Hostility Towards Fethullah Gülen and Its Reasons

by Lynn E. Webb on . Posted in Fethullah Gülen: Is There More to Him Than Meets the Eye?

User Rating:  / 12
Fethullah Gülen served for many years as a public official. During this time he never faced any legal or administrative investigation except during the period of the March 12th martial declaration. Regarding this, Gülen explains that the public prosecutor for the Izmir martial law court said himself that his arrest along with some friends was made in order to counterbalance the arrests of leftist anarchists. The sentence was returned by the Supreme Martial Court and the charges were dropped during the retrial due to a general amnesty.

In spite of this, some news was published regarding Gülen probably due to the media not knowing him well. For example, in one newspaper it was stated that he was married with 4 women, and that he had olive orchards extending all the way from Edremit to Izmir. It was obvious that this news was completely a lie. Later on it was stated in the press that there was a secret Fethullahist organization in the Police headquarters and the police colleges. This news was both denied by Police headquarters and registered as false by the independent Turkish courts.

Finally, those who have persistently pursued Fethullah Gülen in recent time first insisted that he was after the establishment of a long-range Shari'a state. In order to show him as guilty before the law, they accused him of being a member of the order. Again, in order to be able to present him in the web of gangs that have surfaced in regard to the so-called Susurluk scandal, they tried to show him together with some members of the nationalist movement like Haluk Kirci, notorious in the media for his illegal activities before coup d'etat of September 12, and Sedat Demir, presented in the media as one of the Turkish Mafia leaders. This claim was silenced when both Haluk Kirci and Sedat Demir spoke to a TV channel saying that those who had made this claim were "dishonest and dishonorable," and that this claim was an absolute lie. They added that they had never seen Fethullah Gülen and come together with him. Later they tried to blacken Fethullah Gülen's name with a claim regarding the laundering of money, an act that Mr. Gülen stated he had never unknown and heard of. When such claims were rejected by the courts and not accepted by the public and no evidence could be presented to prove them, they attempted to take advantage of the personal problems of the two students who had stayed at a dormitory they claimed belonged to Fethullah Gülen and who had later left there for personal reasons. They published a book on that subject they claimed written on the basis of what the student had told them. However, the students openly spoke to a TV channel, and they gave all the details of it in their statement to the prosecutor. When this plot failed, they circulated false MIT (National Intelligence Agency) reports. This didn't give any results either. After that, they wrote another derogatory book about Fethullah Gülen, which was immediately answered by two people who must belong to Mr. Gülen's group.

When all the games against Fethullah Gülen that they had attempted to play ended unsuccessfully, circles that are understood to remain from (the attempted coup of) March 9 have begun attacking from another front. This time their claims seem much more artificial and baseless. This time they're trying to present Fethullah Gülen as the implementor of a "moderate Islam" project created by America to destroy the nationalist and independent ideology of Kemalism in Turkey. On the one hand, while trying to show him with a connection to America and Israel, on the other hand, claiming him to be a Nurcu (follower of Said Nursi), they're trying to show both Said Nursi and him as belonging to a heterodox sect. By attacking Fethullah Gülen from all such fronts, they must also be trying to frighten those intellectuals and politicians who give support to the activities that he has recommended and encouraged.

What can be the reason for such great hostility towards Fethullah Gülen can, according to a sincere supporter of Mr. Gülen, be summed up in the following two articles:

A Those who see an environment of constant conflict in Turkey to be favorable for their own interests, prosperity and future want to leave fruitless Fethullah Gülen's efforts for tolerance and dialogue, and they hope to take advantage of the confused atmosphere that would en sue.

B In addition to these and in cooperation with them, there is a marginal, atheist and uncompromising enemy of religion who once were tied to those behind the Iron Curtain. They nurture hatred toward Fethullah Gülen be cause of his belief, and they are trying to continue the age-old struggle of atheists against religion.

Fethullah Gülen's Enemies

In order both to better analyze the hostility toward Mr. Gülen and to understand what has been taking place in Turkey since February 28, 1997, it's necessary to take a glance at events before May 27 and March 9 and March 12, 1971 and at the juntas that were formed preceding March 9.


Those who "saved" the country on May 27 and, interestingly enough, spoke of forming a Second Republic long before it has been mentioned by some intellectuals in recent years, (see Akis, p. 340, 12/31/1960) tried to "save" the country again before even ten years had passed at the beginning of the 1970's. Many official-civil juntas of "salvation" have appeared in the country. The most important juntas are the following:

Kabibay Junta: Orhan Kabibay was the leader of the junta. Following the coup d'etat of May 27, he had been eliminated from the junta that had taken over the government by fellow members of the junta and he had been a part of the group called "the 14".

Madanoglu Junta: Under the leadership of Cemal Madanoglu from the May 27 group, this basically "civil" junta included Dogan Avcioglu, Ilhan Selcuk, Ilhami Soysal, Faik Ozfakih, Cemal Resit Eyupoglu and Osman Koksal.

Gurler-Batur Junta: This junta which was formed within the army was the most effective one.

In addition to these juntas, there were the Air Force Junta and the Irfan Solmazer Cell, which were also formed within the army.

Elitism, Rejection of Democracy and Incitement of Anarchy

One of the common characteristics of all the juntas was making a leftist coup and taking over the power. Besides this, they were violently opposed to democracy based on the people's vote. They were in favor of a totalitarian rule that they called real democracy. They made propaganda for this purpose, influenced the university youth and incited anarchy.

Ant ("Oath") magazine was at the top of the list of publications that were serving as mouthpieces for the planned coup. The leaders of this magazine were Dogan Ozguden and Cetin Ozek. This magazine also published handbooks, the most notable of which were Alberto Bayon's Gerilla El Kitabi ("The Handbook of the Guerilla"), Che Guevera's Gerilla Gunlugu ("The Diary of the Guerilla") and Savas Anilarl ("Memories of War"), Fidel Castro and Guevera's mentor Alberto Bayon's books on guerilla war.

The magazine showed the anarchists who made the universities into nests of anarchy as innocent, and it constantly opposed the state's security forces.

In addition to the Ant magazine, there was the Devrim ("Revolution") magazine that served as the mouthpiece for the Madanoglu junta. Writers like Cemal Madanoglu, Dogan Avcioglu, Professor Muammer Aksoy, Ugur Mumcu, Oktay Akbal, Mucip Atakli, Ilhami Sosyal, Osman Koksal, Ilhan Selcuk, Hikmet Kivilcimli and Celil Gurkan wrote for it. Similar to what the -Ant magazine did, they made claims about the security forces and attacked them fiercely. For example, they wrote about the police who searched the SBF (Faculty of Political Sciences) dormitory as follows: The Gestapo's rabid dog while lustfully attacking young girls in the SBF dormitory... (February 2, 1971) The police search made at the Hacettepe dormitory was called, "Fascist brutality at Hacettepe," in the Devrim magazine dated February 23, 1971.

Ugur Mumcu, who was famous for praising those who made the coup d'etat of September 12 after the coup d'etat, described anarchist militants who fought with soldiers and the police as follows (Zeki Saral, Kalemlerin Ihaneti, Ankara, 1991): Young heroes fighting to establish an order where the Turkish people can live as human beings. (January 12, 1971 edition)

In the same period Bahri Savci wrote this commentary in the Cumhuriyet newspaper (1/1/70): Youth today in perhaps less suitable conditions feel the necessity of continuing the international war of liberation. They are giving a fight of self-defense against those who are after their lives to prevent them from succeeding.

The remains of the so-called 1968 generation who cherish and pronounce an incurable hostility towards Fethullah Gülen and Islam in general and who still shout, "Deniz, Yusuf, Ulas / Kurtulusa kadar savas (War until liberation!)" were raised in such circumstances.

Further Analysis

In order to know better those who cherish enmity towards Fethullah Gülen and make frequent complaints of what they call religious reaction, it would be suitable to quote from some writers. We're going to quote from the Cumhuriyet newspaper as a prime example from certain periods:

Nadir Nadi: According to religious fanatics, if you close the doors of religious schools a little, you're an infidel. According to intellectual fanatics, there's a Moscow bogy hidden behind every new idea. (1/17/60)

Nadir Nadi: I can't help but point out at every opportunity e policy of branding everyone (as a communist) with the excuse of not being a scapegoat for the Communists.

Ilhan Selcuk: Ataturk said, "The laws of revolution are above the current laws." In the Turkey of the 70's the villager's occupation of the land is revolutionary. But if the land is nationalized, occupation cannot be revolutionary in this kind of country. The activity must be scientifically evaluated and classified according to time and place. (7/14/70)

Nadir Nadi: Today we have regressed beyond the point where Ataturk began. This is true even though the factory chimneys are full of smoke and there are hundreds of thousands of workers in the factories. Since we have passed to a showpiece democracy, many more minarets than factory chimneys have risen in our country. The syndicate possibilities are restricted for the worker who wants to seek his rights. The rules of martial law are applied to those who want to protest this. Great efforts must be made to regain the revolutionary progress we've lost. (8/1/70)

Nadir Nadi: This is the result we've attained after 25 years of floundering. All the parties have been worn down. The event of May 27 that shone as a sweet light of hope was not able to escape from being the current showpiece of democracy. (8/5/70)

Cemil Sena: Of what good are courses of religion? These courses being in the curriculum of state schools belonging to a secular and democratic republican regime is incongruous with our Constitution and Ataturk's principles, and none of our serious intellectuals are aware of this. (8/10/70)

HifzI Veldet Velidedeoglu: Always the same story. Occasionally there are revolutions. Great wars come and go. A heroic leader saves the Turkish nation with great difficulty from the brink of death. The chain of imperialism, religious fanaticism and exploitation by foreign powers is broken. After the death of that hero, rights and freedom begin to work for the benefit of the old evil powers. Internal exploitation continues as it did in the past. External exploitation is added. The Constitution is not implemented. It's a vicious circle. (1/18/71)

Sevket Sureyya Aydemir. An offer... Let's at least make the call to prayer in Turkish. The majority doesn't mean everything. Sometimes the real decision-makers can be behind the curtain of the majority. For example, like Mustafa Kemal who entrusted the Turkish call to prayer to what is called the majority. (3/1/71)

Ilhan Selcuk: When looking at the partners to imperialism that have come from the voting boxes for the last 23 years, is it possible to claim that the people have cast their vote for their own salvation? The intellectual sees the event differently from the voter. Is this a mistake or fault? Of course, he will see it differently; if not, he's not an intellectual." (10/28/69)

These excerpts from the writings of leading intellectuals of the left who present themselves as true Kemalists, clearly show how they view the people and democracy.

How Sincere They Are In Their Claims

The evaluations made by the late Ilhan Darendelioglu and Ayhan Katircikara regarding the so-called revolutionary left, which were confirmed by Mina Urgan's memoirs in the book Bir Dinazorun Anilari ("The Memoirs of a Dinosaur") are extremely noteworthy:

Communist revolutionaries aren't democratic; they can lie; they like military intervention; they're aristocratic; they like the bohemian lifestyle; and they're generally journalists, members of the arts and academicians. They have a lot of friends outside the country. The poor don't support them.

It's not necessary to investigate very far. It's enough to look at the profile of the Cumhuriyet newspaper and its readers in order to understand that they are not sincere in their talk about poverty, wishes for equality, claims to defending the rights of workers and villagers, their opposition to oppression and misuse authority and their desire for a "clean" society. Regarding this matter, we're passing on information from Zeki Saral's book Alimlerin Ihaneti ("Betrayal of Writers") that displays the truth i front of our eyes (pp. 92-98): 1 fortress-like bank and the Cumhuriyet newspaper's advertising policy.

As you will remember well, some establishments with big capital made an advertising embargo against the Cumhuriyet newspaper prior to the events of September 12. An creased cost of raw materials, collective work agreements, and, again as you will remember, the boycott against the paper by individuals and organizations of the democratic, progressive, patriotic segment of that time because of the paper's publishing policy all put the employers at the Cumhuriyet newspaper in a financial squeeze.

After the coup of September 12th, the resignation of some of those working at the newspaper was requested or they were fired because the employers saw them as undesirable. The names of these are available. But some of these are working at banks, as public officials or at newspapers. Being undesirable personnel for the employers at the Cumhuriyet newspaper is not a matter pertaining only to the period of September 12th. Today the Cumhuriyet paper will fire those personnel it sees as undesirable. These people weren't fired because they didn't write the news or skipped over some news or wrote for money or didn't write for money. Let me give you an example from today. In Istanbul newspaper organizations made a legal march. One Cumhuriyet worker who carried a placard expressing his professional desire was fired because he was seen as undesirable.

Let's continue without dispersing the subject too much. A short time after the coup of September 12th, the big capital establishments raised the embargo they had made to secure unity and solidarity in the country. After September 12th among all the newspapers the Cumhuriyet had the greatest increase in profits from advertising. As you will remember, you saw more advertising than news. Now let's get to the point.

We all know that after September 12 Ugur Mumcu, who was well known for his documentation, relentlessly pursued those who abused their public offices. One of his files regarding abuse of office was entitled "Yuz Milyon Oradan, Yuz Milyon Buradan" ("A Hundred Million From Here, A Hundred Million From There"). Mumcu wrote that the new administration warned that they were going to pursue the abuse of office files and this was emphasized at a press conference arranged by representatives of the MGK (National Security Council). After pointing out that this abuse was not only related to politicians and mentioning the billions of TL owed by employers to the SSK (Social Security Administration), Mumcu opened the Cavusoglu-Kozanoglu firms' files.

When we read Mumcu's file, we see clearly how some people get rich by means of the state and how they act illegally using the tools of the state. Mumcu also wrote about other things regarding Cavusoglu-Kazanoglu. But some time later we found this interesting note at the end of one of Nazli Ilicak's columns in the Tercuman newspaper:

The Cumhuriyet newspaper constantly wrote articles against Hisarbank and the Kozanoglu-Cavusoglu companies and made heavy allegations against them. Finally they recently got two advertisements one after the other from Hisarbank in the amount of 1 million. Let's see what the paper's attitude is going to be after this. We truly hope that the integrity of journalism will be held above material interests. We're going to follow developments with care and curiosity. (12/9/80, Tercuman)

The Ad and Silence at the Cumhuriyet: Ilicak Was Right

This small note was really very interesting. After reading this note, I began to follow the Cumhuriyet paper with greater curiosity regarding this matter. Fearing that I might miss something, I asked another friend to follow the same pages. But we didn't miss anything. There were no more articles on this subject after the ads were given. As you recall, there was a space for advertising on both the right and left sides of the Cumhuriyet emblem. When we looked there we saw a clock with the writing "Hisarbank" on one side and the ad, "Tomorrow definitely come and gain at the Hisarbank," on the other side.

Let's take a brief glance at the advertising catalogue signed by Ayse Torun, Advertising Manager at the Cumhuriyet newspaper. This catalogue was sent to big companies for their advertising. On the cover of the brochure it's written:

The investment of 2 billion that you made in advertising in the Cumhuriyet has given a return of 168 billion.

In Advertising Manager Ayse Torun's writing entitled "Dear Administrator," we can see how a bridge is built between the reader and companies that will make advertising in the Cumhuriyet. She states: Today the Cumhuriyet has a 4.6% share of total sales of daily newspapers. In comparison, the Cumhuriyet's income from advertising is 9.2% of the total advertising income of these newspapers.

She continued:

We can comfortably say that circulation is not the most important measure in the choice of direction. The important thing is who comprises that circulation. How much does a reader of a newspaper spend? What furniture does he have in his house? What is he planning to buy in the near future? How frequently and for what reason does he change newspapers? The answers to all these questions are indications of whether or not a newspaper is on the right track.

The answers to these questions are in this brochure in your hands. You'll learn how much advertising different sectors give to the Cumhuriyet and how much interest our readers show in products we've advertised and how much they spent. We hope you'll find these results interesting.

Let's take a look at the writing under the title: In the last 2 years the number of Cumhuriyet readers who bought videos and colored TVs is 11,000. Approximately 22 billion was spent for these items in the last two years. The inclination of Cumhuriyet readers to buy certain items is much above the Turkish standards. Each is a good consumer.

In the last two years you made 149,557,390 TL worth of advertising for automatic washing machines. During this same period Cumhuriyet readers spent 32 billion for automatic washing machines. The number of readers changing washing machines is continually increasing. Which model washing machine our readers who want to change will choose is unknown.

Their choosing your brand will enable you to reach your sales goal faster. The best road to your goals is the Cumhuriyet. Reach them at the Cumhuriyet. In the last 2 years there has been 65,132,652 TL worth of dishwashing machine advertising in the Cumhuriyet. In the same period Cumhuriyet readers bought 14 billion TL worth of dishwashers.

In the last 2 years 731,537,902 TL worth of computer advertising was made in the Cumhuriyet. Our readers bought 18 billion TL worth of computers during the same period.

In the last two years 363,537,101 TL worth of automobile advertising was placed in the Cumhuriyet. During that period our readers spent 82 billion TL on cars.

According to the results from reader surveys in the Cumhuriyet newspaper and surveys made by various institutions, Advertising Manager Ayse Torun points out that the inclination of Cumhuriyet readers to buy is much above Turkish standards, and she says, "They're each a good consumer." We see how the "innocent" questions in the reader surveys are used. We don't forget that the Cumhuriyet newspaper is a business institution and that whoever pays the money calls the game.

This example must be enough to understand who is really in control of capitalism and capital in Turkey and who is supported by it, the real nature of communist activities in Turkey and why the Cumhuriyet supports them, the reason for the files on illegal operations... in short, who is using whom for what purpose and by what means. This must also be enough to see the real identity and character of those who support a socialist and commut (and therefore "just") administration and who appear to support equality and defend the poor? Again, this example gives clues to understand why these same circles are hostile to Fethullah Gülen in particular and Islam in general and why they want Turkey to continue in an atmosphere of confusion?

It should also be taken into consideration that some big holdings are also behind the fuss made about so-called reactionary movements. Recently one of the famous columnists was relating an incident that sheds light on the clamor of the media, which from time to time burns like a fire in a haystack, regarding reactionary activities. He was relating from a journalist who works for one of the big television channels now: In the middle of 1980s the general editor of the newspaper for which I was working gave me a file regarding the rising danger of reactionary activities in Turkey to see if it should be published or not. According to what was written in the file, it would appear that Muslims were in their final stages of preparation to overturn the current regime. If the relevant powers didn't take the necessary precautions, the country could be lost any time. However, I had long been somewhat familiar with Islam and the internal structure of Muslim communities. Almost all the information in the file was incorrect. Therefore, I did not publish it.

A number of months passed and I attended a meeting at the Izmir Efes Hotel. At the meeting a now deceased big businessman didn't pay any attention to me, although we knew each other closely. I said, "Sir, I hope it's for the best; today you haven't paid any attention to me." The famous businessman replied, "Why didn't you find the file I sent to the newspaper worthy of being published?" I was amazed at this reproach. I followed up on this issue and within three or four days learned the crux of the matter. This important businessman had been after a large amount of credit, but the late Ozal had opposed it. So in order to make blackmail, the businessman had had a file on reactionary activities prepared and sent it to the newspaper. This file, that I did not deem worthy of printing, was published for four consecutive days in another newspaper.

Are They Really Kemalists?

The segment whose identity and real nature are under consideration always give an image of being Kemalist and behind the army. But is this really the case? It's not necessary to make a lengthy investigation on this subject.

For example, Dogu Perincek claimed to speak for the General Staff during the February 28 period and didn't receive any serious denial of this from the General Staff. He pushed the start button for this period with the cover of his weekly, "Let the Republican Revolutionary Laws Be Implemented." However, Dogu Perincek spoke to the court on June 14, 1974 and stated that they were representatives of workers who were shot, of mercilessly exploited villagers, of the Turkish people who were murdered again and again, and of the working class and Turkish people whose desire for democracy and whose organization were forcefully suppressed by what he called the Kemalist dictatorship. Perincek added that that day they saw and lived at the point to where the society established by Kemalism had been led. According to him, Kemalism established a bourgeois society, sharpened international conflicts and carried out national suppression. [1] We can also give an example from Cetin Yetkin, who occasionally writes against Fethullah Gülen and Islamic developments in Turkey and arranged a symposium in 1997 for this purpose in Antalya, where he is currently teaching at the Akdeniz University, and Dogan Avcioglu, one of the powerful members of the Madanoglu junta established before March 12 and mentioned above

According to Cetin Yetkin, the Turks, who were the real founders of the Seljuki and Ottoman states, were exploited for centuries by the government. This was done in cooperation with Western imperialism in the decaying period of the Ottoman reign and continued during the republican era. Those who attempted revolution and rebelled against the Seljuks and the Ottomans carried a revolutionary spirit with economic motives. As published in a notice by the leader of of Haci Bektas order to the Alawis [here Yetkin is inciting separatist feelings based on different religious sects-L. E. Webb] in Anatolia during the years of the National Struggle, Anatolian Turks, or more correctly Turkmans, saved Turkey from Ottoman and Western imperialist exploitation by means of the National Struggle. [Yetkin gives the impression as if the Sunni Muslims, who constitute the great majority of Turkish people, and scholars had not actively participated in the National Struggle and that the Sunni soldiers weren't a majority in the army that fought on seven fronts and became a legend at Canakkale. However, because most of those who founded the Republic had been educated in Europe, they were alien to the people and unable to overcome class difference. Due to Ataturk's and Inönu's giving state blessings to those in their close circles, the people were unable to be saved from economic and class exploitation during the period of the Republic.

This is Cetin Yetkin's view, which fully derives from religious factionalism or sectarian sentiments, on Ataturk and the Republic. Again these sentences quoted from Falih Rifki Atay by Cetin Yetkin are enough to learn the views of Cetin Yetkin, who organizes the Turkish Army and Secularism panel discussions, on Ataturk and his reign:

If there was going to be some business meeting with the government and if a commission was going to be received for it, why allow the enemies of the regime to grab this profit instead of Ataturk himself or those close to him? Fascist intrigue first began in Ankara when extortion was made from those following up business. For these reasons, we can see people who had yet been considered poor, with two private cars, a mansion and yacht even during the early years of the Republic. [2]

Similarly, Dogan Avcioglu and his team were never Kemalist. Avcioglu's book, Turkiye'nin Duzeni ("The Order of Turkey") speaks for itself. He and people like him appear to praise Mustafa Kemal, but their praise is only a requirement of their ideological perspective. Supposedly, Mustafa Kemal made some reforms that cleared their way on the road to communist revolution with the aim of class dictatorship. According to Avcioglu, because administrative staffs passed into the hands of the Sublime Porte in Ataturk's period, the revolution was finished (Turkiye'nin Duzeni, p. 322). Ataturk's success remained as an upper strata revolution. He didn't succeed in the true social revolution that would change the big landowners, sheikhs, and feudal lords (p. 339). In Ataturk's time the economy was completely in the hands of Istanbul businessmen. Let alone making land reform, the big landholders were helped. By accumulating large tracts of land and farms himself, Ataturk proceeded in a direction opposite to land reform (pp. 340-356). Avcioglu says, It's obvious that in an environment where tribal chiefs, land owners and sheikhs who had participated in the war were decision makers, an imitation of the Soviet forms as a vehicle for proletarian dictatorship wouldn't make a difference socially (p. 358-9)- In his book Turkiye'nin Duzeni, Avcioglu explains at length how the group at the head of the government during Ataturk's time became rich and capitalistic. In fact, he ties Celal Bayar's being brought in as Premier in 1937 instead of Inönu to the letter's interfering with the Is Bankasi ("Business Bank"), among the founding partners or share-holders was Ataturk himself, without Ataturk's permission and to his wanting to give the job of building a planned paper factory to another private firm instead of Is Bankasi (pp. 387-393).

It is obvious that, when appropriate, these circles show Ataturk and Kemalism as the only standard and criterion for accepting or rejecting things. But they never hesitate to do the opposite at times:

During the Parliament's work on basic principles of the constitution after September 12th when the subject of Ataturk's nationalism was taken up, Nadir Nadi, after pointing out that he wasn't a legal expert but that he wanted to mention one or two points, made the following evaluation and objection:

Then, what is meant by Ataturk's nationalism? What is wanted to be gained by putting Ataturk's name in the Constitution? The name of our great hero Ataturk has been widely exploited and is still being exploited. (July, 27, 1982, Cumhuriyet)

Criticizing the article in the draft that reads, "The Turkish state... tied to Ataturk's nationalism... is a secular, social, legal state," Ilhan Selcuk remarked: Yesterday, taking up this subject, our chief journalist Nadir Nadi asked, "What are Ataturk's principles?... because I'm not an expert, I don't know. Is there any other constitution on earth that uses a person's name as a shield and puts forward vague judgements that pertain to that person but that bind individuals and organizations?"

After giving examples of other constitutions, Selcuk finishes his article like this: Aren't the youth we're going to raise according to Ataturk's principles going to ask us this? (July 28, 1982, Cumhuriyet)

Their Views and Plans for the Turkish Army

This leftist segment advocating coups definitely was not or is not a friend of the Turkish Army. Their friends are only some in the army who made coups like that of May 27 or joining juntas like in the March 9 period and forming similar juntas. In regard to putting their true thoughts forward, Dogu Perincek, for example, said the following one day before the elections held on October 20, 1991 (Towards 2000, October 27, 1991):

In the army the rank after general is marshal, but now it's bank and business manager! With a few exceptions all retired generals are sitting in big capital institutions. If they didn't secure the TUSIAD bosses' approval while they were still at the head of the army, who would put them at the head of a bank or company? The private sector is pinning on the fifth star. Let's speak openly. Today the parliament and government don't run Turkey. The government's basic decisions are made by a nucleus comprised of the MGK (National Security Council), Ozel Harp Dairesi (Special War Dept.) and MIT (National Intelligence Agency). The Gladio were publicly exposed in European countries. They're still in underground activity in Turkey. They have a finger in the events and violence that have followed one after the other.

Unless the secret and open role of militarism is ended in our country, we can't gain democracy and independence.

As shown in figures above, those making the May 27 coup retired close to 8,000 officers. They created friction in the army and, after the coup, groups like the National Unity Committee and Armed Forces Union were created in the army or their creation was necessitated. The juntas that developed before March 9 had plans for the army that could be called horrifying. If the coup was successful, they were going to immediately remove some commanders and put others in their place. How these plans were going to be carried out was later related by Sahap Atalay, who was directly involved in the plans:

The commanders not participating in the revolution were going to be rounded up. Because the privates would not revolt against their commanders, some parkas, guns and boots were going to be obtained and worn by the young members of the organization who would arrest the commanders.

Hifzi Kacar, a member of the Madanoglu junta, told a MIT agent who he thought was one of them:

In the studies we made in the army, we saw that the private soldiers were not willing to kill their commanders. For this reason we want 40 militant students from you. While the plan is being carried out, these students will be dressed as privates and we'll kill the commanders, each of which has been given to them as targets.

Claims Of Independence and the Realities

According to the last claims regarding Fethullah Gülen, supposedly he "was the implementor of moderate Islam put in place by America in order to destroy the Kemalist ideology of independence." However, they cannot produce even a single piece of evidence. Moreover, the revolutionary leftist group that made this claim, supposedly not leaving independence to anyone else, claim that independence was the basis of the May 27 revolt and events leading up to March 9. However, the evidence at hand says exactly the opposite:

For example, on January 21, 1972 The Daily Telegraph newspaper published in England gave a list of international events the CIA was involved in since 1947 under the headlines, "Where the CIA has worked." It wrote, "1960. Turkey. The CIA helped General Gursel's overturning of the Menderes government."

Later we see, "1971. Turkey. The contribution of CIA agents in anarchist activities and other operations forcing the government's resignation immediately after the army's attempt."

Philippe Agee, a former CIA agent, gave these explanations regarding the CIA's activities in Turkey:

There is no organization as expert on the subject of revolutions as the CIA. Whenever it wants, the CIA can create a great disorder in a country and finance it. This is the environment desirable for all military forces to make revolts. If necessary the CIA can pull down the government with strikes. The CIA has salaried men in all trades union. When needed, it uses them, creates confusion and helps a military take-over to be realized. The greatest supporter of fascism is the CIA. From time to time in Greece, Turkey, South Korea, the Philippines, Iran, Portugal and Indonesia the CIA has intervened and enabled fascism to move in. The CIA has played the lead role in the making of political persecution and torture." (Hurriyet, 10/13/1988) In his book Avrupa'da Guvenlik: Yunanistan ("Safety in Europe: Greece"), Spanish researcher Professor Miguel Angel Cabrera wrote the following regarding the May 27 coup d'etat: Until 1960 everything in Turkey went well for the USA. But when Washington learned that the Bayar-Menderes government planned to use American aid to break off from the USA and gain economic independence, they intervened. And Gursel carried out in a bloody way this revolution that was planned by the USA. The result of the revolt was that Turkey bought more weapons from the USA. (Hurriyet, 10/15 1988)

In his talk in the Milliyet newspaper dated December 5, 1970 Kromer, another CIA agent, accepted that by cutting back funds the USA indirectly played a role in the fall of the Menderes government. Again, when we look at the newspapers of that period, we see that the USA gave Turkey financial aid after May 27. The Cumhuriyet newspaper reported this. For example, in the 6/12/1960 dated paper (25 days after the coup) there's the news, "America is opening 400 million dollars of credit." In the same newspaper dated 7/5/1960 we see the news, "America is giving one billion TL worth of aid."

One who attended the March 9, 1971 junta meetings mentions some of the revolutionaries' secret relationships to journalist Nazli Ilicak, and he gives this interesting information about Orhan Kabibay, one of the leaders of the May 27 revolt:

Kabibay has suspicious connections. All of his friends looked at him doubtfully because he was able to weather the March 12 situation without so much as a hair on his head being disturbed.

There was a rumor circulating among us that while the 14 were in Europe, they made connections with the CIA. The USA gave them instructions to be involved in all activities in Turkey. Eventually, while everyone was spending months in jail, Irfan Solmazer was quickly released from a case that had 84 suspects of car theft. Isn't it strange that, learning beforehand that the matter of bombs and sabotage was going to come up, he got his passport and left the country, and today he is a rich man?

I understood how base the juntas were. I saw that they worked closely with a number of untrustworthy CIA agents. Then I believed sincerely in democracy.

As one who lived the events before and after March 12, Bulent Ecevit's observations on this subject are interesting:

The sinister role of agents who acted as provocateurs in the events that led to March 12 in Turkey is a wound in our government's life. (Ban's, 6/4/73)

Actually all these details are unnecessary. In order to know these people, it's enough to know Dogu Perincek. While he was an assistant at the university before March 12 he and Mihri Belli took over the Fikir Kulupleri Federasyonu ("Federation of Thought Clubs") and changed it into the DEVGENC ("Revolutionary Youth"). Later changing to a Mao line in a group formed around the weekly Aydinlik ("Daylight"), he played an influential role in the June 15-16, 1970 events that caused martial law to be declared in Istanbul. Involved in activities in factories and villages, he played a leading role in the May 1, 1977 meeting that turned into a catastrophe and that went down in history as Bloody May 1, and in the period of February 28.

He claimed that he spoke on behalf of the General Staff during the February 28 period, claiming that the army, which, according to him, had supported the right since 1940, had now entered the Republic's side and was implementing the Workers' Party program. Perincek had constantly been involved in the leftist movement and especially Maoist activities, and he had supported Greece on the Cyprus issue (Aydinlik, 2/17/1975, p. 54), China against Eastern Turkistan and the Serbs against Bosnia. According to strong evidence and the statements of members of the former Workers' Party that was closed and reopened under another name, this man's team performed the duty of provocation in the bloody May 1, 1977 event10; the Kahraman Maras events in 1978 and the burning of the Madimak hotel in Sivas in 1993. Although he always appears to be opposed to the Turkish Gladio, or as is called in Turkey, the Counter-Guerilla, and to MIT and America, the most secret reports of MIT and the Counter-Guerilla are published in the newspaper and magazines that Perincek publishes. Most of the people who have worked with him, including Mahir Kaynak, believe that he works on behalf of the CIA. A former State Minister of the Interior said that he works for the foreign services and that he was caught with members of the British intelligence service, and that when the time came they wee going to explain everything. Perincek never openly denied these claims. It's questionable whether this person and his team, who sometimes appear to support Maoist fractions, sometimes Alawis, sometimes the Kurds, sometimes the PKK and sometimes Kemalists, are supporting Turkish national interests at any particular period.

Regarding Perincek and his group, a person who worked for a long time in the upper echelons of MIT writes:

Hiram Bey [Hiram Abas worked as the secretary of MIT for some time and was shot to death in 1995 by "unidentified" persons.] believed that the power behind Fabrikatör (Fabricator: a used for Perincek and his group) was one of the exploitative countries that Savasman sold information to like the USA or England or one that had mutual interests with these countries like France, which has made a practice of interfering in Turkey's internal affairs since the decaying period of the Ottomans. According to Hiram Bey, Fabrikatör's mission in Turkey is this:

To eliminate factors that does not conform to the same line of thought and activity as theirs by various means that would put the organizer (whichever government he was working for) in a difficult situation in the government, the army, MIT and the Special War Department, and to increase their influence in key institutions.

By continuing activities that feed Turkey's political and economical instability, to prevent the country from gaining strength and following an independent policy outside of the organizer's scope of work.

It is queer enough that, on the one hand, someone who shows no continuity and consistency in his thoughts and behavior, and supports an ideology with the indispensable characteristic of internationalism, can be a freedom-loving, patriotic supporter of Turkey's full independence. On the other, another one can be accused of serving as the person who is implementing "moderate Islam" on behalf of another country for the purpose of destroying Kemalism, "the ideology of Turkish independence", although all the units of the state's intelligence services have made investigations and not found a single indication regarding that he has ever had any relations with a foreign state and received even a single penny in the activities he advises and encourages from any foreign country.

[1] Towards 2000 magazine, dated May 26, 1991.
[2] Turk Halk Hareketleri ve Devrimler ("Turkish Popular Movements and Revolutions"), 1980, pp. 480-481.