MOSQUE-STATE RELATIONS: ISTANBUL DEBATES ROLE OF

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ISTANBUL 000377

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/04/2015
TAGS: PGOV PREL KISL TU
SUBJECT: MOSQUE-STATE RELATIONS: ISTANBUL DEBATES ROLE OF
RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS DIRECTORATE

REF: CONSUL-GENERAL DAVID ARNETT FOR REASONS 1.4 (B&D)


1. (u) Subject: A new report on the relationship among
religion, state, and society by TESEV, a prominent
establishment Turkish think tank, has stimulated a lively
discussion among Istanbul academic and media circles on the
role and future of Turkey's Religious Affairs Directorate
(Diyanet). TESEV's proposals may give added stimulus to
discussions here on a question long debated in Anatolia:
whether Turkey's form of secularism, in which all mosques are
controlled by the state and religious workers are state
employees, is appropriate for this aspiring EU candidate.
End Summary.


2. (u) On February 22, the Turkey Economic and Social Studies
Foundation (TESEV) held a press conference announcing the
publication of a new report on religion in Turkey entitled
"Can There Be a Civil, Transparent, and Democratic Religious
Affairs Directorate?" On February 25, TESEV hosted a
follow-up conference in Istanbul to launch discussion of
their new report based on extensive research and interviews
in Turkey and among the Turkish communities in Germany. The
President of the Diyanet (Turkey's Religious Affairs
Directorate),Ali Bardakoglu, two Diyanet Vice Presidents,
and a former Diyanet President participated in the conference
along with a broad spectrum of academic experts and
representatives from selected religious groups.


3. (u) The TESEV report (http://www.tesev.org.tr/
projeler rcakir ibozan 2005.php) written by Rusen Cakir and
Irfan Bozan lays out the general debate on the relationship
among mosque, state, and society and criticizes the Diyanet
on a number of issues. TESEV concludes that, although
flawed, the solution lies not in abolishing the Diyanet (as
some advocate),but in strengthening it and making it more
autonomous. (Embassy Comment: TESEV has had minimal contacts
with the debate on Islam and Islamic elements in Turkish
society. Cakir and Bozan, for their part, are not well
regarded among Islamic scholars, experts, and members of
brotherhoods/lodges. End Comment.) Notable findings and
recommendations of the report include:

- The Diyanet should correct its failure to provide adequate
services to devout women and women's groups, as well as
ensure greater professional opportunities for female
religious workers;

- The Diyanet should recognize Alevis as a distinct religious
group (note: Alevis are heterodox Muslims who make up a
significant minority of Turkey's population),incorporate
Alevi representation in the organization, and launch an
expanded dialog with all of the various Alevi groups;

- The Diyanet must make its funding, revenue collection, and
activities (including those of its associated foundations)
more transparent;

- The Diyanet lacks sufficient personnel to staff over 23,000
positions; a situation which has left 10,000 mosques without
Diyanet personnel;

- Legalizing the de facto presence of Turkey's Islamic
brotherhoods (tarikats) and instituting a system of state
controls over their operations should be discussed;

- The Diyanet should engage in a continuous dialog with
Turkey's non-Muslim minorities (i.e., Orthodox Christians and
Jews) and provide them with any necessary financial and moral
support;

- Diyanet personnel dispatched to Europe should limit
themselves to religious work and receive more training,
especially language. Ultimately, young Turks living in those
countries should be hired and trained instead. (Note: The
Diyanet currently sends about 1200 imams or religious workers
to service the Turkish communities in Germany, Belgium, the
Netherlands and other countries).


4. (u) In his remarks at the TESEV conference, Diyanet
President Ali Bardakoglu attempted to defend the Diyanet
against the well demonstrated assessment that it represents
only Turkey's majority Hanefi Sunni Muslims. Diyanet Vice
President Mehmet Gormez admitted that the Diyanet itself is
considering the possibility of autonomy. At the same time he
repeatedly took the floor to correct errors in the report,
and on the way back to Ankara told a close Embassy contact
that neither the TESEV nor the authors know what they are
talking about. Other speakers touched on many of the issues
raised in the TESEV report and leveled criticism at the
Diyanet ranging from its failure to provide basic religious
services to its very existence as inconsistent with
secularism. Conference participants seemed to agree that the
EU reform process would force Turkey to address this issue
and that simply abolishing the Diyanet is not a practical
option. Most of the discussion, therefore, focused on how
the Diyanet should be reformed.


5. (u) The report, combined with recent recommendations from
a European Council committee that Turkey eliminate religion
from its identity cards and drop the compulsory requirement
to take religion classes in school, has already sparked an
intellectual and political debate in Istanbul on the subject.
Columnists have weighed in with their views (e.g., Yeni
Safak, Ahmet Tasgetiren, February 25; Zaman, Sahin Alpay,
March 3).


6. (c) Comment: TESEV's report and conference may stimulate
more debate among Istanbul academic and media circles, which
have lagged far behind the rest of the country in questioning
the Diyanet and its relation to Islamic thought and practice.
The future of the Diyanet is central to the question of the
relationship between Islam, the state, and society. Although
near-term consensus is unlikely, TESEV has made an important
contribution by placing the issue squarely in the public
domain and stimulating an open debate. TESEV Chairman Can
Paker told poloff that he was pleased with the cooperation
they received from the Diyanet in preparing the report.
Participation in the conference and comments by senior
Diyanet officials, moreover, suggest that they themselves are
preparing for change. Co-author of the report Irfan Bozan
told poloff most agree that the current system has failed in
its basic purpose - to control religion in Turkey. What
remains to be seen is what will be done about it. We will
continue to track the debate and government statements or
proposals to assess whether Turkey is moving in the direction
of securing religious freedom and equal treatment for all
groups or whether reforms are used to advance the interests
and influence of some vis-a-vis others.
ARNETT