Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06TUNIS1851
2006-07-20 12:09:00
CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN
Embassy Tunis
Cable title:  

PARTING THOUGHT FROM THE AMBASSADOR ON MEPI

Tags:  PGOV KMPI TS 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO6357
RR RUEHDE
DE RUEHTU #1851/01 2011209
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 201209Z JUL 06 ZDK
FM AMEMBASSY TUNIS
TO RUEHMEP/THE MIDDLE EAST PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1339
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TUNIS 001851 

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

FROM AMBASSADOR

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/20/2016
TAGS: PGOV KMPI TS
SUBJECT: PARTING THOUGHT FROM THE AMBASSADOR ON MEPI

Classified By: Ambassador William J. Hudson reason 1.5 (e)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TUNIS 001851

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

FROM AMBASSADOR

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/20/2016
TAGS: PGOV KMPI TS
SUBJECT: PARTING THOUGHT FROM THE AMBASSADOR ON MEPI

Classified By: Ambassador William J. Hudson reason 1.5 (e)


1. (C/NF) I would like to share what I hope will be some
impressions on the MEPI program in the hope that they might
be useful to others as this program evolves. Since my arrival
at post, our number one MPP priority has been support for
greater democracy and human rights in Tunisia, and our post
is the home of one of the MEPI Regional Offices. I trust
that my comments will be received as coming from someone who
has welcomed MEPI and supported its goals.


2. (C/NF) I would like to call NEA,s attention to three
aspects of the MEPI process that I have found frustrating and
counterproductive: failure to coordinate adequately with COMs
and Country Teams; encroaching bureaucracy from the
Washington end; and lack of clarity regarding MEPI,s role
within NEA priorities.


3. (C/NF) It is easy to imagine that a sure way to unsettle
an Ambassador and lose her/his support for a MEPI program is
for it to appear suddenly with the goal of engaging important
audiences and persons in the country of her/his assignment
without her/his having known about it. An ambitious
MEPI-funded program looms on the horizon and the COM must
scramble to: a) inform her/himself about it; b) decide the
degree of support or engagement s/he should offer the
program; and c) seek to modify the program,s content or
approach, based on the Country Team,s knowledge of local
conditions. Without COM and Country Team assistance, many of
these programs would founder and fail. With earlier,
meaningful COM and Country Team involvement, they would not
have been in a position to fail. In some cases, the COM and
Country Team would have known and counseled that the program
was ill advised and should not be funded or supported. The
recent MEPI-sponsored media RFA, for example, as written,
seemed to seek to fund projects in a way that is a violation
of Tunisian (and several other countries') law. The highest
levels of the GOT made it very clear to us that funding of
Tunisian media projects as proposed in the RFA would be
illegal, and actively discouraged Tunisians from trying to

fund their media projects through the RFA.


4. (C/NF) Many posts complain about the amount of time
MEPI-related activities consume. No embassy has been granted
additional "MEPI" officers, yet someone must take up the
extra work. It may surprise you to learn that we in Tunis
have no complaints about our investment of time in MEPI,
mainly because what the Initiative seeks to promote happens
to be our number one MPP priority. The source of my concern
in this area is that our collective efforts do not seem to
produce results that advance our policy. To my mind, this
frustration is directly linked to my above concern about the
absence of the COM and Country Team in the decision-making
process. Our MEPI Committee (which is headed by the DCM) can
spend hours and hours evaluating SPAs or RFPs or a range of
proposals or candidates for a program, rank-order them,
submit qualitative and quantitative commentary on them, and
fill out form after form only to find that, in the end, the
post's opinion was overlooked or overruled in the award of a
grant, fellowship, or contract. Worse, grantees whose
projects the post did not endorse often turn up demanding
considerable logistical and political support to accomplish
what they are being paid far more than our officers are to
deliver. If the post had no input into the selection or
approval of a grantee or project - or possibly even opposed
it - that post is unlikely to be enthusiastic about spending
its weekend clearing up last-minute political and logistical
problems the implementer has encountered.


5. (C/NF) I fully recognize that the obvious answer to my
first two concerns could be that the COM and Country Team
need to involve themselves more fully in all aspects of MEPI
and need to pay closer attention to its inner workings. Post
MEPI Committees and/or the MEPI RO should be keeping COMs up
to date and in the loop. I assure you that my MEPI Committee
and the Regional Office we host have done exactly that -- to
the extent of their ability to understand what is going on in
Washington -- and that brings me to my final concern. I
leave you with two observations on what I believe to be the
source of the disconnect. First, since MEPI is a relatively
new program that involves significant new bureaucratic and
decision-making processes, I would argue that it is incumbent
on NEA/PI to proactively integrate itself into the Bureau, to
insist that Offices and Desks not just clear ideas and
documents but fully understand them, and that COMs and other
officers are always given explanations of proposals and
opportunities to participate in decision-making. Ideally,
key NEA/PI information and requests/taskings would come
through front-channel cables rather than emails to post or
the Regional Office. Without the formality of a

TUNIS 00001851 002 OF 002


front-channel message, it is sometimes difficult to determine
priority for the many requests we receive. Second, NEA/FO
needs to clarify for COMs the importance it places on COMs,
personal attention to MEPI*and to assure COMs that their
MEPI-related engagement will be rewarded with FO support.
Simply put, COMs cannot be expected to guess whether MEPI
priorities are more important than other NEA priorities on a
case-by-case basis. NEA should speak with one voice.


6. (C/NF) I submit these comments out of great respect and
support for what MEPI. I suspect, however, that I am not
alone in suggesting that the above conditions do not help us
achieve them.
HUDSON