Notes on Al-Jazeera article

This is noted I took few years ago on an article mentioned below. I found them in my email and thought will post them here for safe keeping. 

The article titled “Erdogan and Gulen: A political battle through the courts” have landed in my inbox today and having an interest in the topic I read it immediately. To my amazement, the article looked like it was translated from Yeni Akit, a daily newspaper which made its duty to justify everything and anything government and Erdogan does and blame everything on Gülen and his movement. I have decided that I should jot down some notes on the problematic aspects of the article. Her we go… 

Firstly, some serious assumptions which are based on allegation by mostly AKP media in Turkey with no tangible proof have been included as if they are agreed upon claims. In addition, unfortunately, the corruption allegations have just been briefly mentioned and the scope of it is undermined. This grossly threatens the objectivity of the article. 

I should indicate that there seems to be an intentional manipulation of toning in the article’s handling the matter at hand. For example,using the term “Gülen Group” is not appropriate as it send a message that there is an intentional and strict group formation. The preferred term is usually Gülen Movement or Hizmet and I will from now on use Hizmet which what the movement participants use themselves and academic circles use in recent works. Hence any writing should respect the movement participants preference on this. 

The article argues that AKP and Hizmet have been cooperating. Hizmet by its nature never cooperates with a political party but supports them in their projects which they think will serve the country by expanding freedoms and democracy eradicating poverty, growing economy etc. AKP has led major democratic struggles especially against the military tutelage including some by the judiciary. Hizmet affiliated media have supported this process not for narrow group interests but because it was in the interest of the country as a whole. Hence this was not an unconditional support given to AKP but a support for these policies. When AKP started deviating from this line and become more authoritative, the support stopped. 

The scope of the recent graft probe has been undermined in the article. For example, the fact that the CEO of Halk Bank (a state-owned bank) was caught with $4,5m hidden in shoe boxes in his house, the son of Interior minister with six safes and a money counting machine in his bedroom, ministers accepting shocking amounts in bribes have not even been mentioned. In addition, more alarming part is the nature and degree of secret relations between 29-year old man, Rezza Zarrab who was born in Azerbaijan but an Iranian citizen. He obtained Turkish citizenship by paying bribes to Interior Minister. Telephone conversation between the two revealed that Minister had displaced a police chief because he discovered the irregular dealings of Zarrab. It is also claimed that Zarrab was involved in money laundering involving $80bn! None of this is off course mentioned in the article because I sense a desperate attempt to portray the probe as politically motivated. 

The article mentions that police abused power by not informing their superiors. According to law in Turkey, in secret investigations police officers involved are NOT ALLOWED to inform their direct superiors and only responsible to the public prosecutor. Otherwise it would mean that police would have to get permission from the Minister if they can investigate him or his son. Government changed this article of the law but Council of State nullified this amendment resulting the AKP launching an attack on the Council of State and revealing their intentions to restructure the Judiciary. 

According to the article Nursi’s was a resistance movement and anyone who has read a bit of Nursi, will see the inaccuracy of this. We can tolerate this though still as an isolated point until we realize that this is part of the whole article, this contributes to making the point of the article which slowly build up toward portraying Hizmet as political player. One of the most voiced criticism by AKP and their media is that Hizmet should form a political party if they want to have a say in the affairs of the country. In any democratic country this is an unacceptable statement. Any group or organization or individual can comment and make contribution to public debate in a democracy. Otherwise we will be a step from those countries which Erdogan criticizes fervently! 

It is tru that number of people who take part in Hizmet projects have grown significantly including the number and size of the affiliated institutions. However this is not a crime according to any acceptable norms. Crimes are committed by individuals and when it is orchestrated by a center or a group it becomes an organized crime and those involved can/must be prosecuted. On this, Journalists and Writers Foundation whose honorary president is Gülen, have indicated many times that if there are acts against law they must be prosecuted and brought to justice. 

Since December 17, perhaps more than 3000 police officers and chiefs have been reassigned and removed from their posts. Government does not cite any reasons for this but it is common knowledge (and so claimed by media close to AKP) that this is done because these officers are close(!) to the movement. While Government has the authority to reassign them, doing in such abrupt manner is unlawful to say the least. The drama becomes more visible considering a certain police chief have been displaced 4 times in a few weeks. 

Recently, a document was published by Taraf newspaper in Turkey. This document was decisions / recommendations by National Security Council which indicated that Gülen affiliated individuals and institutions are to be profiled. AKP claimed that this was a recommendation document but was never implemented. However further revelations made it clear that they were promptly implemented under the directives of the PM’s undersecretary until very recently. For most people the recent displacements in the police indicate that these profile information are used when making decision. The big question here is how do you know that these officers are close(!) to Gülen and which part of this is a crime. If Gülen or anyone else in the movement gives directives to these officers or prosecutors as claimed by Government this should not be very difficult to establish and prosecute. 

Saying that Hizmet enjoyed relative freedom after the military coup of 1980 is nothing but a perception engineering. The fact that here was a arrest warrant on Gülen himself until 1986 teftifies to this. 

Article mentions the video recording in which Gülen was accused of advising his followers to sneak into the government structures was later proven to be tempered with and Gülen was cleared of all charges resulting from it. Despite this, using the said recording in an analysis casts a thick shadow on its credibility and objectivity. 

Gülen doesn’t have followers but there are people who respect him and take up his recommendations to engage in Hizmet projects. Hence these people are not members of a cult or a Islamic or otherwise order where the leader is seen beyond human and infallible. 

It is claimed that Gülen maintains a strict control over the movement. Perhaps influence on people may be correct statement however in terms of decisions by the institutions are made by the relevant people involved. It has to be remembered that hizmet as started through the initiatives of Gülen and developed on the philosophy built up by him. Therefore it is the most natural thing that people in the movement consult him on either institutional matter or even personal ones provided they are able to reach him and this may not always be possible for everyone. 

Gülen or anyone in a leadership position in Hizmet never claimed to have a voting potential and movement has never used this as a leverage to negotiate on. Any percentage mentioned anywhere are nothing but guess by people making the claim. Movement organizes activities according to principles some of which are not changeable but some may be renegotiated according to circumstance. 

As I said above the article on the one hand claims a strong control by Gülen and then says that not everyone in the movement will commit to a possible voting directive. This is a clear contradiction and an inaccurate evaluation. 

Hizmet always acted within the confinements of the law and therefore an assertion that AKP allowed hizmet to act freely is misleading. Because the statement implies that some activities of the movement are outside the perimeters of the law but AKP overlooked this. 

As per the investigation which involved Turkish intelligence head Hakan Fidan is nothing but a slander. The media close to AKP even went as far as claiming that the next step was to arrest Erdogan. This is firstly legally not possible as a PM can only be prosecuted and tried after a motion is passed by the Parliament and only by the Constitutional Court. Yet this misleading propaganda was voiced by the said media so loud and for so ling that they seem to believe that now. 

Related with this, it is claimed that Hizmet is against a solution to the Kurdish issue. I could understand if an outsider made such claims. However anyone in Turkey especially those who call themselves analysts and writers should not make such blunder. When the government could not even talk about certain basic rights, Gülen proposed allowing Kurdich as a language of instruction at schools. This suffices to clarify this issue as even the progress made by Government has not reached this. The discussion on Kurdish issue seem to be deadlocked whether Ocalan, imprisoned leader of PKK should be released or not. Daily Zaman, Hizmet affiliated newspaper which has the highest circulation in Turkey with about 1,2m readers have always supported the expansion of freedoms in this respect and even criticized the Government for acting too slowly. Any claim of otherwise is baseless and often those making the claim are unable to substantiate when asked to point to articles in Zaman which opposes the solution. 

During this period we are witnessing a typical tendency of political Islam which is to accuse their opposition of cooperating with the West particularly USA and Israel. As always this is done through slogans rather than arguments. Therefore this does not even deserve response. The fact that trade numbers are growing with Israel to Turkey’s disadvantage is sufficient to indicate the contradiction of the Government. I don’t think there is anything wrong with Turkey’s economic relations with Israel or any other country, the government should exercise more caution when criticizing others of supporting Israel. 

I was astonished to read that article asserts that the Government will make the Higher Council of Judges and Prosecutors less susceptible to political pressure. Yet the current changes are will make the council almost a branch of the Ministry of Justice and the Minister having the power to take almost any decision. It should also be remembered that current formation was approved through a referendum last year and this initiative by the government simply means that they admit to misleading the public prior to the referendum and also not respecting it. In short, new changes will make the council very vulnerable in respect of government interference and you can judge what this means in terms of international acceptable standards. 

The ministers whose manes got mixed up in the graft probe unfortunately have not taken up the opportunity to defend themselves as they are still in the Parliament and have impunity. Hence, in practice the government did nothing to support the investigations. On the contrary, they are doing everything in their power to prevent the investigations from deepening despite very strong suspicion. 

One of the most unfair claims made in the article is that the movement leaders do not hide their intention to play political roles. I am absolutely clueless as to what exactly is meant here. If it refers to people commenting on current affairs and government actions, this can hardly be classified as political role! 

Gülen has been visited by a prominent journalist on the request of the President. After having met Gülen and discussing current developments the visitor asked Gülen to put what has been discussed in writing. This then ended up being a leter to the President. It is claimed that Erdogan said he has a signed letter which intends negotiation. Some journalists even said Gülen wanted to negotiate but Erdogan refused. The letter then was published and we found out that firstly it was not sent to Erdogan but to the President. Gülen asked that Erdgan is informed of the content of the letter so that an impression that he is communicating secretely with the President behing Erdogan’s back. Secondly the letter is far from being an offer of negotiation but it simply reassure the President and the administrators in Turkey that he has no political ambition he is not in a position to instruct any government officer, police, judges, prosecutors, etc. 

In conclusion, I can comfortably argue that the article is heavily biased and made almost no mention of the responses given by the movement to these allegations which are not being leveled for the first time. It was done by other people during late 90s and now by increasingly Islamist government of Turkey. 

Unfortunately the articles which criticize Hizmet for this period make some dangerous presumptions such as Hizmet pursuing a power struggle with the government. 

One of the most central strategies of the movement has been positive action. The movement projects aim at eradication ignorance, poverty, and disunity.  For this purpose hizmet institutions always sought ways of conducting their affairs and making contribution because human beings had to be served and there was no time to loose with conflicts. Because of this approach, today the number of people who support or participate in the activities have grown significantly. For Hizmet this growth was never a sign of power or leverage to negotiate status in the running of the affairs of the country. 

The reader should be reminded that AKP leaders claimed they moved away from Milli Gorus (National Outlook: Erbakan’s Movement and where Erdogan has been brought up) and their policies. And they have been accused of betrayal. In their earlier years they implemented more liberal and pro-greater freedom policies and hence Hizmet has supported them until very recently. During those times no AKP member or leader spoke of the Hizmet growing too much and having too much power. In fact they queued to utter praises for the movement and Gülen himself. 

Hizmet has supported AKP government because they stood for greater democracy and freedom despite their failures in some fields. But lately AKP has been doing things which cannot be justified against what they said before. The way they handled of Gezi Park protests during last summer was met with wide criticism and the they reacted to even most friendly warnings. PM and Interior minister praised the police for doing a great job and said many times that police acted on their instructions. However six month down the lice all of a sudden police, prosecutors and judges all became their main target. 

Unfortunately the rift between Hizmet and AKP is not an overnight change. AKP has been reacting harshly to all criticism resulting in being isolated. At the last elections they received 50% vote but the other 50% has been increasingly pushed away further with all kinds of accusations. 

We could understand if they said they do not hizmet’s support to pursue their policies and still continue with reforms. But the reality is not exactly that. Erdogna himself used so many terms to attack hizmet. Traitors, collaborators of outside forces and Israel, foreign agents, parallel state are just a few examples. The latest is Hashashins which was a group of assassins used by Hassan- Sabbah by making them take drugs. This indicates how worrying Erdogan’s stance is. 

Some critiques warn that hizmet will suffer as a result of this. However what exactly they want hizmet to do or not to do is unclear. Because hizmet is not really doing anything on this except running campaigns on social media calling government to respect the rule of law. Erdogan’s current practices undermine the rule of law and setting a precedent for future governments to change anything that poses a threat to them. 

I am confident that in the near future the lack of base of these allegations will be much clearer therefore it is imperative that sides pay greater attention to the language they use.