Tag: Gulen movement

  • The Gülen Movement: A New Islamic World Order?

    The Gülen Movement: A New Islamic World Order?

    SAYLORSBURG, Pa. — Fetullah Gülen has been called the world’s top public intellectual and the face of moderate Islam. He has held court with Pope John Paul II and received praise from former President Bill Clinton.

    “You’re contributing to the promotion of the ideals of tolerance and interfaith dialogue inspired by Fetullah Gülen and his transnational social movement,” Clinton told audience members during a video address at the World Rumi Forum in 2010.

    Yet others have branded Gülen a wolf in sheep’s clothing and a modern day Ayatollah Khomeini. CBN News recently took a closer look at the the life of the reclusive imam who directs a global Islamic movement from the Pennsylvania mountains.

    Master Teacher or Deceiver?

    Gülen’s story takes him from a small town in Turkey to founder of a multi-billion dollar Islamic movement bearing his name.

    Despite a grade school-level education, the Turkish imam leads a worldwide following of some 5 million devotees. They refer to him as “Hoca Efendi,” or master teacher.

    “What is the endgame of this movement, which constitutes a multi-billion dollar budget, which constitutes thousands of high schools all around the world, to universities, NGOs, markets, banks?” Turkish journalist Tulin Daloglu asked, voicing a question many have raised.

    Gülen claims to represent a moderate brand of Islam compatible with the modern world. He emphasizes interfaith dialogue and the pursuit of science.

    Yet one expert told CBN News there’s much more to the story.

    “It’s not just a religious movement; it’s the Fetullah Gülen movement. They call themselves that. So it is, you can say, a cult. It is a highly personalized movement,” Ariel Cohen, a Middle East analyst with the Heritage Foundation, said. Cohen has been tracking the Gülen movement closely.

    “This is clearly the world according to the Koran, the world according to Islam, the world according to Fetullah Gülen,” he told CBN News. “But what he’s talking about is not the caliphate, is not the sharia state–he calls it the New World Islamic Order.”

    Far from Mainstream?

    Cohen said some in the U.S. government and academia support reaching out to Gülen’s followers as a way to counter al Qaeda and other jihadist groups.

    “The idea being, just like people who say that we should have a good relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, that these are ‘mainstream Islamists,’” he explained.

    But according to leading French-Turkish scholar Bayram Balci, Gülen’s ideas are anything but “mainstream” for a Western society.

    Balci writes that the movement “serve(s) to accomplish three intellectual goals: the Islamization of the Turkish nationalist ideology; the Turkification of Islam; and the Islamization of modernity.”

    “And therefore, (Gülen) wishes to revive the link between the state, religion, and society,” he writes.

    Critics claim Gülen wants Islam to play a more active role in societies, breaking down barries between mosque and state while also promoting Turkish nationalism and identity.

    Country Club for Islam

    The Golden Generation Worship and Retreat Center, the worldwide headquarters of the Gülen movement, is located not in Ankara or Istanbul, but on 25 scenic acres of the Pocono Mountains in rural Pennsylvania.

    CBN News toured the compound with a staffer but were not permitted to film or to meet Gülen. The 70-year-old leader is in poor health and rarely gives interviews.

    Gülen came to America in 1998, reportedly to seek medical treatment. Since then, he’s directed his global empire from Pennsylvania. A federal judge granted him a green card in 2008.

    Shortly after he left for America, a series of secretly recorded sermons featuring Gülen aired on Turkish television. In one of them, he told his followers:

    “You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers…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 … Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all in confidence. Know that when you leave here — as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and the feelings that I expressed here.”

    After the tapes aired, Turkish authorities indicted Gülen on charges that he was plotting to overthrow the secular government of Turkey. The charges were eventually dropped.

    Targeting America’s Youth

    Meanwhile, the Gülen movement continues to expand its influence through the construction of schools worldwide, including in America.

    Currently, there are about 125 Gülen schools spread out over 25 states. One school in Philadelphia receives some $3 million annually in taxpayer money.

    “They work through the education system. Their main tool is educating kids,” Cohen told CBN News.

    Gülen charter schools have nondescript names, like “Truebright Science Academy,” and focus heavily on math and science.

    Many of the teachers hail from Turkey. Federal authorities are reportedly investigating whether some employees kick back a portion of their salaries to the Gülen movement.

    Classified documents released by WikiLeaks show that U.S. officials have concerns about the Gülen schools.

    “We have multiple reliable reports that the Gülenists use their school network (including dozens of schools in the U.S.) to cherry pick students they think are susceptible to being molded as proselytizers,” U.S. Embassy officials in Ankara said in a 2005 report.

    “And we have steadily heard reports about how the schools indoctrinate boarding students,” they said.

    Meanwhile, in its birthplace of Turkey, the movement continues to grow. Gülen followers are said to make up at least 70 percent of Turkey’s federal police force, ostensibly devoted to their master teacher half a world away in the Pocono Mountains.

    *Originally broadcast on Jun 1, 2011.

    WO AB190 GULEN G 20100603175818

  • Crisis in Turkey

    Crisis in Turkey

    by Daniel Pipes
    National Review Online
    March 2, 2010

    The arrest and indictment of top military figures in Turkey last week precipitated potentially the most severe crisis since Atatürk founded the republic in 1923. The weeks ahead will probably indicate whether the country continues its slide toward Islamism or reverts to its traditional secularism. The denouement has major implications for Muslims everywhere.

    1113“Taraf” broke the Balyoz conspiracy theory on Jan. 22, 2010.

    Turkey’s military has long been both the state’s most trusted institution and the guarantor of Atatürk’s legacy, especially his laicism. Devotion to the founder is not some dry abstraction but a very real and central part of a Turkish officer’s life; as journalist Mehmet Ali Birand has documented, cadet-officers hardly go an hour without hearing Atatürk’s name invoked.

    On four occasions between 1960 and 1997, the military intervened to repair a political process gone awry. On the last of these occasions, it forced the Islamist government of Necmettin Erbakan out of power. Chastened by this experience, some of Erbakan’s staff re-organized themselves as the more cautious Justice and Development Party (AKP). In Turkey’s decisive election of 2002, they surged ahead of discredited and fragmented centrist parties with a plurality of 34 percent of the popular vote.

    Parliamentary rules then transformed that plurality into a 66 percent supermajority of assembly seats and a rare case of single-party rule. Not only did the AKP skillfully take advantage of its opportunity to lay the foundations of an Islamic order but no other party or leader emerged to challenge it. As a result, the AKP increased its portion of the vote in the 2007 elections to a resounding 47 percent, with control over 62 percent of parliamentary seats.

    Repeated AKP electoral successes encouraged it to drop its earlier caution and to hasten moving the country toward its dream of an Islamic Republic of Turkey. The party placed partisans in the presidency and the judiciary while seizing increased control of the educational, business, media, and other leading institutions. It even challenged the secularists’ hold over what Turks call the “deep state” – the non-elected institutions of the intelligence agencies, security services, and the judiciary. Only the military, ultimate arbiter of the country’s direction, remained beyond AKP control.

    Several factors then prompted the AKP to confront the military: European Union accession demands for civilian control over the military; a 2008 court case that came close to shutting down the AKP; and the growing assertiveness of its Islamist ally, the Fethullah Gülen Movement. An erosion in AKP popularity (from 47 percent in 2007 to 29 percent now) added a sense of urgency to this confrontation, for it points to the end of one-party AKP rule in the next elections.

    1114Gen. Ibrahim Firtina, a former head of the air force, was questioned in court about a plot to overthrow the government.

    The AKP devised an elaborate conspiracy theory in 2007, dubbed Ergenekon, to arrest about two hundred AKP critics, including military officers, under accusation of plotting to overthrow the elected government. The military responded passively, so the AKP raised the stakes on Jan. 22 by concocting a second conspiracy theory, this one termed Balyoz (“Sledgehammer”) and exclusively directed against the military.

    The military denied any illegal activities and the chief of general staff, İlker Başbuğ, warned that “Our patience has a limit.” Nonetheless, the government proceeded, starting on Feb. 22, to arrest 67 active and retired military officers, including former heads of the air force and navy. So far, 35 officers have been indicted.

    Thus has the AKP thrown down the gauntlet, leaving the military leadership basically with two unattractive options: (1) continue selectively to acquiesce to the AKP and hope that fair elections by 2011 will terminate and reverse this process; or (2) stage a coup d’état, risking voter backlash and increased Islamist electoral strength.

    1115Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, President Abdullah Gul and Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ met on February 25.

    At stake is whether the Ergenekon/Balyoz offensives will succeed in transforming the military from an Atatürkist to a Gülenist institution; or whether the AKP’s blatant deceit and over-reaching will spur secularists to find their voice and their confidence. Ultimately the issue concerns whether Shari’a (Islamic law) rules Turkey or the country returns to secularism.

    Turkey’s Islamic importance suggests that the outcome of this crisis has consequences for Muslims everywhere. AKP domination of the military means Islamists control the umma‘s most powerful secular institution, proving that, for the moment, they are unstoppable. But if the military retains its independence, Atatürk’s vision will remain alive in Turkey and offer Muslims worldwide an alternative to the Islamist juggernaut.

    https://www.danielpipes.org/8009/crisis-in-turkey

  • Exploring the Gülen Movement – Conference

    Exploring the Gülen Movement – Conference

    University of Texas-Pan American
    Edinburg, TX
    
    March 27, 2010
    
    Peace through Faith-based Grassroots Organization?  Exploring the Gülen
    Movement
    
    The University of Texas - Pan American College of Arts and Humanities, in
    cooperation with the Institute of Interfaith Dialog, is hosting a conference
    on the ideas of Fethullah Gülen and the faith-based civil society movement
    inspired by his discourse: the Hizmet or Gülen Movement.  The main goal of
    this conference is to examine the Gülen Movement from a multi-disciplinary
    and comparative perspective in an attempt to understand in what ways the
    participants of the Gülen Movement promote global peace through educational
    activities and interfaith dialogue. At the heart of this lies the question
    of whether such dialogue can overcome or avert the "clash of civilizations,"
    predicted by such scholars as Samuel P. Huntington, which has become a
    rallying cry for many on both sides of the perceived East/West ideological
    divide. The activities of the Gülen Movement vary from education to health
    services to disaster relief work. The chief concern for this conference is
    to determine how the interfaith dialogue that occurs within these activities
    may serve to ease the pressures of globalization.
    
    Possible themes and questions for the conference may include but are not
    limited to:
    
    * Would Gülen's thought contribute to the advancement of the modern society
    that would embrace a peaceful coexistence of multi-ethnic, multi-religious
    groups in a democratic state structure?
    * Was it the pragmatic needs of the social mobilization or a modern
    interpretation of Islam that shaped the ideas of Gülen?
    * How does Gülen view the compatibility of democracy and Islam in modern
    society?
    * How does pluralism emerge in Gülen's thought?
    * How do the interfaith dialog activities of the Gülen Movement bring
    Gülen's thought from theory into practice?
    * Do the educational activities of the Gülen Movement contribute to global
    peace?
    * Gülen's ideas in the practice of the Gülen Movement: Educational,
    healthcare and financial institutions and NGOs,
    * Financial resources of the Gülen Movement,
    * Gülen's thought on capitalism,
    * A comparative analysis of Gülen and other philosophers,
    * A comparative analysis of the Gülen Movement and other faith-based groups,
    * Pluralism and democracy in Gülen's thought and in the Gülen Movement's
    practice,
    * Interfaith dialog activities of the Gülen Movement,
    * Gülen's thought on different versions of secularism
    
    All abstracts must be submitted electronically to tbalci@utpa.edu
    <mailto:tbalci@utpa.edu>  by January 8, 2010. Abstracts should be no more
    than 300 words and written in MS Word or similar rich text format.
    
    Please include (GM 2010-last name, first name) on the subject line of your
    email.
    
    All submitted abstracts will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. All
    applicants will be notified by February 5, 2010. The organization committee
    will select the best papers with the intention of seeking publication with
    an academic press.
    
    Full papers are due by Friday, March 12, 2010. Papers should be between
    5,000 and 10,000 words including a 300 word abstract and notes. Chicago
    Manual of Style should be followed.
    
    Travel Grant:
    
    A limited number of travel grants are available for no more than $500.00 for
    presenters only.
    
    Applicants for the travel grant should include a 500 word summary explaining
    the reason for their request.
    
    Date: Saturday, March 27, 2010
    Place: University of Texas-Pan American, Edinburg, Texas.
    University Ballroom
    
    Contact: tbalci@utpa.edu <mailto:tbalci@utpa.edu>
    
    Sponsors:
    IID, Institute of Interfaith Dialog
    UTPA, College of Arts and Humanities
    
    --
    Tamer Balci, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of History
    The University of Texas-Pan American
    Department of History and Philosophy
    COAS, 346 B
    1201 W. University Drive,
    Edinburg, TX, 78539
    Tel (956) 380-8785
    Fax (956) 384-5096
  • Erdogan Avoids Confrontation with the Military over Alleged Plot

    Erdogan Avoids Confrontation with the Military over Alleged Plot

    Erdogan Avoids Confrontation with the Military over Alleged Plot

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 118
    June 19, 2009 02:58 PM
    By: Saban Kardas
    Since the publication of a document, allegedly prepared by Colonel, Dursun Cicek, outlining a plan to undermine the governing AKP and the Gulen movement last week, Turkish domestic politics has focused on the future of civil-military relations (EDM, June 15). Nonetheless, fears over a split between the government and the military did not transpire, and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has avoided such a dangerous confrontation. Instead of pursuing punitive action against the military authorities, Erdogan has demonstrated restraint and instead referred the matter to the courts.

    On June 15, the chief military prosecutor said that the allegations were being investigated. Based on a preliminary study of evidence, the prosecutor reached an opinion that the document was not prepared by any unit within the headquarters of the General Staff. If the authenticity of the document could be established, all personnel involved will be brought to justice, the statement added (Anadolu Ajansi, June 16).

    The office of the General Staff also released a press statement that criticized “the written and verbal comments and declarations targeting the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK), both openly and implicitly, on the assumption that the allegations are true.” It called on everyone to refrain from reaching any premature conclusion on the allegations before the legal inquiry has reached its judgment (www.tsk.tr, June 15).

    Pro-government and pro-Gulen media outlets labeled the action plan as a blatant attempt by the military to interfere with the jurisdiction of civil politics. They did not find the military authorities’ claims about the authenticity of the document credible, and questioned how the prosecutor might have formed an “opinion” on a document without having seen it. More importantly, in their view, despite the steps taken toward democratization, the existence of such a plan within the military was a grave development. They maintained that unless the government acts decisively against this threat, its democratization efforts will be damaged. They believe, if necessary, the government should ask for the resignation of the either the chief of the General Staff or his deputy who oversee the department that allegedly prepared the report (Yeni Safak, Zaman, June 16).

    The Chief of the General Staff General Ilker Basbug gave an interview to Hurriyet in which he responded to the growing criticism of the Turkish military. He reiterated that the military prosecutor was working on the case and his headquarters’ additional investigation had revealed that there was no concrete evidence linking the military to the document. When asked “was such an order [for the preparation of the document] issued by the military command?” Basbug responded “I even consider this question an insult. Such an order was never given.” He said he will take all measures necessary, if the alleged source of the document is proven, but added that he opposed referring the case to the civil courts (Hurriyet, June 16).

    In this context, curiously the AKP’s reaction was expected. When the allegations first emerged, Erdogan promised to defend democracy and take any necessary legal action. On June 16, he met Basbug to discuss these developments. Recently, both leaders had agreed to form a new consultation mechanism and hold weekly meetings every Thursday (Radikal, January 22). No statement was issued following this meeting, but during his address to the AKP’s parliamentary group later the same day, Erdogan insisted that the state institutions had acted in close coordination. He praised the handling of the case by the General Staff, saying that it acted “in a responsible and sensitive manner.” He called on the military and civil courts to conclude their investigations promptly (Anadolu Ajansi, June 16).

    The AKP filed a criminal complaint against the plan with the Ankara Public Prosecutor’s Office. The lawsuit defined those involved in alleged plots against the AKP and the government, as engaging in illegal activities. The AKP described such activities as unacceptable, and requested an immediate investigation (Cihan, June 16).

    The AKP’s lawsuit appears to be based on the assumption that the document is genuine, and consequently the discussions have focused on the forensic investigation into its authenticity. However, reports in the Turkish media demonstrate how deeply politically divisive the issue has become. Newspaper headlines on June 17 illustrated the extent of these divisions. Star, which is supportive of the government, insisted that the document was uncovered as part of the Ergenekon investigation and was true, while Haberturk, which is more critical of the government, questioned its authenticity.

    The Gendarmerie criminal investigation unit has allegedly completed its examination of the document, which hinges on whether the signature belongs to Colonel Cicek. Although the forensic report was not released, newspapers speculate over its possible content. Whereas Haberturk claimed that it is “99 percent certain” that the document was forged, Yeni Safak and Star maintained that according to a preliminary investigation there is “90 percent certainty” that the signature belonged to the Turkish colonel. Other papers alleged that he might have used different signatures, which could further complicate the investigation (Sabah, Aksam, June 19).

    The Zaman daily, close to the Gulen movement, questions this narrow focus on the authenticity of the document, and maintains that it cannot address public concern surrounding the accusations. Zaman was especially critical of efforts to transfer the investigation to the military courts. Citing similar instances in the past, Zaman claims that it might be used to promote a military cover up. It called for a more comprehensive parliamentary investigation into the allegations (Zaman, June 19).

    Nonetheless, Erdogan has refused to turn this case into an open confrontation with the military, and he remains committed to avoiding such conflict. Turkish domestic politics is increasingly conducted around controversial legal cases. Yet, in a political system as divided as Turkey’s, trust in the court system is lacking -and far from clarifying the allegations, the court might perpetuate existing divisions.

    https://jamestown.org/program/erdogan-avoids-confrontation-with-the-military-over-alleged-plot/
  • Turkish General Staff Accused of Seeking to Undermine the Government

    Turkish General Staff Accused of Seeking to Undermine the Government

    Turkish General Staff Accused of Seeking to Undermine the Government

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 114
    June 15, 2009
    By: Saban Kardas
    On June 12, the liberal left Taraf daily triggered a political crisis in Ankara. Taraf claimed to have uncovered a four-page unclassified document, detailing an alleged action plan for the military to combat the “reactionary activities” against secularism. It was allegedly prepared by a colonel from the operations department at the headquarters of the chief of the general staff. This signals a new confrontation between the Turkish military and the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP).

    “The Action Plan against Reactionaries (Irtica),” allegedly prepared in April, was seized during a police search in the offices of Serdar Ozturk, the lawyer representing retired Colonel Levent Goktas -both arrested as part of the Ergenekon investigation. The document defines the AKP and the Gulen movement as threats to the secular order in Turkey, and accuses them of seeking to establish an Islamic state. The plan also criticizes the Ergenekon investigation, describing it as an attempt by Islamic groups to undermine the state and defame military personnel. The action plan proposed various measures aimed at “revealing the hidden agenda” of the AKP and Gulen movement, and undermining their public support. It also contemplates a psychological warfare campaign to promote widespread suspicion against these groups -even amongst pious Muslims- and exaggerate the threat they pose. Moreover, the plan suggests psychological operations against members of the Turkish armed forces suspected of being affiliated to Islamic groups. Furthermore, such propaganda seeks to discredit the Ergenekon investigation and mobilize public support for any military personnel implicated (Taraf, June 12).

    Taraf’s story has proven to be controversial in Ankara. The office of the chief of the general staff announced that the military court had banned any further media coverage of the story. The statement described the alleged action plan as related to national security, public order and public security, and banned any publication of its contents. The military prosecutor launched an investigation into the source of the leak and the dissemination of the document. When questioned about these developments during his weekly press briefing, the military’s spokesman Metin Gurak said that the military prosecutor will investigate all aspects of the story. Nonetheless, he declined to explain whether the investigation would be launched against “the existence of such a document or how it was leaked” (Anadolu Ajansi, June 12).

    Despite the military’s ban on publicizing the document, several media outlets close to the Gulen movement and the AKP government chose to ignore it. The Zaman daily ran a counter campaign against the military’s attempts to ban media coverage. Zaman and its sister daily Today’s Zaman, covered the development intensively, and portrayed the document as representing a serious threat to Turkish democracy and supplying more evidence of the ongoing influence of the military within the political system. They used this incident to make two related points. First, it sought to mobilize the government to revitalize its stalled domestic reforms aimed at boosting democratization and civilian control over the armed forces. Second, it called on the military leadership, particularly the Chief of the General Staff General Ilker Basbug, to demonstrate commitment to democracy by acting decisively over this issue. Equally, it demanded clarification on whether the military as an institution or its commissioned officers are implicated in such activities against the civil authority (Zaman, Today’s Zaman, June 13, 14, 15).

    Liberal columnists in other newspapers emphasized similar arguments, noting that Turkey faces ongoing challenges in order to curtail the military’s political influence (Milliyet, Radikal, June 13). Others largely restricted their reporting to the military’s ban on the Taraf story. Hurriyet quoted Serdar Ozturk’s lawyer, who claimed that the document was placed in his client’s office by the pro-Gulen movement clique within the Turkish police. He said they would press charges against the police and the prosecutors for leaking the document (Hurriyet, June 13).

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan reacted angrily to the document. On June 13, while addressing a party congress in Kars, he emphasized his determination to protect democracy and maintained that the AKP is the main guarantor of Turkey’s constitutional order (Anadolu Ajansi, June 13). Speaking at another party congress on June 14 in Sanliurfa, he reiterated this commitment, and promised to combat any plots against democracy. Erdogan contextualized the document, however, as part of other efforts to weaken the AKP, and argued that “in a democratic environment we cannot remain a spectator to this illegal process against the AKP. We are investigating [the plots against the AKP] and will take legal action if necessary” (www.haberturk.com, June 14).

    Taraf has run controversial stories by publishing unclassified military documents, since it was first published by a group of liberal journalists in 2007 -exposing either the activities of groups within the military seeking to topple the government, or the flaws in the Turkish army’s campaign against the PKK (EDM, July 18, 2008; Terrorism Focus, October 30, 2008). Basbug has publicly accused Taraf in the past of conducting a defamation campaign against the military. Erdogan also joined Basbug in lambasting Taraf, but this did not change its publication policy (www.haber7.com, October 17, 2008).

    If the latest revelation in Taraf proves to be true, it is likely to have significant repercussions for the current balance of power in Ankara. Erdogan and Basbug apparently reached a common understanding on major political issues, such as the Ergenekon investigation and the management of the Kurdish question. They have established close communication channels to exchange opinions. Erdogan did not object to Basbug’s controversial efforts to reassert a role for the military within Turkish politics (EDM, April 15), while Basbug permitted the trial of military officers in the Ergenekon case. Their management of the claims that the military headquarters might be involved in a conspiracy against the government could force them to redefine their working relationship, with significant implications for the future of Turkish civil-military affairs.

    https://jamestown.org/program/turkish-general-staff-accused-of-seeking-to-undermine-the-government/