AMB CONTEH SLAMS MINISTER TANGARA OVER COMMENTS ON POLITICAL APPOINTEE-DIPLOMATS

Alkali F Conteh, the Gambia’s ambassador to Turkey and one of the most influential allies of President Barrow, has taken issues with Foreign Minister Mamadou Tangara over his comments that political appointees in the foreign service have become ‘stumbling blocks’.

The minister made these remarks in a recent interface with the media during the last Mansa-Kunda at the Sir Dawda Kairaba  Jawara Conference Centre.

Tangara also cited incidents that he said embarrassed the country and called for better comportment and training for the country’s would-be diplomats. He also urged diplomats appointed by the president to uphold the trust at all times.

However by all indications, Tanagra’s comments did not go down well with most people, especially serving and former diplomats appointed from both the ruling party and opposition political parties.

Last week a senior official of the governing National People’s Party diaspora branch Lamin Jawara, became the first voice against the minister’s remarks. 

Also, a former Gambian diplomat in the UK, Bamba Mass from the opposition UDP, criticised the minister’s comments.

Over the last 24 hours though, the anger over the minister’s comments seems to have reached a crescendo with Ambassador Akali Conteh joining the fray.

In a lengthy letter he addressed to Minister Tangara on the matter (seen by The Standard) , Conteh  blamed the minister’s ‘own failures for allowing complaints from various embassies to fester in to troubles  and even asked if Tangara’s own public fist- fight in the streets of New York  during the Jammeh regime fits his position as then  Permanent Rep at the UN.

Ambassador Conteh’s letter reads in full:

Dear Dr. Tangara,

I refer to your town hall discussion on the “Mansa Kunda” programme on Friday, 16th May 2025. It was made clear by both the moderator of the programme and you in your opening remarks that the programme will elucidate your ministry’s policies, operations, achievements and challenges.

After outlining the country’s foreign policy goals, ranging from bilateral, sub-regional, regional, continental, global, and multilateral, you provided an insight into our stance in pursuing our sovereign interests, predicated on non-aligned principles. Thereafter, you moved on to map out issues that you consider as our challenges. I am compelled to write this open letter to you in direct response to the latter, and closing with a key area of your ministry’s mandate that you totally failed to touch on during the programme. 

I have a concern with the group of diplomats that I believe you erroneously referred to as “Political Appointees”. I call it erroneous because, going by your definition, these are the group of people that are appointed (by the President) from within the political class without taking into consideration their academic qualifications, other skills and talents that are prerequisites for recruitment into the foreign service, let alone their background. In this regard, you made several indicting statements against “political appointees”, and their appointing authority “the president” arguing that their appointments were premised upon nothing other than sharing identical political platforms with the president who in turn feels obliged to handsomely reward them with these prestigious appointments and “dumped” them into our foreign service.

Mr Minister, your this context of the president’s powers to use foreign service as a dumping ground is not only myopic but a distortion as he “the president” also appoints cabinet ministers, ambassadors, director generals, permanent secretaries, managing directors, heads of security and defence corps, chairpersons and members of boards and commissions “with the latter including the public service commission, the body that appoints the majority of civil servants. Do you, in your conscience, believe that all these politically appointed positions are filled with unqualified citizens of our country? Why did you single out the Foreign Service when you know that the majority of those appointed into the Foreign Service might have served our country in one way or another? As far as I know, those who are politically appointed in the Foreign Service have professional experience anchored on very strong academic accomplishments. 

You further went on to inform your audience and the general public that this class of diplomats is the source of most “if not all” of the troubles in our foreign services/missions, painting them as misfits who are uncut, untrainable, barbaric in behavior and comportment.

They do not know how to talk smoothly or abide by the diplomatic dress code; hence they have earned the country the status of guinea pigs in diplomatic classrooms, being referenced as examples of diplomatic miscreants.

You quoted incidents that took place in both Rabat (Morocco) and Havana (Cuba), where our diplomats were involved in pugnacious behaviour unbecoming of diplomats, and in both cases, the culprits were recalled.  You argued that these incidents happened because, presumably, the appointing authority (the president) did not conduct background checks on these individuals. After all, they are extracted from the political backyard of the appointing authority. Let me go further to categorically point out that all those fightings or incidents happened in our missions because your ministry failed to nip the disputes in the bud. I am sure you received several reports from these individuals and missions, but you turned a blind eye until the issues reached a boiling point. If your ministry had taken the responsibility to address these issues promptly, the scandals would have been abated. The blame squarely falls on your head, and you must not run away from it.

However, I am surprised that you did not reference the Washington, DC, incident where four of our diplomats were declared by the US State Department as “persona non grata” because of their unlawful operation of a criminal enterprise. You didn’t, maybe, because all “except one” of the culprits are your so-called anointed diplomats. What about Guinea-Bissau? And before I rest my case on this subject matter, I must remind the general public of an incident that took place in the streets of Manhattan, New York City not so long ago that involved you (Dr Tangara) exchanging blows with a peaceful demonstrator in the glare of media cameras from all over the world, not to mention the live spectators comprising of Presidents, Prime Ministers, Foreign Ministers and top-notch diplomats that came to attend the UN General Assembly. What could have justified such behavior from our Permanent Representative at the United Nations, and yet his job was saved?

You see, the class of people that you have launched a smear campaign against have very noble principles despite their unimpressive background and standing, by your assessment. They took the moral high ground and stood up to unimaginable and countless sessions fighting the extension of dictatorial rule that turned our country into a failed state. They were subject to physical and mental/psychological torture and still stood resolved, firm and unrelenting, when most of our intellectuals cowered to the dictator to protect and preserve their individual interests. So, the least they deserve is respect, accommodation and integration and not putting them on trial as a bunch of morons who only bring shame and disgrace to our nation.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind you about this simple fact. When was the last time you called your ambassadors and high commissioners to the capital for a conclave to discuss pertinent Foreign Service policies, regulations, opportunities, and challenges? It is evident that from 2017 to date, there has not been even a single virtual conference where you summoned your diplomats for a discussion. This is a monumental leadership failure on your part. One must conclude that the problem within The Gambia Foreign Service has nothing to do with the political appointees, but everything to do with your abdication of responsibility, pure and simple! How about a cabinet paper? The recently validated Foreign Service regulations have been lingering within the ministry since 2023, and may not be presented to the cabinet until next year. The Foreign Service cannot continue to use archaic regulations that don’t serve the purpose. We are in 2025, for goodness’ sake, we have to adapt to the new realities of diplomacy.

Finally, may I ask you, my dear brother, why were you muted on a key component of your ministerial mandate relating to “…..Gambians Abroad”? There was no mention of factoring in the interest and potential contribution of these particular constituents. One would expect plans and strategies of inclusiveness as well as harnessing the immense potential that Gambians in the diaspora have; nor did we hear anything about their plight, except for the humanitarian interventions in Sudan and Mauritania. As the Minister in Charge, what are you doing about the Gambians in the Diaspora in respect of the following:

.          their cry to be active participants in national elections

.          the feasibility of having a quota or representative(s) in the National Assembly.

.          the eligibility for dual citizens to be considered for cabinet appointments, and to run for National Assembly Representation

All of these are tenable and, of course, winnable goals with a committed and dedicated representation at your level. Or could it be that Dr Tangara (as de facto representative of Gambians in the Diaspora that includes Gambians holding dual citizenship) is against all of the above and therefore silent on them?

Yours Sincerely
Alkali Fanka Conteh

Source: The Standard