Turkish Forum

Category: Austria

  • Europe: Salafism, the Catholic Church and Hypocrisy: How Political Islam Is Undermining Europe with the Help of the Vatican

    Europe: Salafism, the Catholic Church and Hypocrisy: How Political Islam Is Undermining Europe with the Help of the Vatican

    Why does the Turkish Cultural Community (TKG) even exist in Austria? And why do its members contribute so much to our society on a voluntary basis? What does all this have to do with religion, politics, and our society?

    The Turkish Cultural Community is a critical and independent think tank that is committed to secular, humanistic, and enlightened values. The TKG organizes small discussion groups with selected guests, provides advice and mediation to political decision-makers and companies, and publishes numerous articles on socially and politically relevant topics related to Europe, Turkey, the Middle East, and Austria.

    At the heart of the TKG’s activities lies the connection between people, not their background, religion, or ethnicity. Its foundation rests on enlightenment values, the legacy of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, and the progressive Islamic theology of thinkers such as Dr. Yaşar Nuri Öztürk and many others.

    I am honored to be a participating and advisory member of the TKG – to build bridges, to provide impulses for social discourse, to raise awareness of problems, and to contribute to possible solutions. Like all other members, I do this work voluntarily, driven by the idea and metaphor famously expressed by Immanuel Kant:

    To seek to understand “things in themselves.”
    A Dangerous Shift: Salafism and Political Islam

    The YouTube documentary “Turkey is Redrawing the Middle East” raises explosive questions. Particularly relevant is its focus on Salafism and Wahhabism—religio-political ideologies that originated in part in Qatar, were embraced by the AKP government in Turkey, and are now gaining increasing influence in Europe.

    Islam as a Tool – The Political Abuse of Religion

    What is being imported into Europe under the guise of “freedom of religion” and “equality with the Catholic Church” is, in reality, an ideological campaign against secularism. Religious movements, backed by powerful states like Qatar and Turkey, are conducting targeted influence operations. They masquerade as religious communities or mosque associations but operate de facto as politically motivated parallel structures—often with mafia-like characteristics.

    In countries like Austria, these organizations now enjoy privileges that make them a “state within the state.” This is a dangerous development, threatening not only social cohesion, but also the foundations of liberal democratic constitutionalism.

    The Silence of the Churches – A Quiet Pact?

    The role of the Catholic Church and the Vatican is particularly troubling. According to various observations, they either ignore criticism of these developments or actively resist it—through media, networks, and political allies. Their support for organizations like IHH and other regressive actors often comes under the cover of tolerance and religious freedom.

    But where does this understanding of “tolerance” lead us?

    The Roots of Reason – and the Forgotten Enlightenment


    The philosopher Immanuel Kant called for enlightenment with his famous maxim:

    “Have the courage to use your own reason!”


    A message more relevant today than ever. The quote itself goes back to the Roman poet Horace:


    “Well begun is half done. Dare to be wise – begin!”


    But where should we begin? In a time when critical voices are systematically discredited, those who encourage reflection are often labeled troublemakers. And yet, without criticism, without enlightenment, without the courage to confront the truth, we risk falling into societal regression.

    Is Europe Retreating?

    Has Europe really learned from its religious wars of the 17th century? Or has it not?

    In 2025, we are witnessing a dangerous relapse—a combination of naivety, political correctness, and strategic hypocrisy. The liberal-secular order is not only being attacked from outside, but increasingly from within.

    Reactionary movements rooted in Salafism, jihadism, and sectarian groups like the Naqshbandi-Halidi sects and their offshoots are already deeply entrenched on European soil—financially well-endowed, strategically connected, and ideologically rigid.

    The West’s Co-responsibility

    But the blame does not lie solely with actors from the Middle East. The West bears responsibility as well—through decades of ambivalence, by tolerating or even supporting radical groups, whether for geopolitical calculation or economic opportunism.

    Cooperation with Salafist networks, IS-linked factions, or the HTS Golani group (formerly the Al-Nusra terror organization) raises pressing questions that governments in the U.S. and Europe must confront.

    Final Thought: Speak Up – or Lose It All

    IF WE FAIL TO DEFEND OUR DEMOCRATIC, SECULAR VALUES TODAY, WE RISK LOSING THEM PIECE BY PIECE.

    Now is the time to stop being silent out of fear or false tolerance—and to start acting with clear minds and open eyes.

  • Austria. Europe’s Asylum Policy: A Trojan Horse We Refuse to Confront

    Austria. Europe’s Asylum Policy: A Trojan Horse We Refuse to Confront

    Week after week, Europe is shaken by jihadist-inspired attacks or narrowly averted plots. The reactions from political leaders have become depressingly predictable: condolences for the victims, promises of stricter laws, faster deportations, and tougher rules. These statements sound more like rehearsed rituals than serious solutions – and they expose how disoriented and helpless European politics has become in addressing this crisis.

    The uncomfortable truth is that Europe must brace itself for more attacks. Terrorist organizations have no shortage of recruits. Across many Muslim-majority countries, millions of young men are trapped in hopelessness, exposed to an ideology of contempt, and radicalized against Western societies. This reservoir of future extremists is practically limitless.

    What makes the situation worse is Europe’s inability – or unwillingness – to control its own borders effectively. Under the noble banner of humanitarianism and the Geneva Refugee Convention, national laws are often bypassed in practice. Anyone who reaches European soil and utters the word “asylum” is, in most cases, almost impossible to send back – regardless of whether they are truly in need of protection, are economic migrants, or even pose a threat to public safety.

    If political leaders were serious about protecting asylum for those who genuinely need it, they would reform the current system. The Geneva Refugee Convention, as it operates today, has turned into a Trojan horse. A strict screening process outside European territory – one that grants entry only to people facing real persecution – is the only way to prevent abuse and restore integrity to asylum policy.

    But this is only part of the equation. Europe must also confront the political architects of endless wars and instability in the Middle East and North Africa – interventions that have destabilized entire regions and fueled the very radicalism we are now battling. Unless European leaders find the courage to break free from American foreign policy interests and challenge this destructive cycle, nothing will change.

    Everything else is empty talk – rhetoric that sounds good in press conferences but does nothing to protect Europe’s citizens or preserve the principles asylum was meant to uphold.

  • Austria: Branch of the Turkish Religious Authority in Austria (ATIB) – The Friday Donations of Diyanet Allegedly Flowed to Escort Ladies!

    Austria: Branch of the Turkish Religious Authority in Austria (ATIB) – The Friday Donations of Diyanet Allegedly Flowed to Escort Ladies!

    According to the Turkish-language newspaper Sozcu, the donation funds collected during Friday prayers at ATIB mosques in Vienna were allegedly embezzled. An intriguing detail is that high-ranking officials and embassy staff of the Turkish embassy in Austria, as well as a relative of an AKP minister, are said to have misappropriated the funds during wild parties with escort women. Thank God, the presumption of innocence applies to all parties involved.

    Among the accusations brought forward during the ongoing five-year investigation is that, using the collected funds from Fridays and religious holidays, at least four escort women were invited, and lavish parties were held.

    The scandals surrounding Turkey’s Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet), which are not limited to Turkey’s territory but also come to light in European countries, show no signs of abating.

    This time, the matter causing excitement in Austria involves Turkish imams, religious officials, and local staff, who are accused of “ordering escort women with donations from the community.”

    The scandal involving embezzled alms and aid funds, as well as decadent parties with escort women, which began five years ago in Vienna, has still not been resolved.

    F.M.K., a religious attaché operating on behalf of the Diyanet Foundation in Vienna and head of ATIB (Turkish-Islamic Union in Austria) with its 63 branches, along with M.Ş., another religious attaché, have been dismissed following the investigations.

    Diyanet justified the dismissal of these officials with “disciplinary misconduct and inadequate performance.”

    THE CHARGES

    Among the allegations raised during the investigations are:

    Donations collected especially on Fridays and religious holidays were not properly documented.
    It is unclear what specific expenses the money was used for.
    A significant portion of income from pilgrimage trips (Hajj), sacrificial animal campaigns (Kurban), the sale of religious books, and funeral funds is said to have been spent in entertainment venues.
    With these funds, at least four escort women are alleged to have been invited, and lavish parties held.
    To conceal these expenses, they were recorded in the association’s budget as “costs for residence permits, rent, and imam expenses.”
    Inspectors conducting checks are said to have been invited on trips and outings funded by the donations, in an attempt to cover up the investigations.
    A RELATIVE OF A MINISTER

    Among those dismissed, there is reportedly a relative of a former AKP minister. Austrian authorities are closely monitoring the case.

    HOW ATIB Collects Money

    ATIB, which is at the center of these allegations, regularly organizes events to raise funds.

  • Austria: Headscarf Ban for Girls Under 14: A Necessary Step Against Religious Instrumentalization

    Austria: Headscarf Ban for Girls Under 14: A Necessary Step Against Religious Instrumentalization

    The Austrian federal government has once again called for a ban on headscarves for girls under the age of 14 – a proposal that regularly meets resistance from certain political and religious interest groups. Critics frequently invoke the right to religious freedom, enshrined in the Austrian Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the legal argument that wearing a headscarf is a protected religious act does not hold up under theological scrutiny – and it overlooks the state’s responsibility to protect children.

    No Theological Basis in the Quran

    At the heart of the debate is the question of whether wearing a headscarf is truly a religious obligation. A close reading of the Quran reveals: the word headscarf does not appear anywhere. In the often-cited verses – such as Surah 24, Verse 31 – only a “veil” or “cloth” is mentioned, which should be drawn over the neckline. Nowhere in these passages is there an explicit reference to covering the head. The context clearly refers to adult women and their relationship to their “adornment” – a term that is frequently interpreted as physical charms or attractions.

    Even Surah 33, Verse 59 – often cited to justify veiling – only recommends that women draw their outer garments around them to avoid harassment. These verses cannot be used to justify headscarves for children or young girls. Rather, they reflect context-specific cultural norms of the time, not a binding divine commandment.

    The Political Function of the Headscarf

    In Turkey – a predominantly Muslim country – headscarves were banned in public schools and institutions until 2014. This ban was only lifted under the Islamist-conservative government of the AKP. This example illustrates a key point: the headscarf is not primarily a religious issue, but a political one. It is about visibility, control of interpretation, and the imposition of societal norms under the guise of faith.

    In Austria, religious organizations such as the Islamic Religious Authority (IGGÖ) often act as extensions of foreign, Islamic-influenced governments. Their insistence on defending the headscarf, even for children, stems not from theological necessity, but from a political agenda.

    The Responsibility of the State

    Children are among the most vulnerable members of society. It is the duty of the state to protect them from religious or ideological misuse – especially when they are not yet able to make informed decisions. A ban on headscarves for those under 14 is not an attack on religious freedom, but a protective measure against political instrumentalization.

    In an open and democratic society, one thing must be clear: tolerance must not be extended to practices that impose symbolic gender roles and norms on children who neither understand them nor choose them freely. A religious symbol with no theological foundation should not be misused as an educational tool under the pretext of freedom of religion.

    Conclusion

    A headscarf ban for girls under 14 is not an expression of intolerance, but a step toward protection, empowerment, and individual autonomy. Political leaders must be willing to challenge false narratives – even when they come from legal or religious institutions. Because freedom also means protecting children from ideological appropriation – whether politically, culturally, or religiously motivated.

  • Analysis: Turkey helps pull the rug from under Nabucco

    Analysis: Turkey helps pull the rug from under Nabucco

    By Ferruh Demirmen, Ph.D.
    Houston, Texas

    Judging from the press reports, one would not know it, but Turkey, the presumed supporter of the Nabucco gas project, recently helped kill the project.

    It was not to be so. After all, the Nabucco project was designed not only to supply natural gas to the EU from the Caspian region and the Middle East, but also help Turkey meet its domestic needs. The intergovernmental agreement signed in Ankara amid media publicity in July 2009, followed by parliamentary seal of approval in March 2010, gave all the indications that Turkey would stand by the project.

    Turkey’s BOTAS was one of the 6 partners that developed the project. The Vienna-based NIC (Nabucco International Company) represented the consortium formed by the partners. The 3,900 km-long pipeline’s planned destination was Baumgarten in Austria.

    Not that the project was ideal for Turkey (). But compared to its rivals ITGI (Italy-Greece Interconnector) and TAP (Trans-Adriatic Pipeline), not to mention a host of “exotic” Black Sea options flagged by Azerbaijan, it was the most mature and most comprehensive gas pipeline project to connect Turkey and the EU to the supply sources to the east. Strategically it deserved Turkey’s support. It was the only project among its rivals that aimed to transport Azeri as well as non-Azeri gas. Turkmen gas was a high-priority objective.

    Surely, with its ambitious design capacity of 31 billion m3 (bcm)/year, Nabucco was under stress. What was holding the project from implementation was the lack of feed (throughput) gas. The feed gas problem caused delays in the project, and the capital costs soared (up to EUR 14-15 billion by most recent estimates). The Azeri Shah Deniz-II gas was identified as the initial start-up gas as from 2017-2018.

    But Azerbaijan, that owned the gas, and the Shah Deniz consortium that would share and produce it, were non-committal about supplying gas. That meant major headache for Nabucco. Turkmen gas input required the cooperation of Azerbaijan, and would be added to the gas stream at a later date.

    In the meantime, the rival projects ITGI and TAP emerged. Like Nabucco, these also counted on Shah Deniz-II gas for throughput. A winner-take-all pipeline contest was in the works.

    Still, Nabucco had a good fighting chance. On October 1, 2011, NIC submitted its proposal to the Shah Deniz consortium tabling transport terms. The rival projects ITGI and TAP did the same. A high-stakes waiting game would then start, during which the Shah Deniz consortium would pick the winner.

    The spoiler project

    All that changed when BP (British Petroleum), at the last minute before the October 1 deadline, came up with a new, “in-house” project: SEEP (South-East Europe Pipeline). It was a shrewd move, and immediately caught the attention of the Shah Deniz consortium – where BP is the operator and a major (25.5%) stake holder. The Azeri partner SOCAR, in particular, quickly warmed up to BP’s proposal.

    Instead of building a new pipeline across the Turkish territory, SEEP envisioned the use of BOTAS’ existing network (with upgrades) in Turkey and construction of new pipelines and their integration with existing interconnectors past Turkey. Azeri gas would be the feed gas. The destination would still be Austria, but the cost would be much less than that of Nabucco.

    Nabucco had come under threat.

    Behind the scenes

    Events behind the scenes further undermined Nabucco. On October 25 Ankara and Baku signed an intergovernmental agreement in Izmir in western Turkey. Details released to the press were sketchy, but one of the accords reached was to use initially BOTAS’ existing network in Turkey, and later build a new pipeline when needed, to ship Shah Deniz II gas to Turkey and the EU. Starting in 2017 or 2018, of the total 16 bcm gas to be produced annually from the Shah Deniz-II phase, Turkey would receive 6 bcm, and the rest 10 bcm would be shipped to the EU.

    Azerbaijan would be the direct seller of gas to the EU, with Turkey being a mere bridge or transit route.

    No mention was made of Nabucco, ITGI, TAP, or SEEP in the press release, but the footprints of SEEP were unmistakable.

    Demise of Nabucco

    Still worse news followed. On November 17, during the Third Black Sea Energy and Economic Forum held in Istanbul, SOCAR chief Rovnag Abdullayev announced that a new gas pipeline, which he named “Trans-Anatolia,” would be built in Turkey from east to west under the leadership of SOCAR. The new pipeline would deliver Shah Deniz II gas to Turkey and Europe.

    Azerbaijan and Turkey had already started working on the pipeline project, he said, and others could possibly join later. The planned capacity was at least 16 bcm/year –large enough to absorb all future Azeri exports after depletion of Shah Deniz II.

    While not stated so, the announcement made Nabucco effectively redundant. The announcement was an offtake from the Izmir agreement, and signaled a surprising, 180-degree turn on the part of Turkey on Nabucco.

    Turkey’s energy minister Yildiz Taner tried to put the best face in the press by claiming that Trans-Anatolian would “supplement” Nabucco, while the NIC chief Reinhard Mitschek expressed his “confidence” in Nabucco.

    More recently SOCAR’s Abdullayev maintained that Nabucco was still “in the race,” and NIC started the pre-qualification process for procurement contractors.

    For all these business-as-usual pronouncements, however, there was little doubt that Nabucco had received a fatal blow. If Trans-Anatolia, dedicated to Shah Deniz II gas, is built, Nabucco will lose its start-up gas, and with it the justification for a new infrastructure across Turkey.

    Without synergy from the Azeri gas, a full-fledged Nabucco project dedicated solely to Turkmen gas will also have a virtually zero chance of implementation.

    Nabucco, in its present form, was dead. (See also . A much-modified, “truncated” version of Nabucco, starting at the Turkey-Bulgaria border, may well emerge, however.

    Conclusion

    With Nabucco frozen in its tracks, the geopolitics of energy in Turkey and its neighborhood has changed dramatically ). What is surprising is that Turkey assisted in undermining a project that it had long supported. It was a project that encompassed both Azeri and Turkmen gas. To reduce its dependence on Russia for its gas exports, Turkmenistan has been eager to ship its gas to the West.

    Azerbaijan, apparently viewing Turkmen gas exports to the West a threat to its own gas exports, has been reluctant to cooperate with Ashgabat on this issue.

    Turkey acceded to the aspirations of the Azeri brethren, while ignoring those of the Turkmen brethren. Over the past year, as the EU delegates approached repeatedly Ashgabat for Turkmen gas (vis-à-vis a TCGP or Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline), Turkey chose to stay on the sidelines. This was a strategic mistake.

    Both Baku and Ashgabat could benefit from a synergy between the Azeri and Turkmen gaz exports, and Turkey could use gas from both sources to enhance its energy security. Being pro-active on TGCP and nudging Azerbaijan in that direction would have been a wise move for Turkey. On balance, there is little doubt that on the gas issue Azerbaijan has played its cards well – perhaps too well!

    [email protected]

  • Austria blocking visa deal between Turkey, EU

    Austria blocking visa deal between Turkey, EU

    FULYA ÖZERKAN

    ANKARA – Hürriyet Daily News

    As fears run high over Vienna’s retaliation after Ankara’s veto of candidacy of a former Austrian foreign minister to be the secretary-general of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, or OSCE, it has been learned that Austria is one of the countries blocking Turkey’s visa agreement with the European Union.

    “What more can Austria do to complicate Turkey’s EU accession? It is already one of the countries standing in the way of any agreement between Turkey and the EU for visa-free travel,” a source told the Hürriyet Daily News on Tuesday.

    Turkey vetoed Austria’s Ursula Plassnik to be OSCE secretary-general citing concerns over her public statements about European identity. The Turkish Foreign Ministry, however, denied any link between its opposition to the Austrian candidate and this action’s negative repercussions on Ankara’s EU negotiations.

    “That would demonstrate through which dimension Austria is looking at Turkish-EU relations. Interlinking the two issues is tantamount to comparing apples and oranges,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Selçuk Ünal told the Daily News.

    Ünal also dismissed speculation that Ankara and Vienna had reached an accord not to veto each other’s candidates.

    “We have opposed the Austrian candidate since the very beginning because of her public statements not reflecting a pan-European vision. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu verbally made this clear both to his Austrian counterpart during telephone conversations and to the Lithuanian term presidency of the OSCE,” he said.

    “Plus, we were not the only country opposing Austria’s candidate,” said Ünal.

    It has been learned that the Russians were also against Plassnik and reluctant to see another European as secretary-general of OSCE. Previous secretary-generals of the organization have been from EU member states Germany, Italy, Slovakia and France.

    Turkey warned against pushing for Austrian candidate

    Turkey warned the Lithuanian presidency not to push for the Austrian candidate, otherwise it would use its right to veto, it has been revealed.

    Turkey’s veto of the Austrian candidate also came after the Lithuanian term presidency’s move to send letters to the representatives of OSCE member states in Vienna saying Plassnik would become secretary-general, a development that angered Ankara.

    In return, Turkey, which previously made its position clear verbally in compliance with diplomatic courtesy, dispatched a written note objecting to Plassnik on the argument that two other countries, Greek Cyprus and Armenia, used the same route to oppose the Turkish candidate.

    “We have never articulated the word veto. But the first written veto came from Armenia and Greek Cyprus against our candidate. And it appeared we could use the same method,” said Ünal.

    “We first refrained from using this method out of diplomatic courtesy, but we clearly told Austria and Lithuania that we would not hesitate to do so if they insist on the Austrian candidate,” he said.

    Turkey nominated Ersin Erçin, the country’s ambassador to Brazil and the president’s adviser for European security, for the same position. Italy and Portugal also nominated candidates. Decisions at OSCE are made through consensus.

    President did not make any promise, says Ankara

    Some news reports, meanwhile, claimed President Abdullah Gül promised Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger not to oppose the Austrian candidate during a reception given on May 2, before a dinner hosted by Austrian President Heinz Fischer. Ünal told the Daily News that the Turkish president has not made such a promise and instead emphasized the strong support for the Turkish candidate.

    via Austria blocking visa deal between Turkey, EU – Hurriyet Daily News and Economic Review.