Hizmet movement breaks with Erdogan's wider support base

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan may have won Turkey’s first direct presidential election on Sunday in a landslide, but his win came largely without the support of the Hizmet movement.

From 2002 up until 2013, Hizmet - a Sufi social movement that has been active in the education, trade and civil society sectors for many decades – threw its support behind Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP).

A relationship of mutual benefit allowed for this relationship to thrive; both the group and the AKP felt empowered by each other’s support.

“In 2002, Erdogan entered into an alliance with the liberals and Hizmet – who had staff in the state since the 1980’s and eventually gained control of the judiciary by 2010 - against the military tutelage and the Kemalist bureaucracy. Hizmet grew under AKP, opening new schools and universities,” said Yildiray Ogur, columnist at Turkiye Newspaper.

But in 2013, corruption allegations against the premier and his inner circle posed by Hizmet leader Fethullah Gulen and his followers caused a huge rift between the two sides. The Prime Minister denied the allegations and blamed the former ally turned rival, Fethullah Gulen for launching a plot against him.

A power struggle that started in 2010 and several points of disagreement between AKP and Hizmet – including negotiations with the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) and political dialogue to resolve the Kurdish problem, broke the Hizmet-AKP alliance. Gulenist police launched an arrest campaign against AKP members while Erdogan also changed his position towards Hizmet, Ogur told MEE.

Though Erdogan has maintained a wide base of support among religiously conservative and middle-income voters particularly in central Turkey and in Istanbul’s poorer districts, for Hizmet supporters, things had dramatically changed.

“Although before around 80 percent of the movement voted for AKP, now the majority does not support Erdogan,” said Ismail Sezgin, a member of Hizmet and a PhD candidate at Leeds Metropolitan University whose research focuses on Gulen and his teachings.

Hizmet supporters and observers say votes went to Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, candidate of the joint secular-nationalist opposition parties’ coalition. At this substantial moment in Turkey’s national history, observers ask why and how the group’s split with AKP will impact their future.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vanquished his two rivals –Ihsanoglu and Salahettin Demirtas - in the elections to become the new Turkish president. Erdogan, who has ruled Turkey as premier since 2003 - a period in which he has transformed the country with modernisation projects but also faced accusations of a gradual Islamisation and an erosion of civil rights - promised to expand the post with new powers.

Ihsanoglu instead

“Do not vote for the one who is disloyal towards what he has been entrusted with...do not vote for the one who persecutes; do not vote for the one who does not recognise the law; do not vote for the one who puts himself above the law, said Gulen in a recording published on 6 August.

Although the group leader told his followers in the address to vote for any of the three candidates, he subtly hinted that they should not to elect Prime Minister Erdogan.

“While there has been no signalling from movement leaders on who to vote for, the majority of Hizmet voted for Ihsanoglu because Erdogan has reiterated that he will continue a witch hunt against Hizmet,” said Sezgin.

Erdogan has described the movement as a parallel state, sacking hundreds of police and prosecutors linked to Gulen and vowing to close down the movement’s network of schools across the country.

“Hizmet’s vote followed the same trend as that of the previous election [30 March]; they are aligned with the CHP-MHP coalition, while the majority of conservative religious groups supported AK party and its candidate Erdogan,” said Ahmet Uysal, sociology scholar at the Middle Eastern Studies Institute of Marmara University.

As predicted by polls, Erdogan won 52 percent of votes to take Ankara's Cankaya presidential palace, with his main opposition rival Ihsanoglu lagging far behind in second place at 37 percent. Turkey’s religious, conservative communities – excluding Hizmet - formed the majority of Erdogan’s support base.

“The opposition parties thought that with Ihsanoglu as their candidate, they could attract Erdogan’s voters. He is religious and knows Arabic; had he been introduced by Erdogan, he would have been welcomed by AKP supporters,” said Sezgin.

“The Hizmet movement shares the same social support base that belongs to Erdogan. Therefore, other than the direct Hizmet members - constituting approximately 1% of the public - the wider religious, conservative base voted for Erdogan,” said Taha Ozhan, president of SETA Foundation, a think-tank for political, economic and social research.

Some Gulen followers believe that Ihsanoglu bares the same values that form the essence of the movement's foundational principles.

“Hizmet holds beliefs that resonated with Ihsanoglu, for example his tolerance. He would not have persecuted any sector of the society, he would have respect people’s rights and the law and would have valued dialogue,” said Sezgin.

“The group believes in an inner Sufi understanding of Islam and working in the public, civil sector. It does not adopt the political Islamism of AKP," said Adnan Aslan, a member of Hizmet and Dean of the Humanities Department at Suleyman Sah University. "Ihsanoglu would have united people and reduced the social divide; both religious and secular people can find something in him." 

Ihsanoglu – an intellectual and former head of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) - based his campaign on the idea of preserving the status-quo and emphasising the parliamentary structure of the current regime. Some analysts say this is an important reason behind Hizmet’s support for him.

“Ihsanoglu promised a more diplomatic and calmer approach; he might have been able to tone down the deep polarisation in society," said Sezgin. "At the same time, while Erdogan is signalling a strong presidential system, Ihsanoglu or Demirtas would have maintained the balance.” 

Erdogan emphasise writing a brand new constitution – the 1982 constitution, written in a post-coup environment, does not meet current societal demands – which should guarantee individual rights and freedoms but also establish a presidential-style system such as France and the US. Erdogan’s opponents accuse him of seeking to establish an autocracy and of undermining the secular legacy of Turkey's founding father Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who based the modern state after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire on a strict separation between religion and politics.

“It is probable that [following Erdogan’s election] there will be a significant redistribution of power between the presidency, the prime minister’s office and the parliament, impacting Turkey’s separation of powers and altering the dynamics of Turkey’s executive decision-making process,” said Taptuk Emre Erkoc, director of the Turkey Institute and visiting fellow of political science at Queen Mary University.

Many Gulen Movement members, although not highly convinced with Ihsanoglu as President, believed that Abdullah Gul has no viable substitute among the two other presidential candidates.

Hizmet member Mustafa, a 25-year-old sociology MA student at Istanbul Sehir University believes the majority of the group will vote for Ihsanoglu because there is no one else to vote for.

“I voted for Ihsanoglu, although I know little about him and do not really support him. There is no alternative because the prime minister is not the right person for Turkey,” said Mustafa.

“In previous elections - from 2007 to 2011- I always voted for AKP, but Erdogan now blames the movement and uses problematic language; I had to show my opposition to him,” he added.

A graduate of Fatih College, one of the first Hizmet-run schools, Mustafa volunteers his free time helping high school students from within the group with their university applications.

One of the students Mustafa tutored, 21-year-old Sadik Yildiz is a graduate of biological sciences engineering at Sabanci University, and is due to commence his PhD at Harvard University in September. Yildiz also voted for Ihsanoglu although he says a small number of his friends who belong to a Kurdish background, voted for Demirtas.

“I didn’t have a choice. The government’s persecution against the movement forced me to vote against it.”

The third candidate Demirtas belongs to Turkey's Kurdish minority. Although he showed considerable dynamism and charisma, he was considered successful for mustering nearly 9 percent of the vote. Demirtas is seen by many Turks as representative of an ethnic minority, but not of the whole of Turkey.

Despite the tension and severed ties between Gulen and Erdogan, some group members maintain their loyalty to Erdogan. 

"Although I am angry at him, I will voted for Erdogan because I believe in him more than the others," said Nur Hilal, a 28-year-old physics graduate, mother and active member of the group.

"Erdogan did so many good things and Hizmet actually continues to support him until now. Hizmet never backed any political parties until AKP was established."

Future of Hizmet

As the joint candidate of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), it was expected that their constituencies would vote for Ihsanoglu. However, polls predicted a swing from MHP supporters towards Erdogan while some CHP voters seemed to support Demirtas.

“This poll will end the tutelage of the power centre established in the 1960s, and also uncovers the opposition parties’ huge leadership crisis. The main opposition parties belong to the 20th century; they can't address 2014 politics,” Ozhan told MEE.

“Ihsanoglu had no chance at winning. He was merely the candidate of parties trying not to lose the vote for the ninth time. And yet, they lost again,” added Ozhan.

Hizmet’s endorsement of an unsuccessful candidate and its shift away from its wider social group, reflects challenging times for Hizmet, members and analysts say. 

“The movement is more disappointed with the public; they were expecting much more support from them against the government. They [Hizmet] thought that they were close to the people, part of the grassroots and not an elitist group," said Yildiz. "They are realising that the people don’t know or trust us.” 

“Realistically, Hizmet will suffer from this struggle and will lose its popular base to other traditional religious movements such as the Sufi groups and other Rasail Nur groups,” said Uysal.

But while some envision the movement becoming increasingly ostracised after the elections, others say that even though Hizmet is experiencing difficult times, it has the potential to overcome such obstacles.

“Hizmet has a proven track record of finding solutions and alternatives when facing oppression from the state apparatus. Hizmet also has a global dimension that will make it very difficult for the government to isolate it," said Erkoc. "Local isolation may actually result in a globally more integrated movement."