Fethullah Gulen's Interview with Asharq Al-Awsat [PART 2]

Fethullah Gülen: “Disbelief may prevail, but
tyranny will not”

In the second part of this interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the Turkish Islamic scholar discusses the Arab uprisings, the Sunni–Shi’ite sectarian tensions in the region, radicalism, and conservative Islam

Islamic preacher Fethullah Gulen is pictured at his residence in Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania September 24, 2013. (Reuters/Selahattin Sevi)

London, Asharq Al-Awsat—The Arab uprisings, which were long in the making but caught everyone by surprise, are now in their fourth year. It remains as difficult today as it was four years ago to reach conclusions about developments that have brought both hope and despair to a region in crisis. For those most sceptical of the turmoil unleashed by the toppling of a series of dictators, the revolutions that have rocked the Arab world are still at risk of being hijacked by conservative Islamic forces.

While there are moderate reasons for optimism, for example in the case of Tunisia where it all started, the war in Syria has become a human tragedy of huge proportions. The spillover of the conflict into neighboring Lebanon and Iraq, the wave of refugees, and the involvement of various regional actors are threatening to plunge the whole region into chaos. Bashar Al-Assad’s determination to hold on to power has turned Syria into the main stage of Sunni–Shi’ite sectarian tensions today, and a golden opportunity for jihadists and would-be jihadists around the world. Amid increasing radicalization, the region’s diversity is in danger and minority groups and women fear as never before about the future.

Fethullah Gülen, who has spent most of his life thinking, teaching and writing about the place of Islam in the modern world, shares his thoughts on all these matters in this second part of his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.

Asharq Al-Awsat: Did the Arab uprisings come as a surprise to you?

Fethullah Gülen: I can say I was partially surprised. As far as I know, there are many experts specializing in the region and many authors who have written about international politics and strategy, but none of them predicted such large-scale turmoil. The people in the region are seeking to obtain democratic rights and promote the rule of law and, except for the use of violence, this should be perceived as a revolution. The existing situation in these countries and the ongoing victimization and suffering of people in the region are heart-rending, and any quick solution to this problem does not seem likely. “Disbelief may prevail, but tyranny will not” is a famous saying. Individually, there is unfortunately nothing much we can do for each other save praying to God for help.

When the incidents first broke out, I asked, ‘Is it an Arab spring or an Arab fall?’ I did so based on my instincts. Unfortunately, this is the quality of the manpower we have. It is easier to destroy than to build. It requires ten times more energy to put in place a new regime acceptable to the entire society than it does to overthrow the existing one. Unfortunately, our society still lacks the ability to do this. Also, we know from history that social fluctuations may develop in extremes. What matters are the internal dynamics within these fluctuations. What governs these fluctuations? What is circulating in the capillaries? If this is not calculated, these fluctuations may develop in any direction. Reliance solely on collective enthusiasm or collective action will not on its own breed authentic and accurate results.

At that time, I had said that “we should look at the groundswell.” Otherwise, the resulting damage could eclipse our expectations. As I was observing these incidents as an outsider, I never thought big changes would come up in a short time. We were witnessing big fluctuations, a big transformation. But it was obvious it would not make any difference in the short term. The past is rife with ordeals and troubles for Arab societies. They will patiently make cool-headed assessments that have long-term consequences, but this process should not be undermined with internal or external anti-democratic interventions.

Their quest for freedoms will naturally be remembered as the greatest achievement of our time. Yet history tells us that truly radical changes or attempted changes may lead to far greater damage or destruction than expected, and it takes time before societies settle down. As [Sunni scholar] Bediüzzaman Said Nursi aptly noted, we should combat the arch-enemies of theUmma (the Islamic community)—namely ignorance, poverty and disunity—with reasonable middle- and long-term projects for promoting education, science, art, trade, democracy, human rights, women’s empowerment, tolerance and dialogue. Any quest for democracy may fail if it does not stand on a firm foundation. The Hizmet Movement has long been trying to do this with schools, universities, business associations, charitable foundations, dialogue institutions and media outlets that employ constructive language for facilitating mutual understanding, negotiations and dialogue. It is our hope that these projects, backed by diverse segments of society, will help people establish societies where everyone lives happily, peacefully and prosperously. To this end, we pray to God both verbally and through our actions. Arab and Muslim societies do not have to wait for the introduction of full-fledged democratic governance before focusing on social projects.

Q: What is your assessment of the conflict in Syria? Is there anything else that could be done to stop this tragedy?

Unfortunately, the entire country has found itself in a deadlock. Developments have since shown that the late martyr Sayyid Ramadan Al-Bouti was right in his assessments of the situation. He represented the Sunni moderation (tamkin) model which, briefly put, says that the worst government is better than no government, anarchy or chaos, and that there is a risk of civil war when we try to overthrow a bad government under unfavorable conditions. Apparently, he knew that there was an asymmetrical balance between the two sides and that the army was under total control of the country’s ruling elites, who have been in power for the last 40 years, and that the army would not side with the majority. Bouti drew attention to the serious risks ahead in light of all this. If this crisis had not erupted, it would have been possible for Syria to slowly and peacefully evolve into a more prosperous and democratic country in the medium and long term, with the help of its serious commercial, political and social relations with Turkey. Perhaps the most tragic part of the crisis was the elimination of this possibility. At this stage, what should be done in the short term is to find political solutions that will stop the ongoing bloodshed, which would come as a partial relief to millions of innocent people who are affected by all that is happening. To this end, the international community must exert concerted efforts for a diplomatic solution.

Q: What are your comments on the Sunni–Shi’ite tensions in the Middle East?

People should not be discriminated against based on their Sunni or Shi’ite identities. Whatever their religion, belief or sect, individuals should be primarily seen as human beings. As human beings, people are entitled to fundamental human rights, and as citizens, they enjoy certain democratic rights. Moreover, religions or sects are not like modern political ideologies. The Sunni world should not have any problem with Shi’ite groups who nurture a love for our beloved Ahl Al-Bayt (the Prophet and his descendants). The principles of our religion do not allow any country to use oppression and abuse on the basis of sectarian differences in an effort to emerge as a regional power.

Throughout history, there have been efforts, generally led by Shi’ite leaders, to approximate Islamic schools of thought (Taqrib Al-Madhahib). Unfortunately, those Shi’ite leaders have tended to employ these approximation efforts for their expansionist purposes. Even Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who was initially warm to the idea, has been complaining about the attitude of these Shi’ite scholars in the last few years. Actually, while the problem appears to be the Sunni–Shi’ite tensions, the real problem is about political aims such as establishing hegemony and the expansion of influence and acquisition of regional power. Religions and sects are being used as means for attaining these goals. Certain politicians and states turn religion into a political ideology and restrict religion with their own narrow and repressive political mentalities. Likewise, there are attempts to turn Sunni or Shi’ite identities into stepping-stones for ideologies. No one can deny that today’s Iran is pursuing a sort of Persian nationalism disguised as Shi’ism. Of course, countries may nurture their specific national interests and try to protect them through legitimate means in the international arena. Leveraging and fomenting religious, sectarian or ethnic tension is not one of these legitimate means. All international organizations should combat this error.

If there are things which we believe to be wrong according to our point of view, there is nothing we can do other than to explain this to people in a civilized manner. Indeed, there is no compulsion in the religion. Unfortunately, certain people and groups have emerged who are making a misguided interpretation of the Sunni school and promoting violence and terror in the name of Sunnis. These groups are assuming destructive roles, causing the most damage to Islam itself. The Muslim world needs concord and alliance and peaceful settlement of political issues more than ever. It is essential for the Umma to dispense with such destructive attitudes and occurrences.

Q: Why are many young Sunni Arabs so prone to radical interpretations of Islam?

With every religion, we see there are groups who diverge away from the mainstream and adopt radical interpretations. It is hard to say that followers of a specific school, Sunni or Shi’ite, are more prone to such divergences. I think this problem stems largely from our shortcomings in understanding and adopting the true substance and identity of religion.

Treating religion as a political ideology is the greatest betrayal against religion, as it amounts to reducing Islam to a simple or lowly set of principles and caricaturing it. The role of the centuries-long colonialism in this should be noted. Indeed, the tendency to reduce religion to politics and to resort to violence is more prevalent in countries which were colonized in the past. To our dismay, the violence by these radical groups is sometimes given wider coverage in the media when compared to the vast majority of Muslims, who do not approve of them. Sometimes, ill-intentioned efforts are made to bring such radical groups to the fore and discredit the public image of Islam.

Islam is open to different interpretations, but this openness is for ensuring this religion’s inclusiveness and universality. This is actually a safety system against attempts to ascribe Islam to a single geography or mentality. Nevertheless, interpretations of Islam must not contradict its essence. Throughout history, many patriarchal, political, nationalist or statist interpretations of Islam were marketed or promoted as the true form of Islam. If with radical interpretations of Islam you mean violence, Muslims—Sunni or Shi’ite—who see violence or coercion as a means of conveying Islam’s message to the masses (tabligh) are not novel; there were always such Muslims. That some groups which have been brought to the agenda in recent years and which seek to politicize Islam are from the Sunni camp does not change this historic fact. Moreover, the media tends to focus on such people and groups at the exclusion of the 99 percent of Muslims, who do not approve of such extremist groups, and by doing so [the media] distorts the overall picture.

Since the extremist interpretations of the movement casting Islam as an ideology is warm to the idea of taking over the state and redesigning the society in a top-down and authoritarian manner and that the Shi’ite Iranian state has been officially and effectively wielding such a form of governance since 1979, the Sunni proponents of such an approach may be plus royaliste que le roi even if they are Sunni. In a sense, they find the embodiment of their ideals in the Shi’ite Iranian revolution. They take this revolution as a model. Such extremist pursuits may develop anywhere, but are mostly likely to emerge at times of colonization and occupation.

If they do not entirely sever their ties with the mainstream, I believe that such extremist groups may fizzle [out] over time. The potential of religions for individual and moral transformation is always more influential and permanent than their political or repressive implementations. When Islam’s capacity for producing dynamics for social change is not fully utilized, such movements may drift toward a more political or extremist position.

The Hizmet movement is not an alternative to a top-down model of societal transformation. The Hizmet movement does not seek to transform society. Rather, it aims to serve society and individuals. We are not seeking to serve individuals to effect political change in society overall. We harbor no such intention. In our work, transformation starts and ends with the individual through education, relief support and other charitable projects such as dialogue. If we can raise good human beings, good citizens and altruistic individuals, this may lead to a more peaceful and prosperous social life. Yet our work is not even about achieving this outcome but about serving society and helping individuals regardless of the larger social impact which may or may not ensue as a byproduct. By analogy, our community is trying to build gardens and orchards where the best and top quality fruits are grown. People may take these fruits and prepare any dish or dessert with them on a table.

Q: The Arab uprisings paved the way for conservative interpretations of Islam, as well as radicalism. How do you think this will affect the position of women in the region?

I should note that the events in Tunisia, Egypt and Syria initially constituted a search for democracy and fundamental human rights and freedoms. The groups which later stole the show and some of the ensuing incidents overshadowed the initial demands.

As a side note, “conservatism” shouldn’t be confused with “fanaticism.” Like any other religion, Islam has certain basic tenets and disciplines that should be conserved and safeguarded. In determining what should be preserved, however, an integrated approach should be adopted and the interpretation of the Qur’an to address the challenges of the time should be taken into consideration.

Previously, I had emphasized that in a Muslim society, women should be free to assume roles in social life, even as judges and prime ministers or presidents. Restricting women’s right to education and isolating them from social life deals a great blow to the society’s sound functioning. To substantiate my argument, I had noted that in the ‘Age of Happiness’ (Asr Al-Sa’adah) there were women Companions (Sahaba) who taught male Companions on religious matters or who would do business as well as those who would be taken as reference regarding certain matters about Islamic jurisprudence.

Patriarchal misinterpretations of Islamic sources do not portray women in this way. Unfortunately, our patriarchal cultures have significantly eroded the fair and egalitarian status given to women by Islam through the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and women have ended up as second-class individuals. Despite the great female models such as Khadijah, who was a businesswoman and business owner, and Aisha, who taught certain religious matters to male Companions, we, as the Muslims of our time, force women to stay at home and task them with raising children. Yet, although this task is of paramount importance, women do not enjoy respect in Muslim families or societies. They lag behind men in terms of education and cultural achievements. Slavery has disappeared, and, today, no one argues that it should be reintroduced on the basis of the debates about slavery in classical Islamic jurisprudence. Why don’t we employ the same progressive approach to the status of women, without contradicting the essence and basic tenets of Islam?

The way to avoid these extreme interpretations is to take the time of the Prophet and the three generations who followed him as the basis of our reinterpretation today; to get rid of our patriarchal cultures; provide better education for women; improve their socioeconomic status and empower women so that they can defend their rights.

Q: How do you think the rise and sudden fall of the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt will impact the future of political Islam in the region?

Egypt is not only one of the leading centers of Islamic knowledge, but also has established political and administrative experiences. It is essential that anyone who aspires to govern the country respects democratic values and the rule of law as Egypt is a country with diverse religions, sects and cultures. Respect for the sensitivities of every social segment, lack of oppression against any group, and responding to their demands are crucial for peace and happiness in the country.

It is no easy task to criticize a democratically elected party which was overthrown by the army. It would be best if the errors of such a party, if any, were assessed and penalized by the electorate. It is anti-democratic to promote coups against the popular will. The Muslim Brotherhood came to power in an extremely fragile atmosphere and they lacked sufficient experience and background. Perhaps, they were caught unprepared. In the final analysis, the Muslim Brotherhood is a movement indigenous to Egypt and it will reassess the whole experience and draw lessons from it.

Q: You are a prolific writer and author. If you had to name one of your books as the most emblematic one, which would it be?

I never thought my words and writings were of any importance. But people appear to have responded positively to them. All my life, I have tried to translate this positive attitude into greater understanding and love for God, the Prophet and the saints. As I have tried to read, study and understand people with true literary and spiritual capabilities, I call on other people to do the same. Our past is rife with people of great stature, such as Imam Ghazali, Mawlana Jalal Al-Din Al-Rumi, Yunus Emre, Mehmet Akif and Bediüzzaman Said Nursi. Their work and words are magna opera.

Click here to read the first part of the interview. 

SOURCE: http://www.aawsat.net/2014/03/article55330430

Fethullah Gulen's Interview with Asharq Al-Awsat [PART 1]

In Conversation with Fethullah Gülen

In the first part of this interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the Turkish Islamic scholar talks about the Hizmet movement, the Turkish government ban on private prep schools, the Hanafi school of Islam, and the relationship between Islam, politics and democracy.   *Read Part 2 here

London, Asharq Al-Awsat—Over the last 10 years and up until the Gezi Park protests that erupted in Istanbul last May, Turkey’s democratic and mostly secular political system was hailed by many as a model for other Muslim-majority nations across the Middle East.

Much of the credit has gone to the leader and founder of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Since he entered the office of prime minister in 2003, Turkey has found the stability needed to tame chronic inflation and re-establish itself as a regional economic powerhouse. The ever-looming specter of military intervention in the country’s political life under the banner of the defense of Atatürk’s secular state has been sidelined. Tangible progress has been achieved in the peace process with the Kurds. Under the guidance of a succession of very active foreign ministers, Turkey managed to push ahead important reforms with an eye on EU membership, while at the same time opening other diplomatic options in the face of the skepticism from EU member states.

But the Turkish honeymoon has come to an end. At the center of the storm is Erdoğan himself, accused by the opposition of succumbing to the arrogance of power and of pursuing an agenda to Islamize Turkey. His heavy-handed response to protests and a succession of recent corruption probes and allegations involving AKP ministers, as well as the prime minister and his close family, have only added fuel to the fire.

For the AKP leadership and many observers of Turkey, it is the supporters of Fethullah Gülen, the hugely popular Turkish Islamic scholar who lives in self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania, who are behind the allegations and the anonymous release of audio recordings with the purpose of incriminating the prime minister. Erdoğan accuses Gülen of running a “parallel state” and of infiltrating the police and the judiciary. Gülen has publicly denied those accusations.

The Turkish government has now transferred hundreds of policemen and pushed forward new laws to monitor the Internet and govern the work of the judiciary. Last year’s widely opposed bill to close private preparatory schools (known as dershanesin Turkish), many of which are run by the Hizmet (“Service”) movement led by Gülen, was approved by parliament earlier this month.

Critics of Gülen believe the Hizmet movement, which runs over 2,000 privately owned educational premises in 160 countries around the world, is pursuing a secret agenda to Islamize Turkey. Many others note the movement has no formal organization and official membership, and that Gülen has long been an advocate of peace, tolerance, humanism, science, and a teacher of moderate Hanafi school of Sunni Islam, rather than of political Islam.

Asharq Al-Awsat spoke with Mr Gülen on the eve of Turkey’s municipal elections, considered an important barometer for the forthcoming presidential elections this summer and the parliamentary polls scheduled for next year.

Asharq Al-Awsat: Do you see your millions of supporters and the hundreds of schools established by your followers around the world as a single, integrated movement?

Fethullah Gülen: Personally, I don’t think it is right to call people my supporters or any other person’s supporters. I have frequently emphasized that it hurts me greatly to witness people being referred to by their ideological designations. I would like to emphatically note that these people come together voluntarily to implement projects which they find reasonable and logical. While it is a movement inspired by faith, this community of volunteers develops and delivers reasonable and universally acceptable projects which are in full compliance with humanitarian values and which aim to promote individual freedoms, human rights and peaceful coexistence for all people regardless of their faith. Accordingly, people from every nation and religion have either welcomed these projects or have lent active or passive, direct or indirect, support to them in 160 countries around the world. In this sense, it is impossible to say that the composition of this movement is homogeneous.

This heterogeneity applies not only to the values nurtured by the participants in the Movement, but also to their sympathy toward or participation in the Movement’s projects. Some work as teachers in the schools abroad, while others pay stipends or allocate part of their time to voluntary services, etc. They are people from a diverse array of ethnic, religious or political groups who voluntarily come together in light of certain common values. [Those values include] freedom, human rights, respect for beliefs, accepting everyone for who they are, openness to dialogue, dislike for abuse of religion for political ends, respect for laws, refraining from the abuse of state resources, asserting that there is no turning back from democracy, rejecting the use of the state resources and coercion to transform individuals or societies or impose certain religious beliefs on them, trust in civil society, and promoting peace through educational activities. [It also includes more religious values such as] seeking the consent of the Creator in every act or word, loving the created for the sake of the Creator, reinforcing the moral values of individuals irrespective of their religious or other values, etc. While several names have been used to date to refer to them, the term Camia in Turkish, which means a large community of diverse people, or “movement” in English, seems to be best one. I can say that these people—who are banded together in light of the foregoing values—despite not constituting a homogenous group, sport such a spirit or awareness of unity and integrity that they cannot be manipulated into breaching the above-mentioned values.

Q: What do you think about the Turkish government’s move to ban private prep schools?

In the first place, I must state that prep schools are a necessary byproduct of the Turkish educational system’s shortcomings. They are legitimate businesses run by people in full compliance with existing laws and in line with the principle of free enterprise, which are enshrined in the Constitution. Secondly, even those associated with the Hizmet Movement are not run directly by the Movement itself, but by a number of private companies belonging to businesspeople who are personally inspired by the Movement. They operate under the constant educational and financial supervision of the public authorities. Moreover, they dutifully pay their taxes to the state. What is more, only a small proportion of the prep schools in Turkey belong to businesspeople affiliated with the Community.

Given that nothing is being done to eliminate the grave problems facing the country’s educational system, of which prep schools are a natural byproduct, trying to shut them down can therefore hardly be seen as a well-intentioned effort. These institutions provide aspiring students with consulting and educational services in certain fields, such as mathematics and science, and operate according to the laws of the land. If the state forces these schools to shut down, it would deal a blow to both access to education as well as the principles of free enterprise.

Furthermore, it is a fact that the teachers who act in accordance with the Movement’s basic principles tend to be positive, proactive, upright, honest, hard-working and non-discriminatory, and that this can have a positive influence on their students.

Thus, we observe that these prep schools are, thankfully, successful in combating students’ harmful habits, such as smoking, alcoholism and even drug use, which constitute huge problems for state schools. Despite the fact that these institutions have never acted in breach of Turkey’s laws and moral values or universal human values and democracy, and that the plan to shut down them has not been sufficiently debated, and that many people want them to remain open, the decision to proceed to ban these schools will eliminate the continuation of such positive impacts and successes into the future.

Q: You have always denied having political ambitions, but you have followers within the state apparatus. Do you think this works to your advantage in Turkey?

First of all, I must note that this Movement does not pursue political aims, but aims to serve humanity through educational, social and cultural activities. It invests all its time and energy in these services. It aims to solve social problems by focusing on individuals.

In my sermons, I have stated that we have enough mosques but not enough schools. I have encouraged the congregation to try to open schools instead of mosques—many of which were empty at the time. If we nurtured any political aim, such as establishing a political party, various signs of our aim would have become manifest during the past 40 to 50 years. Over time, various political positions and ranks have been offered to me and my friends, but we rejected them all. If the Movement had political aspirations, it would have established a political party in 2001, when the political scene was quite suitable for such an initiative, but it did not. Likewise, if we really wanted to, we would have ensured that we had many supporters in the ruling parties that have come to office to date, but we did not. Until very recently, there had been only two Members of Parliament associated with the Hizmet Movement in the ruling party, which is known to everyone.

I have never approved of the instrumentalization of religion or religious values to attain political ends, the abuse of religion with political motives, or the use of religious slogans in political contexts. Of course, it is legitimate for people to engage in political activities, and although we are not involved in politics—such as by establishing a political party—we do not preclude others from doing so. Indeed, political parties are essential constituents of any democratic system. Of course, the Hizmet Movement does not seek to establish a political party. Yet the Movement’s fundamental dynamics and common universal values, which I tried to elucidate in response to an earlier question of yours, do have political implications. Individually or collectively, participants in this Movement who are engaged in educational, social and charitable projects may have demands from politics and politicians. But these legitimate demands are always sought through legitimate means and, in this process, unlawful, illegitimate or unethical methods are strictly avoided and counseled against.

Participants in and supporters of the Hizmet Movement naturally expect its administrators to promote the rule of law, human rights, freedoms, peace, freedom of thought and enterprise, and stability and order in the country, [and they also expect] that they [the political leaders] work to eliminate chaos and anarchy and ensure that everyone is accepted as they are. Such participants resort to civilian and democratic means available to them to raise their voices about shortcomings in this regard. Raising public awareness is both a civic duty and one of the goals of civil society. No one can be forced to establish a political party in order to do this, and those who raise public awareness about these shortcomings cannot be accused of pursuing political goals, trying to partner with the ruling party, or meddling with democratically elected representatives. This is how it works in any true democracy.

Political parties and free elections are prerequisites of a democratic system, but they are not sufficient on their own. The effective and smooth functioning of civil society is important as well. It is wrong to say that elections are the only way to hold politicians accountable to the public. With its media, organized structure, legal activities, petitions and social media messages, civil society continuously supervises the ruling party and checks whether it is fulfilling its promises. Those who sympathize with our Movement tend to refrain from involvement in partisan politics and from seeking political careers. But this does not mean that, as members of civil society, we relinquish our responsibility to hold politicians to account.

Furthermore, the Hizmet Movement does not have a homogenous composition and it does not have a central or hierarchical structure, so its participants do not have a single political view. Therefore, it is unreasonable for it to closely support any specific political party. The Movement’s participants have their personal political views, and the Movement does not impose any specific view on its participants. The Movement is not focused on elections or political developments, but on projects that promote common universal values. Likewise, the Movement does not meddle with the internal affairs or political developments of any country. Wherever it goes, it seeks to develop and implement civil, educational, cultural and humanitarian projects. Since it sticks with this principle, the Movement is able to be active in 160 countries around the world.

If it is true that there are people who are sympathetic to the values and projects of the Movement working in various positions within the Turkish state but whose identities are not readily obvious—it is both unlawful and unethical to attempt to profile them through various methods. Public servants who are said to be sympathetic to the Movement are bound by the laws, by-laws and the code of conduct of the authorities they work for, and they are strictly subordinated to their superiors and their duties are defined by the relevant laws. I really don’t know if or how this may be an advantage for any social group.

Let me repeat a point: In any state there may be those who feel affection towards me or towards another person or who sympathize with an intellectual or ideological movement. This is quite normal. No one should or can meddle with the personal convictions, beliefs or worldviews of another person. The people who graduate from schools associated with the Movement or who sympathize with the ideals promoted by the Movement are expected to act in a way that is honest and respectful of the rule of law, human rights and democratic principles, [regardless of] whatever positions they assume in public office.

If there are people within the state bureaucracy who take orders from an ideological or other group instead of obeying the orders of their superiors or the provisions of laws and regulations, they must be found and punished, even if they claim to be acting on my behalf. If there are public servants who claim to sympathize with the Hizmet Movement [who] commit crimes, investigations should be swiftly launched against them; they must be brought to justice. The Movement’s stance regarding transparency and accountability is clear and will remain so.

Yet, as you might appreciate, only political systems which rest upon the principle of full transparency can demand that civil society be transparent as well. It is a sign of insincerity to refrain from making the state and politics more transparent while telling everyone else to be more transparent. The latest wave of profiling, wiretapping and bureaucratic purges in Turkey reinforces the point I make. Thousands of public officials have been reassigned without any disciplinary procedure following the December 17 corruption investigations. The public still does not know the criteria that are being used to identify who should be reassigned where. The entire process gives the impression of an arbitrary process.

Q: Do you believe Islam should be given more room in the public sphere and in politics?

Islam, as a religion, is a set of principles and practices based on divine revelation which guides human beings to absolute goodness through their own free will and shows them how to strive to become a “perfect person.” People can live their religion in any way they please in a democratic country which allows people to enjoy their religious beliefs freely. In such a country, free elections are held in compliance with democratic principles and universal human rights and freedoms, and people freely voice their demands of their representatives. They do this by casting their votes at the elections and through using other democratic rights available to them. They can do this individually or collectively by participating in the activities of civil society groups. I always reject the idea of treating religion as a political ideology.

In my opinion, a Muslim should continue to act as a Muslim in social life and in the private, public, civilian and bureaucratic spheres. In other words, a Muslim is supposed to stick to Islam’s moral and ethical values everywhere and at all times. Theft, bribery, looting, graft, lying, gossip, backbiting, adultery and moral lowness are sins and are illegitimate in every context. These sins cannot be committed for political or other purposes and no one can issue a fatwa allowing their commission. At the same time, these acts of corruption are generally deemed by universally accepted norms as criminal offences. If an individual has lost his or her moral integrity in these respects, what is the use of this individual assuming a role within a public body or within a political faction? Like anyone else, I would like to see these ethical positions adopted by all people who hold public office, whether as a civil servant or as a politician. Indeed, the above-listed afflictions are the main source of complaints about public bodies and political structures everywhere around the world.

Let me put it blatantly: If Muslims can freely cherish their religion, perform their religious duties and rituals, establish institutions defined by their religion, teach their religious values to their children or other aspirants, speak their mind about their religion in public debates, and make religious demands in compliance with laws and democracy, then they do not have to try to establish a religious or “Islamic” state. We know from history that rebellions, revolutions, uprisings and other violent incidents that have the potential to drag a country into chaos and anarchy will eventually make us lose our democratic and human rights achievements and lead to irreparable damage to that country. As a matter of fact, if a country’s administration is forcibly seized and people are forced to become religious, it would turn them into hypocrites. These people will pretend to be pious at home, but when they go abroad, they will indulge in the most extreme forms of sin and irreverent and irreligious acts. In such a country, respect for the rule of law diminishes and hypocrisy increases. If you look closely at diverse experiences in different countries, you will realize that my seemingly abstract words rely on concrete cases and observations.

Q. Do you think Islam can be reconciled with democracy in Turkey? How could a successful reconciliation of the two affect Turkey’s European Union membership bid?

Turkey has been governed by democratic rule, despite its shortcomings, since the 1950s. Democracy is a popular form of governance around the world. The preliminary moves to transition our country’s administration to democracy were made by the Ottoman sultans, who were caliphs at the same time, in 1876, and non-Muslim deputies constituted one-third of the first democratically elected parliament. It is wrong to see Islam as conflicting with democracy and vice versa. Perhaps it can be argued that democracy is a system that fits well with Islam’s governance-related principles, both in terms of its allowing the rulers to be accountable to the ruled and its being the opposite of despotism, which is defined by Islam as an evil form of governance. Islam is readily compatible with human rights, democratic elections, accountability, the supremacy of law, and other basic principles. When I said “there will be no turning back from democracy; it is not perfect, but the best system we have,” in 1994, certain groups raised objections to my assertion. But there are numerous implementations and types of democracy. We can hardly say it is a perfect form of governance. It is still going through a process of perfection.

A country where life and mind, as well as property, family and religious freedoms are protected, and where individual rights and freedoms are not restricted save for in exceptional cases such as war, minorities are treated as equal citizens and do not face any discrimination, and people are allowed to freely discuss and implement their personal, social and political views—this would be a country which is suitable for Islam. If people can freely express their views and beliefs, cherish their religion, perform their religious duties and rituals, and have freedoms such as freely acquiring property, neither Muslims nor practitioners of other religions are supposed to change the regime in that country. In countries where they cannot enjoy these liberties, they should try to obtain them through democratic means, but never by resorting to violence.

I believe that Islam and democracy can coexist peacefully not only in Turkey, but also in Muslim countries or, more precisely, in predominantly Muslim countries. We sadly observe that in countries where democracy is demonized, human rights violations, moral and legal turmoil, and religious and ethnic disputes and conflicts abound. Currently, democracy is evolving to become a common asset and custom, as it were, of the entire human race. In countries that comply with the EU standards, Muslims are entitled to cherish, implement, represent, and even promote and teach their religion. Both as individuals and as a community, our essential duty is to cherish and represent our religion.

Turkey is not described as a full-fledged democracy. Practicing Muslims who were oppressed in the past, such as Muslim female students who were banned from wearing headscarves on university campuses, have attained many rights as a result of the country’s EU bid. In this respect, the EU accession process has brought a number of benefits to Turkey. As part of this process, serious democratic reforms have been introduced to the country. If these reforms are maintained and Turkey’s democratic system can attain the EU standards regarding the rule of law and respect for human rights and freedoms, then I think Turkey’s Muslim identity will not be seen as a roadblock to its full membership. Even if anti-Islam fanatics block Turkey’s EU membership, the gains Turkey makes during its attempt at becoming a full member are still important wins for Turkey’s democracy. However, Turkey has recently started to backpedal from the EU democratic standards.

Q: Could you explain your vision of Hanafi Islam to our readers?

Such a thing is out of the question. Neither Hanafis nor other schools of Islamic jurisprudence can come up with their own interpretations of the basic tenets of Islam, but they are allowed to interpret certain aspects of Islam which are open to interpretation using a specific method. These interpretations may overlap with or contradict those of other schools. These interpretations are considered within the circle of Islam as long as they do not contradict the very spirit of Islam and the basic tenets of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The prevailing circumstances influenced the interpretations of the founding scholars of these various schools of Islamic jurisprudence. Political and cultural circumstances, too, had an effect on these interpretations. But Imam Hanafi, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Malik and Imam Hanbal—may God be pleased with all of them—were sincere people who devoted their lives to Islam and who suffered numerous troubles in serving Islam. Through God’s will, these interpretations of Islam came to being thanks to their and their students’ hard work; these interpretations should be seen as an asset.

I try to stick to their tradition. In their understanding of Islam, protection of life, mind, property, family and religion prevails over the glorification of the state. [In addition,] people’s freedom of choice and enterprise is stressed; the role of reason, public interest and even social experience is acknowledged in addition to transmitted knowledge as a way of understanding divine revelations; the use of ijtihad—that is, interpretive reasoning—is encouraged in areas of the religion that are open to interpretation, reasoning and explanation; and the freedom to enjoin the good and forbid the evil is sought. [Furthermore], the freedom of practitioners of any religion to cherish their religion not only individually, but also the public sphere, is recognized; the respect for laws, public order, and peace is fostered; terror and the murder of innocent people are recognized as crimes against humanity; and reasoning is promoted as a method to be employed instead of coercion in the civilized world. [In their understanding] religion is defined as mainly consisting of spirituality, morality, belief in the Hereafter, worshiping God, perfection, empathetic understanding, representation, and good counseling. As a matter of fact, from a sociological perspective, this is how Islam has been accepted and interpreted in Anatolia for thousands of years. This perception of Islam defies all forms of violence, extremism and the politicization of religion, but promotes love, tolerance, mutual acceptance, humility, humbleness and inclusiveness. In the social and public sphere, this perception of Islam prioritizes rights, freedoms, justice and peace. That is, it seeks to create a social texture open in all respects.

The second part to this interview will follow in the coming days.


SOURCE: http://www.aawsat.net/2014/03/article55330430

Fethullah Gulen's Interview with Today's Zaman [Part 5]

Gülen says ballot box is not everything in a democracy

Islamic scholar Fethullah Gülen, who has inspired the popular civic and social movement called Hizmet, said the ballot box is not everything, urging his followers to not stick to only one but to cast their votes freely based on their personal conviction.

“Of course the ballot box holds a crucial importance for the future of this country; but it is not everything,” he said, adding that focusing on the ballot box only makes some people comfortable in telling lies.

As for the question on which party he would support, Gülen said he has always asked his friends to cast their votes based on their personal conviction. “I believe that asking them to vote for a certain party is a type of pressure; in addition, I also consider engagement with a certain party isolation from other segments of society,” he explained.

Gülen signaled, however, that his supporters would not be voting for the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), whose chairman, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, constantly throws around insults.

“If a person internalizes and acknowledges such grave accusations and insults, he or she may still vote for that party; but I believe that these remarks which would be hurtful to anybody have also been hurtful to our friends,” Gülen noted.

He cautioned, however, that the candidates are more important than the parties in local elections and as such some of his supporters may see some AK Party candidates deserving their support.
“Whatever party you vote for, you will not have committed a sin,” Gülen remarked.

Commenting on speculations over whether he will return to Turkey, Gülen said he will decide about whether or not to return to Turkey after consulting with friends he trusts. He signaled that the threat for him is not over in Turkey, saying that “those who aspire to seize power despotically upon growing stronger and to never abandon it start to see as a danger those who don't nurture aspirations for power.”

“They try to portray these people as a threat to the state, but they essentially perceive them as a threat to their plans,” he underlined.

Drawing lessons from the past during which important figures suffered and were prosecuted and persecuted, Gülen said troubles are only temporary and asked his supporters to remain patient.
As for the exit strategy from the current turmoil Turkey has been experiencing, the Islamic scholar advised that the country needs a new climate.

“A new constitution is a must to guarantee fundamental rights and freedoms. I believe there should be growing popular demand and pressure on the relevant figures and institutions so that they will make a democratic constitution based on the recognition of universal legal principles,” he explained.
Gülen also warned that “a Turkey which moves away from its own values and people will also move away from the world.”

Here are excerpts from the interview:

Only days are left until the elections. There are debates on what party the movement will support.
I cannot see it as proper for Muslims to talk about this all the time and think that the ballot box is the real meaning of life. Of course the ballot box holds a crucial importance for the future of this country; but it is not everything. It is impossible not to become upset realizing that focusing on the ballot box only makes some people comfortable in telling lies. As for the debate on who we should vote for, I have always asked my friends to cast their votes based on their personal conviction. I believe that asking them to vote for a certain party is a type of pressure; in addition, I also consider engagement with a certain party isolation from other segments of society. Our clear and plain stance in the referendum was not for a certain party; it was for the introduction of democratic steps. It appears that this stance is not being appreciated.

There is now a party chairman who constantly throws around insults. And, unfortunately, the wise men of that party prefer deep silence. With the exception of strong partisans, I have frequently noticed that the AK Party support base is upset with this. If a person internalizes and acknowledges such grave accusations and insults, he or she may still vote for that party; but I believe that these remarks which would be hurtful to anybody have also been hurtful to our friends. Everyone will consider their own situation and analyze the mayoral candidates. In the end, this is not a general election. The candidates are more important than the parties; there are many valuable candidates in all parties. Whatever party you vote for, you will not have committed a sin.

Speculations abound regarding your stay in the US and about whether you will return to Turkey. Can you comment on this matter?
I wanted to think well of those who had asked me to return. Similar calls had previously been made. Regarding these calls, I could sense the real intention. But I continue to stick to courtesy and a positive attitude toward believers. First and foremost, I am just a believer among many believers. I have always kept my feet on the ground. This is the way I have lived my life. In my opinion, the highest station one can attain is to be a true servant of God. It is my wish to die in this station. I have no connection or ties to any external power, force or group. Such a thing is out of question. Those caught in the web of external powers, forces or groups are those who run after prosperity, power and other worldly stations or posts. Unfortunately, those who aspire to seize power despotically upon growing stronger and to never abandon it start to see as a danger those who don't nurture aspirations for power and who even specifically refrain from such pursuits with a focus on how to attain God's contentment and His bliss in the Hereafter. They try to portray these people as a threat to the state, but they essentially perceive them as a threat to their plans.

Even in the most underdeveloped societies, people are tried for their words and acts and verdicts are passed about them based on what they say or do. People and authorities know and have observed my acts and words for the last 50 years. Is it possible for a person who has a secret agenda to conceal this agenda for 50 years?

I will decide about whether or not to return to Turkey not based on the convictions of some people but after consulting with friends whose intentions I find considerably sincere. As I said before, if I return, I will return not as someone else but as I am -- as the son of Ramiz Efendi who served as the imam of the Üç Şerefeli Cami [mosque].

You have for some time now stopped delivering sermons over the Internet. Those affiliated with the movement wonder about your sentiments under such strong pressure and insults. Is there anything you would like to tell them?
We have to remain patient in the face of what is happening to us. We should never abandon our lenient and decent style. People have suffered from different problems in different periods. Important figures such as Imam Rabbani, Hasan al-Shadhili and Mawlana Baghdadi have suffered. The brutality and persecution Bediüzzaman was subjected to should be remembered. He was subjected to all sorts of brutality. We are not comparable to these remarkable people. But if this is their case and this is their method, then we need to be willing to take all sorts of sufferings. We should not resent. We need to pray to God all the time and tell Him, “We are content with God as our Lord, and with Islam as our religion, and with Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, as our Prophet.” We should never feel offended by the way He treats us. We should always be content with Him.

Troubles are temporary. If our communication and relationship with God is perfect, we will secure our afterlife even when we experience huge troubles. If they do not seek worldly advantages and assets, those who dedicate themselves to this cause will have eternal gains in the afterlife. Everybody should stay where they are. Depending on the circumstances and the conjuncture, different options should be tried to reach the destination even if they block the main road and options. That destination is universal human values. These people I referred to above were never pessimistic; so we should be like them. We should keep our hopes high. “Hopelessness is such a quagmire that if you fall into it, you will drown; but if you grab on to your resolution, you will be saved.” This is what Mehmet Akif [a renowned Turkish poet] says about hopelessness. We believe that this bleak weather and climate will eventually disappear. We have always held this hope.

You also referred to what I have been subjected to so far. I did not complete my military service when the May 27 [1960] coup was staged. I was persecuted then. I was persecuted in the March 12 [1971] coup. I had to run away like a bandit for six years during the Sept. 12 [1980] coup. Former President Turgut Özal exerted his authority at a time when he was feeling strong; so they left me alone. But this was not the end. I traveled to Mecca to perform the Hajj. Things were unpleasant for me once again. I gave a statement at a state security court. The legal case Prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel filed in the aftermath of Feb. 28 [the 1997 coup] lasted for years. Despite the denigration I was subjected to in that case, the chief prosecutor here in New Jersey showed me respect. He welcomed me at the door [to the building]. He helped me to the [witness] chair himself so that I could sit down. He then washed his own glass, filled it with water and offered it to me, telling me that my mouth may go dry given that I was testifying. I experienced this here. He did not know me at all. Then we discussed as to whether we should send him a gift for this gentle treatment. When I presented him a gift, he said he could not accept a gift from a person whose legal case he had handled. I said to myself that these people still survive despite all negative developments thanks to this legal philosophy. Because of this legal understanding, they still play an influential role in world politics.

I should also tell you that I was imprisoned during my military service because I was delivering sermons. A commander who was protecting me allowed me to deliver sermons, which he also attended. As he was preparing to leave our unit, he hugged me in tears and said I would face repression after he goes. And what he said came to be. They sent me to prison. I have also been subjected to different types of persecution and repression at different times. However, the things I am experiencing now are not comparable to what I experienced in the past. The lies, insults and denigrating remarks… But everyone reflects their own character in their attitudes and remarks. In the end, we cannot say anything to anybody.

---

A new constitution needed to exit from turmoil

Turkey is going through hard times. Sometimes people become pessimistic because of the ongoing turmoil. How, in your opinion, can Turkey get out of this atmosphere?
Above all, I should stress that in such times it is strongly necessary to pray to God and seek refuge in His mercy. We should be worried about the fate of those who are not worried about their fate. Those who feel content all the time and hold doubts about the faith of others will face a great danger from the religious perspective. ‘Umar [the second caliph] was concerned about his fate [despite being one of the 10 people who have been promised Paradise]. And so we should be worried about our fate. We need to seek refuge in His mercy and protection. We need to say, “O God, hold my hand. For if You do not, I will be doomed.” Like individuals, faith and submission are sanctuaries for communities as well. Those who do not seek refuge in this sanctuary may be crushed under their ego. May God protect us from this.

This is one side of the coin. The other side is as follows: In order to overcome the current turmoil, this country needs a new climate. A new constitution is a must to guarantee fundamental rights and freedoms. I believe there should be growing popular demand and pressure on the relevant figures and institutions so that they will make a democratic constitution based on the recognition of universal legal principles. Many intellectuals offer similar analyses. A Turkey which moves away from its own values and people will also move away from the world.

Today, individuals and societies have greater importance than their states. It is impossible to implement a project that is imposed on the people. At the beginning of this century, Bediüzzaman said predominance over the civilized is possible through persuasion, not coercion. Therefore, repression of people will not remain the same all the time. They cannot be permanent. We have to approach the events and developments via patience, prudence and caution. If you approach the developments via the patience and submission they deserve and deal with them as such, reason will dominate eventually. And when this happens, those who had engaged in sin before will feel embarrassed; and you open up your hearts noting that this is not a day of condemnation and making sure that they do not feel this way.
This has been the case throughout history. If you are traveling in the opposite direction when people are moving away from you; the distance between you becomes larger. And the day you need union and cooperation you will realize that you have made a mistake. You realize this but it is too late. We need to think about nothing but committing ourselves to our service and duties. This is my humble opinion on this matter.

Source

 

Fethullah Gulen's Interview with Today's Zaman [Part 4]

Gülen calls for respect of diversity in Turkey to end polarization

Islamic scholar Fethullah Gülen, who has inspired the popular civic and social movement called Hizmet, called for the respect of diversity in Turkey, expressing his concern over growing polarization in society.

  “I believe it is extremely dangerous to polarize society along various lines or identities in Turkey”, he said, stressing that “everyone must respect diversity. Freedom of speech and expression cannot be restricted.”

“While the views of the majority certainly deserve respect, the views of minority groups should be treated with the same level of respect as well”, he added.

Describing Turkish society as a big family whose members subscribe to different ideologies, Gülen asked, “How can a parent incite some members of the family against other members of the same family who hold different ideologies?”

“This is akin to playing with fire,” he warned.

Gülen's remarks are a direct criticism of embattled Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's harsh rhetoric pitting various social groups against each other on the eve of local elections scheduled for March 30 with the purpose of consolidating support for his ruling party.

“If you suppress the masses, this will cause friction along social fault lines. And this is such a big risk that no political party can take for whatever political gain,” Gülen underlined.

Recalling his comments on the government's ill-advised policies on how to handle mass protests during the Gezi Park events, Gülen said: “[The protesters] voiced democratic demands and, initially, there were innocent protests. These protests could have been tolerated.”

“Instead, the protests were violently suppressed,” he lamented.

“Is the shopping center that was to be built there worth a single drop of blood [shed during the protests]? Is it worth a single human life?” the Islamic scholar asked.

Responding to slander and baseless accusations targeting the Hizmet movement, Gülen expressed his anguish over the unbearable smear campaign. “I suppose people have never been insulted or encountered such extensive lies and slanderous remarks before,” he stated, stressing that the Holy Quran recommends sensitivity and a soft heart.

“When the hardness of the heart takes the soul hostage, one can resort to every method to attain his goals irrespective of whether they are legitimate or not,” he explained.

Reaffirming his views on the settlement process to resolve the Kurdish problem, Gülen noted that he has always favored peace and reconciliation over violence to settle the issue.

“This [settlement process] shouldn't be disrupted. This is a good opportunity for both sides to forget about hostilities and turn back from their mistakes,” he explained.

He criticized the government, however, for belated steps in tackling the Kurdish issue, saying that fundamental rights and freedoms should not be seen or used as a card in bargaining.

“Even before the settlement process began, I had expressed my perspective about education in one's mother tongue. But no step was taken to this end. This matter is still in abeyance,” he lamented.
The Islamic scholar also suggested that “in addition to recognizing the due rights and freedoms of its Kurdish citizens, Turkey must extend a helping hand to the Kurds in other regions. We must re-establish and reinforce our cultural and historical ties with them.”

Here are excerpts from the interview:

During the Ambassadors' Conference in Ankara, ambassadors were told to “explain well this organization” at their posts abroad. In a sense, Turkish ambassadors were ordered to denounce the Turkish schools abroad. Can you comment on this order?
When I hear news about Turkish officials' efforts to undermine the Turkish schools abroad, my heart aches and I seek refuge in God. Unfortunately, this appetite for destruction pushes all fair limits. These schools were established through the great self-sacrifice of the people of Anatolia. Almost everyone in Turkey has seen these schools, be they rightists, leftists, neo-nationalists, the religious or atheists, officials from the AK Party, the [main opposition] Republican People's Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), the Grand Unity Party (BBP), the Felicity Party (SP), the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) -- people from all walks of life. I have not heard even one person say, "These schools are harmful, and they should be shut down." No rational or political argument or criterion can be employed to advocate the closure of these schools.

Our friends who established these schools faced numerous material and immaterial hardships. They brought the embracing nature of the people of Anatolia to these countries. With them, they brought the Anatolian people's tolerance. They took our universal values with them. To turn a blind eye to the activities of these people who introduce our culture and language to all the countries of the world is ingratitude. You cannot conceal this manifest truth. Whatever they do, this wise society sees and knows everything. Therefore, their failure to prevent these activities or undermine these schools may lead them to delirium. They are struggling uncontrollably. This also needs to be known.

Turkey cannot emerge as a strong international player in the globalizing world if you fail to ensure that volunteer organizations and lobbies support Turkey in the international arena. Turkey cannot survive if it isolates itself from the external world. In this day and age, this applies not only to Turkey but to every other country as well. Turkey needs the support of the people who nurture love and sympathy for it everywhere around the world. Societies need to know more about and understand each other for global peace.

I feel much pain in seeing how these charity activities are being sabotaged and misrepresented in the eyes of foreign people. Despite this, we will try to maintain our respect and politeness toward everyone. This is what we have always done and will always do as this is what our character tells us to do.

In this transient world, we will speak ill of no one; we will not break anyone's heart; we will continue to promote good and amiable relations with everyone. Our actions will be guided by the following words of Bediüzzaman Said Nursi: "I forgive everyone who caused me hardship and anguish, the torture I was subjected to, and the ordeals I went through for many years. I have known nothing of worldly pleasure in my life of over 80 years. I have spent all my life on the battleground, in dungeons or in prison. I was barred from communication for months. I was treated like a criminal at war tribunals. I forgive those who oppressed me, those who sent me into exile many times, those who sought to put me in prison on trumped-up charges, and those who paved the way for my imprisonment."

True, as a believer, I promised to share these feelings. I will not be angry with anyone. I promised to welcome death smiling and treat divine hardship and bliss as the same.

Our friends should not despair. With God's grace and permission, this service done for this nation, for the future of this nation and for all of humanity will continue. Thanks to God's favor and generosity, neither slander nor ill-intentioned campaigns can halt this bandwagon of service. People with a pure conscience and mind will soon uncover this slander and these lies.

As I noted elsewhere, there may be certain fanatical efforts to block our path, but as long as there are souls who are open to dialogue, tender people who smile at everyone, conscientious people who are aware of their sins, souls who regret their wrong or misguided deeds, and wise people who seek to build their future on reasonableness, we will mend our shattered souls and recover ourselves and continue to love everyone anew. This is what we should do with respect to the recent developments.
On the other hand, I believe it is extremely dangerous to polarize society along various lines or identities in Turkey. This is akin to playing with fire. How can a parent incite some members of the family against other members of the same family who hold different ideologies? We are a large family with roots dating back several centuries. We must refrain from treating our differing ideologies and diverse identities as reasons to quarrel or engage in conflict. Everyone must respect diversity. Freedom of speech and expression cannot be restricted. While the views of the majority certainly deserve respect, the views of minority groups should be treated with the same level of respect as well. If you suppress the masses, this will cause friction along social fault lines. And this is such a big risk that no political party can take for whatever political gain.

Unfortunately, this is what happened during the Gezi Park protests. The people voiced democratic demands and, initially, there were innocent protests. These protests could have been tolerated. Officials could have visited the protesters and learned about their demands. Instead, the protests were violently suppressed. Is the shopping center that was to be built there worth a single drop of blood [shed during the protests]? Is it worth a single human life? Naturally, pressure led to violence and a local issue turned into a national security issue. And the evil networks which were waiting for an opportunity to stir up chaos stepped onto the stage, and we were very concerned at that time. Our friends all around the world prayed for peace. They prayed the Prayer of Need. And yet it was said that these protests were somehow masterminded by the Hizmet movement. May God endow them with understanding.

Some circles recently used the term “supreme mastermind” to tarnish the image of the Hizmet movement and imply that the movement is supported by external actors.
Making this accusation is a grave sin. I suppose people have never been insulted or encountered such extensive lies and slanderous remarks before. If there is something they are aware of, they should inform the public about it; otherwise, they are denigrating Muslims. The smear campaign is so unbearable that we are witnessing new lies and even slander every day. The desire for prosperity makes hearts insensitive; and in that case, you cannot feel properly. You ignore spirituality; you even humiliate it. When the heart becomes insensitive and attaches great importance to the world through the desire for prosperity, you'll suppose that it is all about this world. And then you simply do not worry about committing sins. The Quran recommends sensitivity and emotion in the heart. When the hardness of the heart takes the soul hostage, one can resort to every method to attain his goals irrespective of whether they are legitimate or not. Sadly, one of the reasons for the current stalemate is hardness in the hearts. But if they are looking for a mastermind of the Hizmet movement, I would say it is the solidarity and protection that God bestows on consultation and brotherhood.

The Hizmet movement does not depend on any fading and mortal power or actor; it has made advances because God has been graceful; as long as He protects, no one will ever hurt it. Muslims are supposed to act with caution. They do not backbite about their brothers and sisters based on false reports. Unfortunately, there is no room for the afterlife in the agendas of those who express their desires for worldly possessions all the time. This may drive the people towards social deviation and religious distortion. Many unusual statements that contradict with religious belief have been made. Media outlets covered them extensively. These are contradictory to religious norms; but even those who are supposed to remain silent are talking. We can save our souls from the disorder and corruption surrounding us by renewing our thoughts and emotions on a daily basis. Hearts are hardened if theoretical Islam turns into a lifestyle and, in that case, one forgets about his own responsibility and slanders Muslims all the time. Things will settle down eventually. People in this country will look at each other's face again. People who turn in the same direction [i.e., towards Makkah] while performing their prayers should avoid making strong remarks that they would feel ashamed of in the future.
---- In the fifth and last part of this series, to be published tomorrow, Gülen explains his views on the upcoming elections and talks about a brand new constitution to make a fresh start in Turkey.

---

‘Kurds' right should not be used as a card in bargaining'

What do you think about the settlement process and its current state?
This is something I had spoken about previously on a number of occasions. A believer always favors peace. A believer adopts the attitude required for peace. There are problems that have accumulated over time. In the past, violence was wielded to solve these problems. But this did not settle it; it only exacerbated it further. Now there is a process of peace and reconciliation. This shouldn't be disrupted. This is a good opportunity for both sides to forget about hostilities and turn back from their mistakes.
A state must be fair in its dealings with its citizens. Fundamental rights and freedoms should not be seen or used as a card in bargaining.

Even before the settlement process began, I had expressed my perspective about education in one's mother tongue. But no step was taken to this end. This matter is still in abeyance. At once we must raise teachers who are capable of teaching in Kurdish. This is not something that can be done upon demands from the public. The state must take the first step. In taking this step, we must refrain from words, attitudes and behavior that may give the impression that we are doing this as a favor. The region was home to numerous major civilizations and intellectuals. In addition to recognizing the due rights and freedoms of its Kurdish citizens, Turkey must extend a helping hand to the Kurds in other regions. We must re-establish and reinforce our cultural and historical ties with them.

We have three fundamental problems: These were outlined by Bediüzzaman almost a century ago as ignorance, poverty and disunity. These problems have bred despair, deception, circumvention, mutual distrust, and so on. We need to discuss these problems on a common platform. This is not something that can be done with disdain and arrogance. If conciliation is to be achieved, this would be all-inclusive, embracing the entirety of the region and diverse groups. No one should be excluded from it. Common denominators should be found to embrace political and non-political groups. We should let local people solve their problems with their own capabilities. If quick steps are not taken in this regard, I fear the settlement process may come to a halt. Fine, let us focus on stopping the bloodshed. Even this indicates a certain level of pragmatism. But we should have targets beyond that point. We must create an atmosphere in which everyone -- Turks, Kurds, Sunnis, Alevis, Arabs, Syriacs, and so on -- can co-exist as members of the same family in happiness and prosperity.

Source

Fethullah Gulen's Interview with Today's Zaman [Part 3]

Gülen says gov't cut back on rights and freedoms in Turkey

Islamic scholar Fethullah Gülen, who has inspired the popular civic and social movement called Hizmet, has said he is concerned with the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government's moves seen over the last couple of years to cut back on fundamental rights and freedoms in Turkey.

Islamic scholar Fethullah Gülen poses for a photograph in his humble bedroom. (Photo: Today's Zaman)

“There has been a serious regression in fundamental rights and freedoms over the last few years,” he said, lamenting the offensive and subversive language utilized by politicians in stigmatizing and marginalizing large swathes of Turkish society.

“During the Gezi Park protests, I raised my objection to the description of protesters as ‘çapulcu' [bandits]. This also applies for the Alevis. Turkey has failed to introduce democratic solutions for their most fundamental rights,” he explained in an exclusive interview with Today's Zaman.

Gülen reaffirmed his position on establishing political party, saying that “we are not and will not be a political party. Therefore, we are not a rival of any political party.”

He also made it clear that he will continue to express his views when necessary, underlining that this is one of his most natural and democratic rights.

“I don't understand why some people do not like us enjoying this democratic right of ours. Telling the people at the helm of the country ‘I have such and such ideas' should not be a crime. In advanced democracies, individuals and civil society organizations freely disseminate their views and criticisms about the country's political issues, and no one expresses any concern about this,” Gülen stated.
Dismissing descriptions of a "parallel structure," a term invented by embattled Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has been incriminated in a massive corruption scandal, Gülen said every institution affiliated with Hizmet is open to public scrutiny and operates in full compliance with the law.
“If public servants are profiled or face unfounded charges, this is a breach of their fundamental rights and freedoms,” he warned.

Gülen also rejected the claim that his movement is seeking a position in government, saying, “We have never asked for a position such as general manager, governor, district governor or minister.”
“If someone has done so in the past -- and I do not remember such a thing happening -- they are no longer linked to us. I have forwarded this sentiment of mine to state officials,” he added.

As for the government's interference in the media and the judiciary that was wrongfully ascribed to Hizmet, Gülen said audio leaks posted on the Internet have clearly indicated that it is Erdoğan's government that is pressuring the media and judiciary, and not Hizmet.

“Today, we understand from the voice recordings posted on the Internet that the officials who govern the country abandoned their proper duties and worked hard to ensure that these people were sentenced. They directly meddled in public tenders to push the businessmen who were deservedly awarded the contracts out. What is tragic here is that they commit grave sins by putting the blame of these errors on innocent people,” he noted.

As for the Ergenekon detainees who were recently released, Gülen said the government could have saved them a long time ago just like it did intelligence chief Hakan Fidan, who was saved with a rush bill in Parliament.

“I am in no position to meddle with the laws in force or make any suggestion in this context,” he said.
He also added that “a coup is a serious accusation and judicial authorities are supposed to, in accordance with the rules that govern them, hold those responsible accountable. But perhaps a legal remedy could have been found while taking into consideration the ages or medical condition of those people advanced in age and used to being treated with respect all their lives.”

Commenting on rumors that Hizmet will face a crackdown after the local elections on March 30, the Islamic scholar said many things are being said out of anger. “I think every insult imaginable has already been made,” he lamented.

“There is no end to inventing offenses based on beliefs, ideologies, communal identities or parties of the people who work in public institutions,” Gülen noted, adding that “the practice of creating suspicions about certain people or groups with such unfounded accusations destroys the very sense of fairness, justice and order.”

Here are excerpts from the interview:
On the surface, it appears that there is a row between the government and the Hizmet movement. Articles were written to analyze this row. Some say, "We can change a party we don't like through elections, but how can we change a community we don't like?" What do you think about this?
I must note first of all that this is not a row between the AK Party and the Hizmet movement. There has been a serious regression in fundamental rights and freedoms over the last few years. The offensive and subversive language utilized by politicians is making every social segment into “the other” and polarizing society. During the Gezi Park protests, I raised my objection to the description of protesters as "çapulcu" (bandits). This also applies for the Alevis. Turkey has failed to introduce democratic solutions for their most fundamental rights. Perhaps there is a deliberate procrastination in this regard. We supported a project to build a joint mosque-cemevi complex but received unexpectedly harsh reactions.

Second, we are not and will not be a political party. Therefore, we are not a rival of any political party. We stand at an equal distance to everyone. Nevertheless, we make public our hopes and concerns about the future of our country. I think this is one of our most natural and democratic rights. I don't understand why some people do not like us enjoying this democratic right of ours. Telling the people at the helm of the country "I have such and such ideas" should not be a crime. In advanced democracies, individuals and civil society organizations freely disseminate their views and criticisms about the country's political issues, and no one expresses any concern about this.

I must add that every institution established and run by our companions are open to public scrutiny and operate in full compliance with the law. In other words, there is a completely transparent structure in place. The recent developments have shown clearly who is not transparent. Participation in the Hizmet movement is voluntary. It is regrettable to see volunteers of the Hizmet movement depicted as members of a clandestine organization despite the fact that these people exhibit full compliance with the law. There are public servants from diverse ideological groups in every public institution. A public servant may be rightist, leftist, Alevi, Sunni, non-Muslim, a Kurd, a Turk, what have you, but he or she is supposed to perform their duties properly. What matters is their compliance with the laws and regulations when performing their duties. If public servants are profiled or face unfounded charges, this is a breach of their fundamental rights and freedoms. If you talk about an imagined "parallel structure" out of the blue, then your illusions will create thousands of such structures for you. And you end up with oppression against those people.

Why do you now oppose a political party you have supported over the last 12 years? Were your interests aligned and reconciled before?
We have never established cooperation based on the recognition of interests with anybody. We have abstained from doing this because this is the lesson we draw from the Quran and the Sunnah. I have always seen the pursuit of strong and influential positions as a betrayal of our values. I would never say anything about choices other people make. But I have always viewed the pursuit of worldly and material gains as detrimental to my afterlife. This is also the case with my friends. We have never asked for a position such as general manager, governor, district governor or minister. If someone has done so in the past -- and I do not remember such a thing happening -- they are no longer linked to us. I have forwarded this sentiment of mine to state officials.

We have tried to extend support on such issues as the improvement of democracy and fundamental rights and freedoms. We would support any party to make sure anti-democratic practices come to an end and that the culture of a pluralistic democracy would become permanent. Unconditional partisanship is one thing, and lending support to democratic practices is another.

We now stand where we were before. We should look at who is moving away from this standpoint. A political party which has up until recently taken steps to expand the sphere of fundamental rights and freedoms is now considering censoring the Internet and introducing bills that would make this country an intelligence state. Is it possible to think of us as supporting attempts to do harm to social cohesion through strong and insulting discourse and to shelve democratic customs? If the whole issue is restricted to the Hizmet movement, you may try tolerating the repressive measures. However, the ongoing developments should be analyzed from a broader perspective. Unfortunately, Turkey is being alienated from the world. A Turkey which becomes isolated on the global stage and loses its democratic richness will hurt not only the people in this country but also everyone who takes Turkey as a model for themselves.

In the fourth part of this series, to be published tomorrow, Gülen talks about his support for the settlement process and laments the government's belated steps to resolve the Kurdish issue.

---

Hizmet wrongfully blamed for gov't misdeeds and conduct

For a long time, government sources have been attributing all adverse things at home and abroad to the Hizmet movement, and all good, democratic and favorable things to themselves. Now, with the defendants in the Ergenekon trial being released, they are resorting to the same method in an effort to leave the Hizmet movement with the bill. And occasionally this propaganda works. What do you say about this?
They tried to delude many social segments with this slander. For instance, they told some media groups, "We have no problem with you, but the Hizmet movement is messing with you." Today, we understand from the voice recordings posted on the Internet that the officials who govern the country abandoned their proper duties and worked hard to ensure that these people were sentenced. They directly meddled in public tenders to push the businessmen who were deservedly awarded the contracts out. What is tragic here is that they commit grave sins by putting the blame of these errors on innocent people. Gossiping, backbiting, slander and aspersions abound, and one cannot help but feel sorry about it.

The saddest part is about the military. Those who boasted, behind closed doors, about "making the military submit to civilians" or "putting an end to military tutelage" told the military authorities, "We would iron out this problem, but the Hizmet movement is preventing us." And yet they [the government] quickly passed a bill specifically for MİT Undersecretary Hakan Fidan. Had they really wanted and had they been sincere, they could have enacted a bill to save former Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ and other senior military officers overnight.

Moreover, I would like to convey to you a feeling of mine. My friends have witnessed numerous times my eyes fill with tears, seeing how those retired military officers were detained. "If only the people who wear this honorable uniform had not been faced with this situation," I had said. But I am in no position to meddle with the laws in force or make any suggestion in this context. A coup is a serious accusation and judicial authorities are supposed to, in accordance with the rules that govern them, hold those responsible accountable. But perhaps a legal remedy could have been found while taking into consideration the ages or medical condition of those people advanced in age and used to being treated with respect all their lives.

This is how I feel. It has always been so. It really runs counter to the facts to say that it is the Hizmet movement that put them in that position. A senior retired police intelligence official recently gave an interview to a journalist. My friends read it to me from the Internet. "We informed Mr. Prime Minister before every operation we conducted," he had said. This statement, mentioned in a column, was not denied by the government. Now we have the right to ask: If the government knew of all operations beforehand, isn't it a great sin to talk about a conspiracy and raise suspicions about certain groups? If there really was a conspiracy, why didn't you take action to deal with it in a timely manner? If you knew, but failed to take action to prevent it, then wouldn't this make you an accomplice to the conspiracy?

---

Sham trial against Hizmet doomed to fail

The Hizmet movement is being accused of being a gang or [terrorist] organization. There are even rumors that it will face a crackdown after the [local] elections [on March 30].
Unfortunately, many things are being said out of anger. I think every insult imaginable has already been made. They have consumed many things. Meanwhile, totally unfair accusations have been voiced. Following the campaign to toss around such labels as "[terrorist] organization," and "gang," efforts are also being made to influence the judiciary. It is now clear that, as has been said in election rallies, a lawsuit will be launched. If no crime can be found despite searching hard for it, it hurts the sense of justice to push laws beyond their limits to invent one, doesn't it?

The concept and ambiguous accusation of the existence of a "parallel structure" applies to virtually every segment of society. That is, there is no end to inventing offenses based on beliefs, ideologies, communal identities or parties of the people who work in public institutions. Today, you may declare a specific community as a "parallel" structure or as a "gang." In the future, others may claim the same for other communities. Thus, any person who works for the state and is sympathetic to any social, political or religious community may be accused of membership in a "parallel state." What is more, no one can guarantee that those who parrot today these accusations of a "parallel state" will not face the same accusations in the future. The practice of creating suspicions about certain people or groups with such unfounded accusations destroys the very sense of fairness, justice and order.

If a public servant does not comply with the orders of his or her superiors, there are laws that set forth the sentences for this offense. His or her noncompliance is punished under the law. Yet if the matter is taken outside the legal course and thousands of people are labeled and reshuffled unlawfully, this oppression cannot be explained or justified in either this world or the next [i.e., on the Day of Judgment].

To force the judicial authorities to invent crimes and launch lawsuits against these people would be amplified oppression and the general public will find it unacceptable. Moreover, sham trials will not be successful. Moreover, if you call these people, who make total compliance with the law their lifestyle, a network, then people will ask: You have been working with these people for 12 years and they were good people during that time, but suddenly, after the launch of the graft and bribery investigation, you realized that they are evil. Is that so? We must never forget the verse recited in every Friday sermon: "God commands you to act with fairness." That is, He orders us not to breach the rights of others.

Source