private domain of individuals and to bring it to the public arena, to govern every aspect of life in the country.[58] AKP leaders, including Gül and Erdoğan, have repeatedly expressed their opposition to the “imprisonment of Islam in the mosque,” demanding that it be present everywhere as a lifestyle. Most Turks vividly remember statements by AKP leaders not long ago rejecting the definition of secularism as “separation of mosque and state.” Gül has slammed “secularism” on many occasions, including during a November 27, 1995 interview with The Guardian. What Turkey’s Islamists really want is to remove the founding principles of the Turkish Republic. So long as U.S. and Western officials fail to recognize that Gülen’s rhetoric of tolerance is only skin-deep, they may be setting the stage for a dialogue, albeit not of religious tolerance, but rather to find an answer to the question, “Who lost Turkey?”

    Rachel Sharon-Krespin is the director of the Turkish Media Project at the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Washington D.C.

    [1] Can Dündar, Milliyet (Istanbul), June 21, 2007; Reha Muhtar, Vatan (Istanbul), June 22, 2007.
    [2] Milliyet, Mar. 10, 2008; Hürriyet (Istanbul), Mar. 10, 2008.
    [3] Helen Rose Ebaugh and Dogan Koc, “Funding Gülen-Inspired Good Works: Demonstrating and Generating Commitment to the Movement,” fgulen.com, Oct. 27, 2007.
    [4] Merdan Yanardağ, Fethullah Gülen Hareketinin Perde Arkasi, Turkiye Nasil Kusatildi? (Istanbul: yah Beyaz Yayın, 2006), based on interviews with Nurettin Veren on Kanaltürk television, June 26, July 3, 2006.
    [5] “Fethullah Gülen Is an Islamic Scholar and Peace Activist,” International Conference on Fethullah Gülen, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Nov. 2007; J. J. Rogers, “Giants of Light: Fethullah Gülen and Meister Eckhart in Dialogue,” The University of Texas, San Antonio, Tex., Nov. 3, 2007.
    [6] See for example, Rogers, “Giants of Light”; USA Today, July 18, 2008.
    [7] Bülent Aras, “Turkish Islam’s Moderate Face,” Middle East Quarterly, Sept. 1998, pp. 23-9.
    [8] Anadolu Ajansı (Ankara), Feb. 10, 1998.
    [9] Booklets on Anatolian Sufism with citations from Mevlana Celleddin Rumi distributed at the “Muslim World in Transition: Contributions of the Gulen Movement” conference, London, Oct. 25 – 27, 2007.
    [10] Aland Mizell, “Clash of Civilizations versus Interfaith Dialogue: The Theories of Huntington and Gulen,” KurdishMedia.com, Dec. 31, 2007; idem, “Are Islam and Kemalism Compatible? How Two Systems Have Impacted the Kurdish Question?” Iraq Updates, Nov. 28, 2007.
    [11] Interview with Nurettin Veren, Kanaltürk television, June 26, 2006.
    [12] Ibid.
    [13] Sabah (Istanbul), Dec. 30, 2004.
    [14] Veren interview, Kanaltürk, June 26, 2006.
    [15] Cumhuriyet (Istanbul), Dec. 23, 2007.
    [16] Bayram Balcı, “Central Asia: Fethullah Gulen’s Missionary Schools,” Oct. 2001.
    [17] Interview with Merdan Yanardağ, Gerçek Gündem (Istanbul), Nov. 20, 2006.
    [18] Hürriyet, Apr. 11, 2008.
    [19] Erik-Jan Zürcher, “Kamermeerderheid Eist Onderzoek Naar Turkse Beweging,” NOVA documentary, July 4, 2008.
    [20] Cumhuriyet, July 9, 2008; Netherlands Information Services, July 11, 2008.
    [21] Yanardağ, Fethullah Gülen Hareketinin Perde Arkasi, Turkiye Nasil Kusatildi?
    [22] Adil Serdar Saçan, interview, Kanaltürk, July 3, 2006.
    [23] Ibid.
    [24] Samanyolu television, Oct. 13, 2008.
    [25] See, for example, Michael Rubin, “Erdogan, Ergenekon, and the Struggle for Turkey,” Mideast Monitor, Aug. 2008.
    [26] Yanardağ interview, Gerçek Gündem, Nov. 20, 2006.
    [27] Vatan, June 2, 2008; Hürriyet, June 2, 2008.
    [28] “SOK! Tuggeneral Munir Erten den SOK aciklamalar!” accessed Oct. 27, 2008.
    [29] “Sok Video! Cumhuriyet Savcisi Salim Demirci,” accessed Oct. 27, 2008.
    [30] Vakit (Istanbul), June 14, 2008.
    [31] Vatan, June 2, 2008; Hürriyet, June 2, 2008.
    [32] BBC News, Feb. 4, 2008; Frank Hyland, “Investigation of Turkey’s ‘Deep State’ Ergenekon Plot Spreads to Military,” Global Terrorism Analysis, Jamestown Foundation, July 16, 2008.
    [33] Reuters, May 1, 2008; Sendika.org, Labornet Turkey, May 1, 2008; Vatan, May 1, 2, 2008; Milliyet, May 1, 2, 2008; Hürriyet, May 1, 2, 2008
    [34] Vatan, May 2, 2008; Milliyet, May 2, 2008; Hürriyet, May 2, 8, 2008.
    [35] Hürriyet, Feb. 28, 2008.
    [36] Milliyet, May 14, 2008.
    [37] Yanardağ, Fethullah Gülen Hareketinin Perde Arkasi, Turkiye Nasil Kusatildi?
    [38] “Turkish Judiciary at War with AKP Government to Defend Its Independence,” MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 1520, Mar. 27, 2007.
    [39] “The AKP Government’s Attempt to Move Turkey from Secularism to Islamism (Part I): The Clash with Turkey’s Universities,” MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 1014, Nov. 1, 2005; “Professor from Van University in Turkey Commits Suicide after Five Months in Jail without Trial,” MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 1025, Nov. 18, 2005.
    [40] Zaman (Istanbul), Apr. 18, 2008.
    [41] Odatv.com, May 30, 2008; Hürriyet, June 13, 2008; Akşam (Istanbul), June 16, 2008.
    [42] Radikal (Istanbul), Apr. 7, 2008.
    [43] Hürriyet, Oct. 21, 2008.
    [44] Hürriyet, May 14, 2008.
    [45] Hürriyet, Sept. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 2008.
    [46] Milliyet, July 14, 2008; Cumhuriyet, July 15, 2008
    [47] Turkish channel ATV, June 18, 1999.
    [48] Ibid.
    [49] Ibid.; “The Upcoming Elections in Turkey (2): The AKP’s Political Power Base,” MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 375, July 19, 2007.
    [50] Sabah, Jan. 2, 3, 2005.
    [51] “Fethullah Gulen v. Michael Chertoff, Secretary, U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, et al,” Case 2:07-cv-02148-SD, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
    [52] Ibid.
    [53] Turkish Daily News (Ankara), Mar. 16, 2008; Vakit, June 7, 9, 2008; Yeni Şafak (Istanbul), June 9, 2008.
    [54] Mustafa Akyol, “The Threat Is Secular Fundamentalism,” International Herald Tribune, May 4, 2007; “Islam Will Modernize-If Secular Fundamentalists Allow,” Turkish Daily News, May 15, 2007; “Mr. Logoglu Is Wrong, Considerably Wrong about Turkey,” Turkish Daily News, May 24, 2007.
    [55] Vatan, Aug. 21, 2008; Turkish Daily News, Sept. 23, 2008.
    [56] Hürriyet, Feb. 14, 2008; Milliyet, Feb. 14, 2008; Vatan, Feb. 14, 2008, Cumhuriyet, Feb. 14, 2008.
    [57] Yeni Şafak, July 7, 2006.
    [58] “Turkish PM Erdogan in Speech during Term as Istanbul Mayor Attacks Turkey’s Constitution, Describing It as ‘A Huge Lie’: ‘Sovereignty Belongs Unconditionally and Always To Allah’; ‘One Cannot Be a Muslim and Secular,’” MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 1596, May 23, 2007.

  • Gilad Atzmon: Israel needs Turkey

    Gilad Atzmon: Israel needs Turkey

    The world famous Israeli- born musician Gilad Atzmon said to TIMETUR:“Turkey’s friendship is very important for Israel and Israel needs Turkey.”

    Hasan: Dear Gilad, How do you evaluate the Israeli carnage in Gaza?

    Gilad: Dear Hasan, I don’t really think that it is a matter of evaluation. We are all aware of the level of destruction brought upon innocent civilians by the Jewish state. Gaza looks as if it was nuked. Yet, as we know, the devastation is not the outcome of a single atomic bomb. It was actually a merciless and lengthy campaign conducted by a national and popular army that employed a chain of heavy bombardment using conventional and unconventional shells.  Gaza’s carnage is the outcome of a sinister, continuous, intense air raid against civilians in the most populated spot on this planet.  Hence, rather than evaluating the carnage itself, I am very interested in the evaluation of the people who are capable of bringing such destruction about. In other words, I am interested in the Israeli and the Jewish collective identity. I wonder how is it possible that the Israelis, the people who were ‘raised from the ashes’, have matured collectively into the embodiment of modern evil. How is it that Diaspora Jews happen to institutionally support Israel and its crimes against humanity?

    Hasan: Why does Israel always break the international laws and does not obey the agreements?

    Gilad: I assume that the Israeli is imbued with feelings of superiority that have something to do with the secular interpretation of the notion of Jewish Chosenness. At the end of the day, Israel is the Jewish state. Though Israel is largely a secular society, it manages to maintain the Judaic heritage of racial supremacy. It is actually the secular nationalist interpretation of Judaic tradition that had evolved into a collective murderous inclination. It is important to note that while within the Judaic context, chosenness is interpreted as a moral burden in which Jews are demanded to stand as an exemplification of ethical behaviour, in the Jewish state, chosenness is interpreted as an entitlement to dominate and kill. Since the Israelis regard themselves as the chosen people, they clearly feel free of any ethical or moral concerns. Moreover, they are not concerned at all with other peoples’ or nations’ judgment or thought. This arrogant philosophy was defined by Israeli PM David Ben Gurion in the 1950’s when he said, “it doesn’t matter what the Goyim (Gentiles) say, the only thing that matters is what the Jews do.”

    Hasan: What is the importance of PM Erdogan’s reaction in Davos?

    Gilad: For me it is clear that PM Erdogan was rather courageous in confronting the Israeli lie on an international stage. Moreover, he really hit the nail on the head by exposing the ultimate symbol of this very lie. I am referring here to war criminal President Shimon Peres, who in spite of his devastating past (Kefar Kana, Nuclear reactor Dimona etc.) has managed to grab a Nobel Prize for peace. Considering his contribution to the Dimona WMD project, a Nobel Prize in nuclear physics would be more appropriate.

    Hasan: How does / can the Jewish lobby work against PM Erdogan and the Jews with conscience?

    Gilad: This is a very good question, I am not an expert on Jewish lobbying tactics. However I am fully aware of their influence. As long as British Labour finance is run by rabid Zionists such as Lord cash Machine Levy and as long as White House chief of staff is a rabid Zionist, we should expect Zionist interests to shape our reality and this means a lot of conflicts, carnage and blood of innocent civilians.

    However, we have to bear in mind that the tide is turning. What we see and hear in Gaza brings about a mass indignation against Israel and its lobbies around the world.

    It is hard for me to predict what the measures taken by Jewish lobbies against PM Erdogan will be. He can probably expect himself to be presented as their new anti-Semite protagonist.  As we know it doesn’t take a lot to become one. While in the old days, anti-Semites were those who didn’t like Jews, nowadays, anti-Semites are those the Jews Hate.

    Nevertheless, we must bear in mind that Turkey’s friendship is very important for Israel. Turkey had been Israel’s only friend in the region. Lately, it had been a negotiator with Syria.  In short, Israel needs Turkey.

    Hasan: How can the Israeli-Turkish relations be effected after the Erdogan-Peres clash in Davos?

    Gilad: I really prefer not to answer this question, I am not exactly an expert on the subject…

    Hasan: What kind of days are waiting for Israel and Turkey in the global political arena?

    Gilad: Again, international affairs isn’t exactly a topic I specialise in.

    Hasan: Do you have a final message for the world and the Turkish people?

    Gilad: I do not like to come with final messages for three reasons:

    1.      I do not like final statements, I insist upon reserving the option of regretting and want to be able to revise my views on every possible topic.

    2.      I believe that people who come with ‘final messages’ must be very important and clever. I am more of an artist. I look into myself, and I share what I see with my listeners and readers.

    3.       Unlike politicians who know what is right and wrong for other people, I hardly know what is right for myself.

    However, my politics, so to say, are very simple. I am looking for an ethical voice. It means that in any given circumstance, I would try to find out myself what is right and what is wrong. I do not believe in dogmatism. I insist that the ethical search is a dynamic process of shaping and reshaping.

    A week ago or so, a friend of mine, the legendary musician Robert Wyatt, helped me put it into words in the most eloquent and simple way. “My politics”, he said,  “is very simple, I am just an anti-racist”.  This is really what it is all about, being an ‘anti-racist’.

    I am totally against any form of racist politics and this is why I despise any form of Jewish politics left, right and centre. I am tired of all these ‘Jew only’ settings. Whether it is the ‘Jews only state’ or ‘Jews for peace’. I am against it because; it is there to promote Jewish tribal interests rather than humanity and brotherhood. The Jewish political experience is somehow always racially orientated and chauvinist to the bone.

    Though I believe that people are entitled to fight for their rights e.g., the Palestinian national struggle, I also believe that people should know how to reinstate peace and harmony. As far as Israel and Jewish politics is concerned, this is exactly what we lack. All we see is vengeance and anger that lead to more and more violence. It is rather apparent that Israelis are not familiar with the notion of mercy and compassion. Jesus’ spiritually harmonious suggestion known as ‘turning the other cheek’ sounds to the Israeli as an amusing ludicrous concept. Apparently, for them, ‘shock and awe’, sounds far more appealing. They democratically vote for carnage, destruction and genocide. At the end of the day, they are entitled to vote. They are the ‘only democracy in the Middle East’, at least this is what they claim to be.

    Source:  , 07 February 2009

  • Talking Turkey About Israel

    Talking Turkey About Israel

    Philip Giraldi *

    The Israeli invasion of Gaza and the slaughter of civilians was such an egregious error in judgment that the usual suspects are working overtime to make it all look like a heroic defense of democratic values. The expected beneficiary of the “defensive action,” the ruling Kadima Party, so miscalculated that it is now likely to lose today’s election, with the Israeli electorate convinced that an even more extreme right-wing government is the only solution to the moderate right-wing bungling.

    Israel will likely choose hard-right nationalism by electing Bibi Netanyahu as the next prime minister. Netanyahu has never let any values, democratic or otherwise, stand in his way in his quest for a Greater (Arab-free) Israel encompassing all of the West Bank and running from the Litani River in Lebanon in the north to the Suez Canal in the south. He has already promised that if elected he will not turn any occupied land over to the Palestinians.

    There have been numerous signs that the world is no longer buying into the Israeli creation myth, even in the United States, where the suffering of the Gazans, neatly concealed by most of the mainstream media, nevertheless produced an outpouring of sympathy. The beleaguered little state of Israel founded as a homeland and refuge for the victims of persecution in Europe has become a regional military superpower ruled by a corrupt political class, with a socialist economy kept afloat by the U.S. taxpayer. Israel continues and even expands its occupation of the lands of its neighbors and engages in the brutal suppression of those who resist. Far from seeking a political solution that would create two states side by side, it has deliberately aborted every genuine peace initiative and now seeks absolute regional hegemony, pressing forward with racist policies that marginalize its own citizens of Arab descent. Most of the world has finally realized that claiming perpetual victimhood as a shield against criticism does not work very well when you can muster Merkava tanks, helicopter gunships, and white phosphorus against a civilian population.

    The sharp exchange between Israeli President Shimon Peres and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan at Davos on Jan. 29 exemplifies Israel’s public relations problem and also casts light upon what steps the Israeli government and its friends in the United States are taking to counteract the negative press. Media reports suggest that Israel preceded its attack on Gaza by alerting a network of supporters to post comments on blogs, saturating the Web with the Israeli government’s justification for its action. This was evident on a number of blogs, including Huffington Post and the Washington Note. Many of the posters were Israelis, and it is believed that a number of them were active-duty military personnel selected for their fluency in English and other European languages as well as their familiarity with the Internet.

    The coverage of the Erdogan-Peres exchange was carefully managed in the U.S. media, but less restrained in Europe and the Middle East. In a one-hour discussion of Gaza moderated by David Ignatius of the Washington Post, an odd choice for such an important discussion, Peres was allowed 25 minutes to speak in defense of the Israeli attack. Erdogan and two other critics on the panel were given 12 minutes each. The YouTube recording of the debate shows Peres pointed accusingly at Erdogan and raised his voice. When Erdogan sought time to respond, Ignatius granted him a minute and then cut him off claiming it was time to go to dinner. Erdogan complained about the treatment and left Davos, vowing never to return. Back in Turkey, he received a hero’s welcome.

    Four days later the Washington Post featured an op-ed entitled “Turkey’s Turn From the West” by Soner Cagaptay, a Turkish-born, American-educated academic who is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). WINEP was founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Cagaptay is also on the board of the American Turkish Friendship Council, one of several Turkish lobbying groups that are supportive of the Israel-Turkey relationship. A review of Cagaptay’s writings reveals that he is AIPAC’s go-to guy for any argument that Turkey is becoming more anti-Western and religious.

    That Cagaptay is a genuine expert on the country of his birth is clear, but his view on developments there is very much shaped by who pays him. He finds anti-Semitism lurking everywhere in Turkey and being “spread by the political leadership.” He is astonished by Erdogan’s assertion at Davos that Israel is “killing people.” He finds inexplicable the prime minister’s belief that there was “Jewish culpability for the conflict in Gaza” and that the “Jewish-controlled media outlets were misrepresenting the facts.” For good measure, Cagaptay believes it “doubtful whether Turkey would side with the United States in dealing with the issue of nuclear Iran,” and he sees a regrettable Turkish “solidarity with Islamist regimes or causes.”

    AIPAC’s Turkey expert might be surprised to learn that most of the world, which saw the images of dying Palestinian children on nightly television, would probably agree with Erdogan. Israel planned its invasion of Gaza six months in advance, timed the assault for maximum political benefit for the ruling party and to engage the incoming U.S. president in its policies, committed war crimes against a largely defenseless civilian population, and then kept journalists out of the combat zone so it could lie about everything that it was doing. The U.S. media in particular chose to ignore the carnage and present the Israeli point of view. Though it would be unfair to claim that the media is controlled by any ethnic or religious group, it is certainly true that Jewish organizations mobilized to make sure that pro-Israel commentary far exceeded any reporting of Palestinian suffering.

    Cagaptay likewise fails to see what the rest of the world sees regarding Iran. No one admires Iran’s government, but America’s European allies, not just Turkey, will not support yet another war in the Middle East, even if Tehran does move closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon. Turkey’s development of closer ties with the Islamic world, which Cagaptay tellingly insists on calling “Islamist,” is also an understandable response to being repeatedly snubbed in its bids to join the European Union, something that even WINEP’s reliable scholarly claque surely knows to be true.

    Efforts to control and spin the narrative, to turn black into white, have been unrelenting since the Israelis decided to attack Gaza. Cagaptay is only a part of that effort, but his smearing of Turkey and its elected leaders is unfortunate, particularly as his newspaper audience probably knows little about Turkey and will assume that the analysis is credible. Anyone who knows Turks well knows that they are an exceedingly stubborn and honorable people who will invariably say what they think to be true. Prime Minister Erdogan spoke the truth in Davos and has been speaking the truth about the invasion of Gaza. Attempts to label him anti-Semitic and to denigrate the Turks in general will certainly have some impact, most certainly on the U.S. Congress, which will rapidly fall into line and comply with AIPAC’s instructions on an appropriate punishment. But Israel’s attempt to portray itself as always the victim of a global anti-Semitic, anti-Western conspiracy just will not stand any more, no matter how many Soner Cagaptays are paid by AIPAC to write for the Washington Post.

    Source: www.antiwar.com, 10.02.2009

    * Philip Giraldi is a former officer of the United States Central Intelligence Agency who became famous for claiming in 2005 that the USA was preparing plans to attack Iran with nuclear weapons in response to a terrorist action against the US, independently of whether or not Iran was involved in the action. He is presently a partner in an international security consultancy,  Cannistraro Associates.

  • Man in the News: Pope Benedict XVI

    Man in the News: Pope Benedict XVI

    By Guy Dinmore

    Published: February 6 2009 19:17 | Last updated: February 6 2009 19:17

    As the head of the world’s oldest organisation, holding a global market share of 17.5 per cent and with defined values and established decision-making procedures, Joseph Ratzinger should be the envy of any corporate chief executive.

    Yet in the space of two weeks Pope Benedict XVI has stumbled into the worst crisis of his four-year-old papacy, dealing in the process the most serious blow to relations between the Roman Catholic Church and the Jewish faith in half a century. Cardinals and bishops are starting to mobilise in revolt. For the moment their disquiet is aimed at a handful of figures surrounding the 81-year-old pontiff who they fear is becoming a timid recluse, buried in his reading and writing, vulnerable to manipulation.

    That is the charitable explanation of why last month Pope Benedict lifted the excommunication of four ultra-traditionalist clerics, including British bishop Richard Williamson, who has questioned the extent of the Holocaust and denied the existence of gas chambers in Nazi death camps.

    EDITOR’S CHOICE

    Editorial Comment: A Pope’s fallibility – Feb-05

    Merkel raps Pope over Holocaust row cleric – Feb-04

    Pope opens YouTube channel – Jan-23

    But for progressive theologians this latest attempt by Benedict to heal a decades-old schism confirms his barely disguised sympathies for the doctrinal views of the ultra-conservatives and calls into question the reforms of the historic Second Vatican Council of 1965. The harm done to interfaith dialogue is considerable, says Miroslav Volf, an Episcopalian and professor of theology at Yale University. “This is not the first time that this pope has caused such interfaith damage. He is an equal opportunity interfaith offender,” Prof Volf tells the FT, recalling the angry response of Muslims to the Pope’s 2006 Regensburg speech interpreted as equating Islam with violence.

    “Only some of it can be attributed to the Vatican bureaucracy. He is over-zealous in protecting the truth of the faith and unity of the church, the hallmarks of his pontificate … His mistakes and blunders all lean in one direction, appealing to the traditionalists. He is not a Holocaust denier. But why this blunder?”

    The reactions from political and religious leaders – including Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel – have focused on Mr Williamson’s blatant anti-Semitic (and sexist) views. That the decree was issued just days before International Holocaust Remembrance Day was seen as a public relations disaster. One close follower of the Vatican says Pope Benedict’s media image as “God’s rottweiler” is wrong. “In reality he is timid, shy, bordering on the recluse and could potentially be bullied.”

    The pontiff is a popular teacher but appears cut-off, rarely giving access to cardinals and nuncios, unlike his predecessor. His isolation is a subject of considerable debate and mystery, as is how the decision was made to revoke the excommunication of the clerics, followers of the Pius X Fraternity established by Marcel Lefebvre, the schismatic French archbishop who died in 1991.

    Sandro Magister, a prominent commentator, blames Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the secretary of state who is effectively the Vatican’s prime minister. The cardinal was “distinguished by his absence” in the affair, travelling in Mexico and Spain, indulging in endless rounds of conferences and celebrations. “Benedict XVI was left practically alone, and the curia (civil service) was abandoned to disorder,” Mr Magister writes on his blog.

    Others suggest the Italian cardinal – appointed by the Pope in September 2006 – played a more deliberate role, keeping key cardinals out of the decision-making process. They note he helped the then Cardinal Ratzinger in trying to negotiate a solution with Lefebvre in 1988, shortly before Pope John Paul excommunicated the rebel archbishop and the four bishops he had illegally ordained.

    In rare displays of public discord, prominent cardinals have expressed dismay at not being consulted. Cardinal Bertone was forced into damage control, issuing a statement that the Pope did not know of Mr Williamson’s views on the Holocaust. He also ordered the renegade bishop to recant his views if he wanted to serve as prelate in the Church.

    Mr Williamson’s remarks on the gas chambers were made to a Swedish television station in November but only released on January 21. That was the day the Vatican decided to lift his excommunication although the decree was not made public until three days later. The timing has led to a conspiracy theory that someone in the curia tipped off the broadcaster. Even so, Mr Williamson had aired similar statements before. As Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, says: “All somebody had to do was Google him.”

    Others must have known, despite their denials, critics contend. One was Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos who persuaded the Pope to reverse the excommunications. Cardinal Hoyos heads Ecclesia Dei, a group with ties to the ultra-traditionalists, sharing their adhesion to the traditional Latin mass whose return was permitted amid great controversy by the Pope in 2007. There are doubts Benedict will remove Cardinal Bertone, but a revolt by senior clerics could persuade him to resign.

    For Benedict – the first German pope since Victor II in 1055 – the furore must be painful. While he has been unapologetic in his rejection of religious pluralism, moral relativisim, economic liberalism, contraception, divorce, women priests and same-sex civil unions, he has consistently spoken out against the Holocaust and persecution of Jews.

    Born in 1927 in a Bavarian village not far from Hitler’s own birthplace, his childhood was spent in the shadow of the Third Reich. As a 14-year-old seminary student, he was obliged to join the Hitler Youth. He saw prisoners from the Dachau camp and Hungarian Jews shipped to their death. He was later sent to the Austrian Legion where he was “bullied by fanatical ideologues” and in 1945 he deserted, to be taken prisoner by US soldiers.

    Ordained in 1951, he became a professor of dogma and fundamental theology at age 30, starting a long life in academia. By 50 he was archbishop of Munich and soon a cardinal but with little pastoral experience. In 1978 Karol Wojtyla became Pope and in 1981 persuaded Cardinal Ratzinger to head the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican’s enforcer of orthodoxy tracing its roots to the Holy Inquisition. He disciplined at least a dozen high profile, liberal Catholics. Some were excommunicated.

    Much is now at stake in how Benedict responds to this latest challenge to the Church. In an interview he gave when still a cardinal, he remarked however: “I am like the cellist Rostropovich. I never read the critics.”

    Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

  • CLINTON SIGNALS A SMART RETREAT FROM DEMOCRATISATION

    CLINTON SIGNALS A SMART RETREAT FROM DEMOCRATISATION

    By Gideon Rachman

    Published: February 5 2009 20:39 | Financial Times

    Taking questions from staff at the state department this week, Hillary Clinton highlighted the hard-headed approach she hopes to take to the US’s relations with the rest of the world, write Daniel Dombey and Demetri Sevastopulo. “When we talk about the three pillars of American foreign policy – defence, diplomacy, development – they’re not just words to the president and me,” the new secretary of state (below) declared, repeating a formula she has spelled out several times in the days since she took office.

    Singularly absent from her outline of the struts of US foreign policy is a fourth “D” – democracy promotion – a goal that served as one of the guiding themes of the Bush administration.

    The Obama administration has gone out of its way to signal a pragmatic, non-ideological approach. It is a modus operandi that stresses continuity with policy under George W. Bush in terms of the tools it uses while setting out arguably more “realistic” goals.

    “This team is very deliberate and what you’ll see is them taking a long look at what they’ve inherited to see what of that works,” says a US official. “They have learnt the lesson from the beginning of the Bush administration, which threw everything out that had to do with [former president Bill] Clinton.”

    Mrs Clinton’s “three D’s” mantra uses a vocabulary of the possible rather than charting grand objectives. It suggests that the US will continue to assert its military might while emphasising the kind of diplomatic outreach many US allies called for during Mr Bush’s presidency. The secretary of state also wants to use US aid to put pressure on countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and to win control of assistance currently dispensed by the US military so that it can be more easily put to the service of political goals.

    In a phrase Mrs Clinton has borrowed from Joseph Nye, a Harvard professor, and Richard Armitage, a former Bush administration state department official, she labels such an alliance of “hard” and “soft” power as “smart power”. Her stance is bolstered by similar positions struck by President Barack Obama and Robert Gates, defence secretary – a veteran champion of “realism” in the long-running Washington debate with liberal interventionist “idealists”.

    Not for nothing did Mr Obama promise to work with authoritarian states in his inaugural address. While Mr Bush used his second inauguration to set out “the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world”, Mr Obama told undemocratic states that “we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist” – an offer he later explicitly addressed to Iran.

    Indeed, just days before taking office, the then president-elect took care to avoid Mr Bush’s emphasis on free elections. “Elections aren’t democracy, as we understand it,” Mr Obama told The Washington Post, stressing priorities such as freedom from arbitrary arrest and fighting corruption. “They are one facet of a liberal order.”

    Mr Obama’s emphasis on stabilising Afghanistan to reduce the threat of terrorism rather than on establishing a US-style “Jeffersonian democracy” follows this train of thought, as did his pre-election suggestion to General David Petraeus, then the commander of forces in Iraq, that the US should be content with a “messy, sloppy status quo” in that country.

    Ahead of Mr Obama’s expected approval of the deployment of 12,000 more soldiers to Afghanistan, Mr Gates has also suggested that the US scale back its ambitions, cautioning that any attempt to create “some sort of Central Asian Valhalla over there” would inevitably fail.

    Yet while the goals set out by the Obama administration may differ from – or sometimes be more pragmatic than – those endorsed by the Bush administration – the tools it employs are often the same. Last week Mr Gates signalled that the US would continue to launch missile strikes against suspected terrorists inside Pakistan. Less than three days after Mr Obama moved into the White House, the CIA carried out such a strike, an attack that almost certainly was approved by the new president.

    Other instruments established by Mr Bush and set to continue include the six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear programme, which Mrs Clinton has labelled “essential”, and similar discussions on Iran. “Where continuity is appropriate, we are committed to doing that,” Mrs Clinton said, also instructing Todd Stern, her climate change envoy, to take part in both “United Nations negotiations and processes involving a smaller set of countries” – an apparent reference to Mr Bush’s controversial “major emitters” grouping.

    “From Iran to the plans for an early meeting with [Russian president Dmitry] Medvedev to recent statements on Afghanistan, there is a strong realist strain appearing, although whether that will hold sway at the end of the day remains to be seen,” says Cliff Kupchan, a Washington-based analyst and former Clinton administration official.

    While the debate between realists and idealists that rocked the Bush administration continues, Mr Kupchan observes that now “the portions of meat and vegetables are different”.

    Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

  • USA: 15 Companies That Might Not Survive 2009

    USA: 15 Companies That Might Not Survive 2009

    Rick Newman
    Friday February 6, 2009, 11:53 am EST

    With consumers shutting their wallets and corporate revenues plunging, the business landscape may start to resemble a graveyard in 2009. Household names like Circuit City and Linens ‘n Things have already perished. And chances are, those bankruptcies were just an early warning sign of a much broader epidemic.

    Moody’s Investors Service, for instance, predicts that the default rate on corporate bonds – which foretells bankruptcies – will be three times higher in 2009 than in 2008, and 15 times higher than in 2007. That could equate to 25 significant bankruptcies per month.

    We examined ratings from Moody’s and data from other sources to develop a short list of potential victims that ought to be familiar to most consumers. Many of these firms are in industries directly hit by the slowdown in consumer spending, such as retail, automotive, housing and entertainment.

    But there are other common threads. Most of these firms have limited cash for a rainy day, and a lot of debt, with large interest payments due over the next year. In ordinary times, it might not be so hard to refinance loans, or get new ones, to help keep the cash flowing. But in an acute credit crunch it’s a different story, and at companies where sales are down and going lower, skittish lenders may refuse to grant any more credit. It’s a terrible time to be cash-poor.

    [See how Wall Street continues to doom itself.]

    That’s why Moody’s assigns most of these firms its lowest rating for short-term liquidity. And all the firms on this list have long-term debt that Moody’s rates Caa or lower, which means the borrower is considered at least a “very high” credit risk.

    Once a company defaults on its debt, or fails to make a payment, the next step is usually a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing. Some firms continue to operate while in Chapter 11, retaining many of their employees. Those firms often shed debt, restructure, and emerge from bankruptcy as healthier companies.

    But it takes fresh financing to do that, and with money scarce, more bankrupt firms than usual are likely to liquidate – like Circuit City. That’s why corporate failures are likely to be a major drag on the economy in 2009: In a liquidation, the entire workforce often gets axed, with little or no severance. That will only add to unemployment, which could hit 9 or even 10 percent by the end of the year.

    [Want to land a plum job without paying taxes? Here’s how.]

    It’s possible that none of the firms on this list will liquidate, or even declare Chapter 11. Some may come up with unexpected revenue or creative financing that helps avert bankruptcy, while others could be purchased in whole or in part by creditors or other investors. But one way or another, the following 15 firms will probably look a lot different a year from now than they do today:

    Rite Aid. (Ticker symbol: RAD; about 100,000 employees; 1-year stock-price decline: 92%). This drugstore chain tried to boost its performance by acquiring competitors Brooks and Eckerd in 2007. But there have been some nasty side effects, like a huge debt load that makes it the most leveraged drugstore chain in the U.S., according to Zacks Equity Research. That big retail investment came just as megadiscounter Wal-Mart was starting to sell prescription drugs, and consumers were starting to cut bank on spending. Management has twice lowered its outlook for 2009. Prognosis: Mounting losses, with no turnaround in sight.

    Claire’s Stores. (Privately owned; about 18,000 employees.) Leon Black’s once-renowned private-equity firm, the Apollo Group, paid $3.1 billion for this trendy teen-focused accessory store in 2007, when buyout funds were bulging. But cash flow has been negative for much of the past year and analysts believe Claire’s is close to defaulting on its debt. A horrible retail outlook for 2009 offers no relief, suggesting Claire’s could follow Linens ‘n Things – another Apollo purchase – and declare Chapter 11, possibly shuttering all of its 3,000-plus stores.

    [See 5 pieces missing from Obama’s stimulus plan.]

    Chrysler. (Privately owned; about 55,000 employees). It’s never a good sign when management insists the company is not going out of business, which is what CEO Bob Nardelli has been doing lately. Of the three Detroit automakers, Chrysler is the most endangered, with a product portfolio that’s overreliant on gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs and almost totally devoid of compelling small cars. A recent deal with Fiat seems dubious, since the Italian automaker doesn’t have to pony up any money, and Chrysler desperately needs cash. The company is quickly burning through $4 billion in government bailout money, and with car sales down 40 percent from recent peaks, Chrysler may be the weakling that can’t cut it in tough times.

    Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group. (DTG; about 7,000 employees; stock down 95%). This car-rental company is a small player compared to Enterprise, Hertz, and Avis Budget. It’s also more reliant on leisure travelers, and therefore more susceptible to a downturn as consumers cut spending. Dollar Thrifty is also closely tied to Chrysler, which supplies 80 percent of its fleet. Moody’s predicts that if Chrysler declares Chapter 11, Dollar Thrifty would suffer deeply as well.

    Realogy Corp. (Privately owned; about 13,000 employees). It’s the biggest real-estate brokerage firm in the country, but that’s a bad thing when there are double-digit declines in both sales and prices, as there were in 2009. Realogy, which includes the Coldwell Banker, ERA, and Sotheby’s franchises, also carries a high debt load, dating to its purchase by the Apollo Group in 2007 – the very moment when the housing market was starting to invert from a soaring ride into a sickening nosedive. Realogy has been trying to refinance much of its debt, prompting lawsuits. One deal was denied by a judge in December, reducing the firm’s already tight wiggle room.

    [See why “Wall Street talent” is an oxymoron.]

    Station Casinos. (Privately owned, about 14,000 employees). Las Vegas has already been creamed by a biblical real-estate bust, and now it may face the loss of its home-grown gambling joints, too. Station – which runs 15 casinos off the strip that cater to locals – recently failed to make a key interest payment, which is often one of the last steps before a Chapter 11 filing. For once, the house seems likely to lose.

    Loehmann’s Capital Corp. (Privately owned; about 1,500 employees). This clothing chain has the right formula for lean times, offering women’s clothing at discount prices. But the consumer pullback is hitting just about every retailer, and Loehmann’s has a lot less cash to ride out a drought than competitors like Nordstrom Rack and TJ Maxx. If Loehmann’s doesn’t get additional financing in 2009 – a dicey proposition, given skyrocketing unemployment and plunging spending – the chain could run out of cash.

    Sbarro. (Privately owned; about 5,500 employees). It’s not the pizza that’s the problem. Many of this chain’s 1,100 storefronts are in malls, which is a double whammy: Traffic is down, since consumers have put away their wallets. Sbarro can’t really boost revenue by adding a breakfast or late-night menu, like other chains have done. And competitors like Domino’s and Pizza Hut have less debt and stronger cash flow, which could intensify pressure on Sbarro as key debt payments come due in 2009.

    Six Flags. (SIX; about 30,000 employees; stock down 84%). This theme-park operator has been losing money for several years, and selling off properties to try to pay down debt and get back into the black. But the ride may end prematurely. Moody’s expects cash flow to be negative in 2009, and if consumers aren’t spending during the peak summer season, that could imperil the company’s ability to pay debts coming due later this year and in 2010.

    Blockbuster. (BBI; about 60,000 employees; stock down 57%). The video-rental chain has burned cash while trying to figure out how to maximize fees without alienating customers. Its operating income has started to improve just as consumers are cutting back, even on movies. Video stores in general are under pressure as they compete with cable and Internet operators offering the same titles. A key test of Blockbuster’s viability will come when two credit lines expire in August. One possible outcome, according to Valueline, is that investors take the company private and then go public again when market conditions are better.

    Krispy Kreme. (KKD; about 4,000 employees; stock down 50%). The donuts might be good, but Krispy Kreme overestimated Americans’ appetite – and that’s saying something. This chain overexpanded during the donut heyday of the 1990s – taking on a lot of debt – and now requires high volumes to meet expenses and interest payments. The company has cut costs and closed underperforming stores, but still hasn’t earned an operating profit in three years. And now that consumers are cutting back on everything, such improvements may fail to offset top-line declines, leading Krispy Kreme to seek some kind of relief from lenders over the next year.

    Landry’s Restaurants. (LNY; about 17,000 employees; stock down 66%). This restaurant chain, which operates Chart House, Rainforest Café, and other eateries, needs $400 million in new financing to finalize a buyout deal dating to last June. If lenders come through, the company should have enough cash to ride out the recession. But at least two banks have already balked, leading to downgrades of the company’s debt and the prospect of a cash-flow crunch.

    Sirius Satellite Radio. (SIRI – parent company; about 1,000 employees; stock down 96%). The music rocks, but satellite radio has yet to be profitable, and huge contracts for performers like Howard Stern are looking unsustainable. Sirius is one of two satellite-radio services owned by parent company Sirius XM, which was formed when Sirius and XM merged last year. So far, the merger hasn’t generated the savings needed to make the company profitable, and Moody’s thinks there’s a “high likelihood” that Sirius will fail to repay or refinance its debt in 2009. One outcome could be a takeover, at distressed prices, by other firms active in the satellite business.

    Trump Entertainment Resorts Holdings. (TRMP; about 9,500 employees; stock down 94%). The casino company made famous by The Donald has received several extensions on interest payments, while it tries to sell at least one of its Atlantic City properties and pay down a stack of debt. But with casino buyers scarce, competition circling, and gamblers nursing their losses from the recession, Trump Entertainment may face long odds of skirting bankruptcy.

    BearingPoint. (BGPT; about 16,000 employees; stock down 21%). This Virginia-based consulting firm, spun out of KPMG in 2001, is struggling to solve its own operating problems. The firm has consistently lost money, revenue has been falling, and management stopped issuing earnings guidance in 2008. Stable government contracts generate about 30 percent of the firm’s business, but the firm may sell other divisions to help pay off debt. With a key interest payment due in April, management needs to hustle – or devise its own exit strategy.

    – With Carol Hook, Danielle Burton and Stephanie Salmon