Skip to main content

Who Is Fethullah Gulen? A Modernizer or a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing?

Believers say he preaches a new, modern form of Islam. Critics charge he is a power-hungry wolf in sheep's clothing preparing to convert secular Turkey into an Islamic republic -- a conspirator who has created a state within the state and attempted this weekend to topple democratically elected Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in a failed military coup.

That was not how past Turkish governments or, for that matter, Erdogan in his first eight years as prime minister saw Fethullah Gulen, the leader of one of the world's largest and wealthiest Islamic movements.
Back in the 1990s, secular Prime Ministers Tansu Ciller and Mesut Yilmaz and other prominent political leaders viewed Gulen as their weapon against the pro-Islamic Refah (Welfare) Party (the predecessor of Erdogan's Justice and Development Party), which advocated Turkey's divorce from the West and a return to its Islamic and Ottoman roots.
Erdogan too initially saw Gulen as a cherished ally. The two men worked together to force the staunchly secular military in line with one of the European Union's demands for future Turkish membership to accept civilian control. It fit both men's goal of lifting French-style laicist restrictions on freedom of religious expression that had long been resisted by the military. Erdogan had at the time no problem with Gulen's followers establishing a power base in the police force and the military.
This weekend's failed coup suggests that elements of the military still believe in a non-constitutional role of the military. Yet, at the same time, it is to the credit of Erdogan and Gulen that significant parts of the military, the opposition and the public backed Turkey's democratically-elected president and helped foil the coup, irrespective of what they thought of his politics and leadership.
Gulen's moves into branches of government, a version of German student leader Rudi Dutschke's march through the institutions, reflected his long-term strategy. Gulen preaches obedience to the state and recognition of the rule of law while at the same time inserting his followers into key institutions of the state and educating a next generation in his ideological mold.
Indeed, more than half a century after he first became a government-employed imam, Gulen adopted the role. He often dresses in a crumpled sports jacket and slacks, looking the part of a modern religious leader rather than a fervent Turkish nationalist or a militant Islamist. A doleful 75-year-old, he moreover talks the talk, evading language often employed by Turkey's right-wing nationalists and Islamists.
As a result, Gulen's modernist approach appealed to urban conservatives and some more liberal segments of the middle class. His approach contrasted starkly with that of Erdogan, who targeted the more rural conservatives and the nationalists.
It was indeed Gulen's advocacy of tolerance, dialogue and worldly education as well as his endorsement of Turkey's close ties to Europe that endeared him to the country's secular leaders of the 1990s and subsequently to Erdogan.
"We can build confidence and peace in this country if we treat each other with tolerance," Gulen said in a first and since then rare interview at the time with a foreign correspondent. "There's no place for quarreling in this world. ... By emphasizing our support for education and the media, we can prove that Islam is open to contemporary things," he added sprinkling his slow and deliberate speech with old Ottoman Turkish words regarded as quaint by modern Turks.
A diabetic with a heart ailment, Gulen has devoted himself since officially retiring in the early 1990s to writing tracts on Islam. Yet there is little in his writing or the administration of institutions linked to him that points in the direction of theological renewal.
Gulen, among other things, takes a conservative view on the role of women and has said that the presence of women makes him uncomfortable. It was something he had felt since he was a young man, he said. Not surprisingly, Gulen's movement operates separate schools for boys and girls.
Yet, even Gulen has evolved. In the mid-1990s, when a woman visitor asked directions to a toilet at the Istanbul headquarters of his Zaman newspaper, officials said the multi-story building wasn't equipped for women visitors. A member of the staff was sent to check whether a men's room was free. That has since changed. Women's toilets were installed long before Erdogan sent his police in March of this year to take over the paper.
Critics charge that moderation may not be what Gulen really hopes to achieve. "Fethullah's main project is the takeover of the state. That is why he was investing in education. They believe the state will just fall into their lap because they will be ready for it. They will have the people in place. That is their long-term plan," said a prominent liberal Turkish intellectual.
Indeed, Gulen's movement, despite the imam's long-term vision, effectively sought to undermine Erdogan's government in late 2013 with charges of corruption against members of the then prime minister's cabinet and family. The charges and alleged evidence to back them up were never tested in a court of law.
Erdogan made sure of that. For him, the charges were the straw that broke the camel's back. What had been an increasingly public parting of the ways that started with a soccer match fixing scandal in 2011 turned, in late 2013, into open warfare. Erdogan fired or moved thousands of judiciary personnel and police officers to other jobs, shutting down the investigation and seeking to destroy Gulen's religious, educational and commercial empire.
The fact that the police played a key role in foiling this weekend's coup attempt bears testimony to the degree to which Erdogan has succeeded in erasing Gulen's influence in the police. This weekend's dismissal of almost 3,000 judges and the issuance of arrest warrants for 140 of them on allegations of involvement with Gulen suggests that Erdogan believes that his efforts to destroy the imam's infrastructure were more successful in the police than they were in the judiciary.
None of this amounts to evidence of Erdogan's assertion that Gulen engineered this weekend's coup attempt. In recent years, Erdogan has used the alleged threat of a state within a state to remove his critics from the media and academia and has attempted to cow the parliamentary opposition to turn Turkey into a more authoritarian state.
Erdogan's increasingly illiberal version of Turkish democracy, in which the public is invited to protest on his behalf but not against him, makes uttering unsubstantiated allegations relatively easy. Erdogan will however have to produce hard evidence if he formally goes ahead with a request that the U.S. extradite Gulen, who is a green card holder resident in Pennsylvania.
Even if those that staged the failed coup turn out to be followers of Gulen, Erdogan would still have to prove that Gulen was aware and involved in their plans. That may be easier said than done.
Back in 2011, during the soccer match fixing scandal, the first public indication of the growing rift between the two Islamists, Gulen apologized to one of the involved club executives. The preacher said if his followers were involved in prosecuting soccer executives and players, he was not aware of that. It was a rare suggestion that Gulen, by now a frail old man, may no longer be in control of the empire he built.
Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, co-director of the University of Würzburg's Institute for Fan Culture and the author of The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer blog and a just-published book with the same title.
Who Is Fethullah Gulen? A Modernizer or a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing?
By James M. Dorsey
Follow James Dorsey on Twitter:

Read: Turmoil in Turkey and its implications >>>>

  • فتح اللہ گولن کون ہیں؟ 
  • Who is Fethullah Gülen?
  • Genesis of Terror & Road to Peace
  • Popular posts from this blog

    A historic moment in the Arab world

    لحظة تاريخية في العالم العربي
    As a democratic revolution led by tech-empowered young people sweeps the Arab world, Wadah Khanfar, Al Jazeera's director-general, shares a profoundly optimistic view of what's happening in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and beyond. In the first talk posted online from the TED 2011 conference in California, Khanfar describes the powerful moment when people realised they could step out of their homes and ask for change. "كما ثورة ديمقراطية بقيادة الشباب التكنولوجيا ذات صلاحيات تجتاح العالم العربي ، وضاح خنفر ، الجزيرة المدير العام والأسهم وجهة نظر متفائلة بشكل كبير ما يحدث في مصر وتونس وليبيا وخارجها. وفي اول حديث له نشر على الانترنت من مؤتمر تيد 2011 في ولاية كاليفورنيا ، خنفر يصف لحظة قوية عند الناس أدركت أنها لا يمكن الخروج من منازلهم ونطلب من أجل التغيير." This talk was given on March 1, 2011 in Long Beach, California. TED 2011 is taking place between March 1 and Mar…

    Our Captured, Wounded Hearts: Arundhati Roy On Balakot, Kashmir And India

    With his reckless “pre-emptive” airstrike on Balakot in Pakistan, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has inadvertently undone what previous Indian governments almost miraculously, succeeded in doing for decades. Since 1947 the Indian Government has bristled at any suggestion that the conflict in Kashmir could be resolved by international arbitration, insisting that it is an “internal matter.” By goading Pakistan into a counter-strike, and so making India and Pakistan the only two nuclear powers in history to have bombed each other, Modi has internationalised the Kashmir dispute. He has demonstrated to the world that Kashmir is potentially the most dangerous place on earth, the flash-point for nuclear war. Every person, country, and organisation that worries about the prospect of nuclear war has the right to intervene and do everything in its power to prevent it.  Keep reading  >>>>

    India has built around itself an aura of a global power whose time has come. For at least the last t…

    Kashmir Jihad - Analysis & Options


    Kashmir is an incomplete agenda of partition of India. Since 1947, India and Pakistan have fought three wars on this issue. According to UN resolutions, Kashmiris have to decide their accession to Pakistan or India through impartial plebiscite, which could not take place due to Indian reluctance. Recently, India revoked Article 370 of the Constitution, which granted special autonomous status to Kashmir, it was done to unilaterally integrate occupied Kashmir. This is a violation of the UN resolutions and the Simla bilateral agreement, which demands to maintain status quo until the final settlement. The US and world powers are emphasizing that Kashmir should be resolved bilaterally, though India has refused to hold talks with Pakistan. In the present scenario, while India has turned Kashmir into the largest prison of 9 million people, denying basic human rights and oppressing the Kashmiris' who want freedom from India, Pakistan cannot watch as a silent spec…