DISPARATE ALEVI GROUPS AGREE TURKISH GOVERNMENT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 000015 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SE E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/07/2017 TAGS: PGOV PHUM TU SUBJECT: DISPARATE ALEVI GROUPS AGREE TURKISH GOVERNMENT HASN'T DELIVERED BUT SEE NO ATTRACTIVE ALTERNATIVE REF: 05 ISTANBUL 1297 Classified By: Consul General Deborah K. Jones for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C) Summary: Alevi groups representing different religious ideologies shared with us views about their beliefs and disputes with the Government of Turkey. The Ehl-i-Beyt and Cem Foundations continue to seek legal recognition of their faith and proportional support from the Government, as well as equitable representation in mandatory religion courses. Their very different approaches to resolving these issues are reflective of their beliefs, in general. Both organizations are disappointed with the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) but see no credible alternative. Alevis, consequently, likely will have little influence as a community during this year's parliamentary elections. End summary. -------------- Alevi Fragmentation: Historical Context -------------- ¶2. (SBU) Generally speaking, Alevis are a religious group who like Shia Muslims are followers of the Prophet Mohammed's son in-law Ali but in most other respects have significantly different beliefs and practices. The Alevi Community in Turkey is far from cohesive and there is widespread disagreement both over what it means to be Alevi as well as the size of the community. Alevi "Cem" (pronounced "Jem") Foundation Chairman Izzetin Dogan claims there are over 25 million Alevis (approximately 35% of the Turkish population), while the Government asserts there are closer to 7 million (less than 10% of the population). As in most cases, the truth likely lies somewhere in between and academics assess the community to stand at approximately 19 million members (27% of the population). Alevi religious identity differs as well, with many considering themselves to be Alevi-only, some Alevi-Muslim and others simply Muslim. ¶3. (SBU) Fermani Altun, President of the Alevi World "Ehl-i-Beyt" Foundation, told us his organization is unique because it does not recognize differences between sects in Islam. In fact, the 10-year old Foundation includes a small proportion of Sunnis among its 150 different associations in 80 countries, including the United States. Altun described Ehl-i-Beyt's main goal as, "bring(ing) everyone together under an umbrella of common dialogue" and stressed the Foundation supports women's rights and rejects a strict adherence to Sharia Law, as well as "the militant practice of Islam." ¶4. (SBU) Namik Sofuoglu, Cem Foundation board member and head of its legal committee, explained that Alevism was the dominant interpretation of Islam in Anatolia under the Ottoman Empire until the early 16th century. The shift in favor of Sunni Islam occurred after the Ottomans conquered Egypt and transferred the caliphate and thousands of Sunni lecturers to Istanbul. According to Sofuoglu, Alevis have been in dispute with the State ever since and for centuries were forced to practice their faith in secrecy in small rural villages. He explained that economic growth in the 1950s encouraged many Alevis to move to the cities where they found safety in numbers and began to express their religious views more openly. Sofuoglu attributes today's divisions within the Alevi community to the legacy of having to practice their faith secretly in separate communities for centuries. -------------- Alevi Disputes: Political Context -------------- ¶5. (SBU) Despite these divisions, Alevis agree on several points of contention with the Government. Altun suggested there was no real secularism in Turkey, arguing that the State's involvement in religious affairs had led to discrimination; either the State should not be involved at all or it should address all religions and treat them equally. Similarly, Sofuoglu lamented that the Directorate of Religious Affairs' (Diyanet) original role as coordinator of religious affairs had evolved into one of directing religious services. He asserted that the Diyanet's public services budget of over USD 1 billion went only for the benefit of Sunnis. Despite representing a quarter of the population, he argued, Alevis receive no government support for building, maintaining or operating cem evis (places of gathering/worship). ¶6. (SBU) Alevis also oppose the required religion courses in ISTANBUL 00000015 002.2 OF 003 secondary schools. Altun, for example, stated that religious education should be left to religious groups outside of the school system as the current courses reflect a Sunni bias. Press widely reported this week the Government's release of the new religion course curriculum, which was expected to include additional information about Alevism, and stated that new textbooks do not make any reference to Alevism by name. Altun, who had previous knowledge of the changes, called them inadequate. Not only was the information "very basic" but in some cases it was wrong or even insulting, he claimed. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is currently hearing a case brought by Alevi parents who object to their son attending Sunni-focused religion courses. Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims are not required to attend these courses. The vast majority of Turks are Sunni Muslim. Shia Muslims and Alevis are required to attend. Though Altun and Sofuoglu would rather see Turkey resolve its own problems, they feel an ECHR decision in the Alevi child's favor could establish an important precedent. At the same time, both Altun and Sofuoglu were fervent in their support for Turkey's EU accession. "The EU is consistent with Ehl-i-Beyt's philosophy of brotherhood," said Altun. He believed the associated reform process will help resolve Alevi issues. Sofuoglu told us the Cem Foundation "unconditionally supports EU accession." ¶7. (C) Alevis are also united in their disappointment with the Islamist AKP government. Altun explained that, because Ehl-i-Beyt is open to everyone, the Foundation has a dialogue with AKP--indeed, at least one AKP card-carrying Foundation member was present at our meeting--but that any allegiance to the party was a result of good personal relations with party members and not due to Alevi identity. The current administration, said Altun, has "good talk but no action" and has proven to be just as indifferent to its problems as its predecessors. ¶8. (C) Meanwhile, Sofuoglu recounted that, prior to its 2002 election victory, the AKP had presented itself to Alevis as a proponent of religious freedom; unfortunately, all contact stopped after the election. Frustrated, the Cem Foundation submitted two petitions to the Government in June 2005 (reftel). The first, delivered to the Prime Minister's office, requested that Alevi worship services be treated as public services and consequently granted the same type of support that Sunnis enjoy, including a proportionate distribution of Diyanet funding. The second petition, directed to the Ministry of Education, requested that religion courses in secondary schools "give enough space to Alevi principles." Sofuoglu said the Government responded to both petitions by claiming it was acting in accordance with the Constitution. As a result, the Foundation filed cases against both the Prime Ministry and the Ministry of Education. Regarding the latter, Sofuoglu told us a hearing is scheduled on February 21 at the 10th Administrative Court in Ankara. No hearing has yet been scheduled regarding the case against the Prime Ministry. ¶9. (C) Despite widespread Alevi disappointment with perceived AKP inaction, our interlocutors suggest no other party is positioned to capitalize and earn consensus support from the community during this year's parliamentary elections. Altun stated that the Alevis' traditional political allegiance to leftist parties is no longer predictable because of significant changes that occurred in Turkish domestic politics during the 1990s. He explained that the traditional divisions between left and right don't exist anymore and that Alevis vote for whichever party is most representative of their general interests. Sofuoglu told us that for the first time a party -- the Motherland Party (ANAP) -- is planning to include support for Alevis in its political platform; he cautioned, however, that ANAP sincerity would be gauged by the number of Alevi candidates represented in its tickets. ¶10. (C) Comment: Though the Cem and Ehl-i-Beyt Foundations share similar complaints against the Government, their strategies for resolving related disputes are notably different. Ehl-i-Beyt, with its big tent approach to membership, takes an equally collaborative approach to conflict resolution, stressing the importance of educated dialogue. With that goal in mind, the Foundation is opening an Istanbul-based Academy in April where students can learn about Alevi history and faith. The Cem Foundation on the other hand, feels it has no choice but to pursue resolutions through the courts and is considering a class action law suit against the government should the latter not comply with an awaited ruling in the Alevis' favor in the suit against the Ministry of Education. In the event the court rules against ISTANBUL 00000015 003 OF 003 it, the Foundation is likely to take the case to the ECHR. ¶11. (C) Comment (continued): Speaking off the record, Sofuoglu suggested the AKP is pressuring the courts to delay a hearing on the Cem Foundation's case against the Prime Ministry until after this year's parliamentary elections. Sofuoglu assesses that the AKP believes a hearing, no matter the outcome, will have negative ramifications on AKP's election performance. Either the Government will lose the case with its culpability affirmed publicly or it will win, resulting in increased Alevi public pressure, i.e. referral of the case to the ECHR or a lawsuit for damages. Sofuoglu may be correct in stating that AKP has nothing to gain from a decision but he is likely too optimistic in believing the public at large is so sympathetic to Alevi issues that the court decision could affect the outcome of the election. In addition, despite this week's headlines regarding numerous political parties' courting the Alevi vote, the fragmentation within the community and the lack of genuine commitment by any party to resolve associated issues means Alevis are not likely to rally behind any one particular party ticket. End Comment. JONES