ETHIOPIA & PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR

0336 Ethiopian Resignation

STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL (memo to David Asch, Dean)

May I confirm that, following the severe criticisms made in your memo of 19 December and your even more vehement comments made during our meeting today, I have - as agreed - immediately resigned as Project Director for Ethiopia.

May I say, however, that - while I fully understand the anger you described you felt towards me after receiving Michael Sargent's telephone call - I am sorry that the anger prevented you from contacting me immediately - since I feel that many of the problems could have been sorted out without precipitating the potentially embarrassing diplomatic incident which may now result. I trust that your discussions with Debbie Goldthorpe - who was not aware of any problems developing, but who has been consistently of great help - will reduce the temperature somewhat, and allow a more diplomatic solution. I think, indeed, that the withdrawal of the doctorate which you have asked for is precipitate, and unnecessary - and with the OU at times leaking like a sieve may offer a hostage to fortune in terms of PR coverage for the OU and Ethiopian government. As demanded, however, I have not said - and will not say - a word to anyone (other than Debbie Goldthorpe, who had to be made aware of the situation) about the subject.

May I, however, take the opportunity of correcting some of the misinformation which has been bandied around. Once it had been decided, by yourself, that the proposal for an honorary doctorate for Meles Zenawi should come from the team members rather than the School, I prepared the original submission; which was then signed by all the members of the project team - including yourself but excluding Tony Stapleton (who withheld his support on grounds of personal political differences). At that time, on my own initiative, I contacted the FCO and had a meeting with Debbie Goldthorpe. This was not to obtain their formal support, since it was always clear that they could not give this. I thus ascertained that, as was my impression of that meeting, whilst they had sever reservations (which I subsequently documented in my memo to the VC) they would not have then have wished to stop the award - and indeed did not see that it was their role to interfere in the internal affairs of an independent university (a position which has, according to the reported comments of Michael Sargent, now seemingly been reversed by the British Ambassador in Addis!). In my subsequent memo I made it very clear that the FCO would not be willing to associate themselves with the award; though I was not aware that, as the British Ambassador is now apparently claiming (according to your comments to me), the FCO will publicly dissociate itself (which I would have thought would have constituted FCO interference not just in our internal processes, but also in those of Ethiopia!). I gained the perhaps mistaken impression that the FCO, at that time, did not see any major embarrassment arising to HMG - even though in no way could it be associated with them, and that they would have preferred the references to democracy to be removed (as I pointed out in my memo). I also contacted Michael Sargent who, though he had received the draft proposal, was unwilling to comment (even though he now seems to have been very vociferous in his comments to you).

In this way, the university had the benefit of an unusually a balanced view of the situation, that of the project team combined with the FCO's reservations (where such an FCO view is not normally sought). In addition, I am led to believe, the university made its own separate soundings. The net result was that the proposal went to Senate, and was passed. I do not know on what grounds the award was made, since you have maintained the contact with the VC on this matter - and I have never been informed of progress. In any case, and here we come to the areas where I might have been able to help (had I been consulted when you received the phone call from Michael Sargent), what was to be said in the valedictory address had not yet been decided. As it would have been an informal occasion, the aspects to which the FCO objected could have easily been edited out. In any case, if the timing has now become now unfortunate (with the elections now falling a few weeks later - rather than several months earlier) the reports of the ceremony could have been embargoed. The Ethiopian Government has always wanted to keep the ceremony private (with just a dozen students and their families) and it has been we who wanted to publicise it in Open Forum - and this could easily have been cancelled or delayed.

I do not understand Michel Sargent's alarm - though it may have followed on from the other (more justifiable) complaints he has made recently about our administration. When I talked to him last week - asking him, as a matter of courtesy, to inform the ambassador - he too thought it was a very positive move. He may be right in thinking that the government out there is hated by a large proportion of the people - though this is out of line with the embassy's comments before the new ambassador arrived (which said that the 95% of the population who are farmers were behind the government, because their standard of living had improved noticeably in the past three years), and it does not seem to reflect the fact that - having survived relatively well the worst drought for a number of decades - the harvest has been a bumper one and (according to Peter Stratfold who is currently in Addis) the atmosphere seems quiet buoyant. I suspect it may have more to do with the British Council's long-standing, and in my view somewhat unwise, close contacts with opponents of the government (especially those at Addis University) - which does seem to colour their opinions from time to time (and may have led them into this rash adventure - attempting to interfere in our and the Ethiopian Government's affairs - which I suspect is a mite out of character for any arm of the diplomatic service). Thus, while I believe we could have been mistaken (though, at the heart of government there, it would have been difficult to be so ) I believe it is the British Council which is being partisan rather than the project team (remembering that you too were party to the proposal, though this is not clear from your memo, and I am certain that you would not have signed had you seen the act as partisan).

From your comments, however, I accept that it is inevitable that one way or another the blame will be laid at my door - though those who are now running for cover have been only too willing to previously share in the success of the project. I will not deny that I feel bitter at being made a scapegoat in this way, partly because I have been the target of not some small amount of misinformation in the process, but not least because I have given three years of my life (and run many personal risks acting as an agent in one form or another of the British Government) to the project. Needless to say, I will be very sorry to miss the degree ceremony - and meeting my many friends out there again - but accept that, under the circumstances my presence would not be appropriate.

In taking over from me as project director, with immediate effect, I would be grateful if you would ensure that the necessary support is continued; including support for Peter Stratfold, out there now, and the resolution of the exam issues hanging over Tefera. I leave it to you how you wish to explain my resignation - especially to the Ethiopian Government - but you should make the British Council aware that it is at least in part the result of their machinations, since the contract we have with them insists that I stay the full course (and I would hate for it to be used as grounds for breach of that contract!).

[back]     [home]

hits