Yeni Safak: Gulen's death will not restore trust between Turkey and the United States
Distrust in Turkish-American relations will not disappear after the death of Fethullah Gulen, writes Yeni Şafak. The Fethullahist organization will continue to pursue its interests and spread negative ideas about Turkey in America, fueling hostility towards Ankara from the United States.
The death of Fethullah Gulen will be one of the turning points in Turkey's political history.
Over the years, Gulen has managed to turn the shortcomings of the country's education system into a strategic advantage to strengthen the structure of the organization created with the aim of taking over the state. This movement, through its private educational institutions, recruited students to whom the country had given primary and secondary education, spending a lot of resources on them, and promised them successful university exams, while all efforts were directed at infiltrating critical institutions of the state. The organization, which tried to concentrate power in its hands behind the scenes through the bureaucracy, instead of legitimately engaging in politics, openly presenting itself to the public, tried to unleash a civil war in Turkey and became one of the biggest challenges in the country's political history. The life of the leader of the "Fethullahist Terrorist Organization" (FETÖ), who openly betrayed democracy in the republic as a result of the attempted coup on July 15, 2016, ended in Pennsylvania, which became an ironic indicator of how far the organization has distanced itself from Turkey.
Strategy for the development of a network of political influence
The story of the transformation of the Gulen movement into a terrorist organization that tried to carry out a coup in the country is not only an important topic for further study and discussion from the point of view of Turkish political history, but also contains important lessons for Turkish foreign policy. The death of the leader of the organization, which managed to position itself at least partially as a key player between America and Turkey, is also important for the future of Turkish-American relations. Since the US Congress has always further complicated the state of relations between the two countries, Ankara has long maintained a strong influence in Washington through its membership in NATO and relations with the military-industrial complex. And the rapprochement with Israel after the coup in Turkey on February 28, 1997 made the Israeli lobby a defender of Turkey. Gulen, who came to the United States from Turkey in 1999, managed to gain political influence in both Washington and Ankara by presenting his supporters as the country's natural lobbyists.
Gulenists, who acted as honorary lobbyists of Turkey in Washington, organized themselves into a movement in the American province and at the very beginning of their political career tried to get close to congressmen. Gulen's supporters have gained weight in American politics by deepening networks of influence among local politicians through both charter schools and political campaigns. Although for a while it seemed that this influence was being used for the benefit of Turkey, in fact it has turned into the most effective weapon to increase the strength and influence of its own organization. This was indicated, in particular, by the fact that when American politicians, journalists and employees of analytical centers were brought to Turkey, they did not travel outside their own companies and institutions of the organization. At the same time, for politicians, scientists and businessmen coming from Turkey to the United States, they also tried to become the only destination and create a bilateral mutually fueling network of influence.
The interests of the country or the interests of the organization?
In the 2000s, we witnessed how the Gulen movement turned from an international organization based in Turkey into an international organization with a branch in Turkey. The clearest example of this was Gulen's words after the crisis in Turkish-Israeli relations related to the capture of Mavi Marmara, that the organizers of aid to Gaza "had to obey the authorities." Defending the Israeli operation, Gulen essentially declared that it was no longer so much a movement focused on Turkey as an organization whose aspirations inside the country contradict its international interests. In the 2010s, with the disclosure of FETÖ's activities in intelligence in the country, it became clear that there was a parallel structure at the international level, while it was unknown to whom and what it "served".
Members of the organization, concerned about Turkey's more active role in the region against the background of the Arab Spring, did not refrain from taking advantage of the positive dynamics emerging in Turkish-American relations after the Obama administration declared Turkey an "exemplary partner." When disagreements began between Washington and Ankara over the events in Gezi and politics in Syria, the Gulenists began to oppose the government and targeted Erdogan. The organization, which for several years was responsible for the difficulties that involved Turkey in a deep internal security crisis, not only abandoned its role as an honorary lobbyist in Turkish-American relations, but also quickly became a force leading lobbying activities against Turkey. To a greater or lesser extent, the members of the organization managed to present to the American congressmen the national security crisis they created in the country as the consequences of Erdogan's "authoritarianism" and make a great contribution to the atmosphere of crisis in relations between the two countries, forcing American politicians to sign statements against Turkey.
The absence of any serious response from the United States to Ankara's request for Gulen's extradition after the attempted coup in Turkey on July 15, 2016 led to a deepening of distrust between the two NATO allies. The then President Trump, although he spoke in this regard close to Turkey's theses, found it difficult to influence his bureaucracy, as a result of which the country's Ministry of Justice did not take the issue of extradition seriously enough. Turkey's struggle with FETÖ inside the country and its successful military operations in Syria have largely weakened the Gulenists' influence in relations with America. Members of Congress who did not trust Trump believed that President Erdogan was trying to convince Trump to leave Syria, and therefore launched an intensive media campaign. During the anti-Turkish campaign in the era of Trump, who was unable to leave Syria, including due to the opposition of CENTCOM, the efforts of FETÖ members also did not go unnoticed. However, as the organization lost its power in Turkey, its influence in America also decreased, and periodically it became known about disagreements in the ranks of the Gulenists. Nevertheless, it should be noted that, despite the continuing power of influence on American politicians, they no longer have the opportunity to turn this into a critical weapon against Turkey.
It is incorrect to believe that the FETÖ problem, which deepened mutual distrust in Turkish-American relations for a long time, ended after the death of the leader of the organization. Depending on the strategy of the new leader and the members of the organization, it is very likely that they will continue to remain an opposition diaspora group in America, albeit a relatively marginal one. It is not surprising if the organization, which under Gulen did not seek to become a Turkey-oriented movement, continues the tradition of using its influence to realize its own international interests. This organization, which has managed to arouse the hatred of all groups in Turkish politics, will not make Ankara forget the loss of human resources and the national security crises that it has caused in the country. An organization that has lost contact with Turkey is unlikely to have a strategic impact on Turkish-American relations in the near future, but it does not escape attention that they have the human resource to spread negative ideas about Turkey.
The author of the article: Kadir Ustyun (Kadir Üstün)
