"ملف ٨٩/٥٣ II (د ١٦٩) التعليم في الكويت" [و‎‎١‎٨‎٠] (٥٢١/٣٧١)

r
0.0.No.0/845-4/13-TII.
J
o) 183
BUSH'PF. r r
/</ Is'L .
rrc •'"vr"
NCY.
A/o...
Date.
2i. 1.
/ * / ^ 7 / ’’cOMnDZiU-L. nECOhDS
M (slS/fsUyf
Political Agency,
Kuwait,
1st -July, 1944.
^lease refer to the enclosure to His Highness 1
letter No.R/6/2374 dated the 12th June, 1944, forwarded under
Kuwait Printed Letter No.844-4/13-III dated the 29th June,
1944. - - \
P is-S'
s &a
2. I took up the question of Abdul Koneim shortly
afterwards wict His Highness and remarked that there seemed
to have been some misunderstanding of Mr. /aicelin f s remarks
about the permission from the I inistry of Education, Cairo.
3. From his reoly it was clear that any
misunderstanding had been intentional. He said that he
thought that all the trouble in the cast had been due to
Haikal and that he had so far found no fault with Abdul
Koneim. He intended to keen him on for a few months to see
how he shaped under a new Director.
4. He added that, had he been privately asked by
the Political Agent to remove him, his dismissal would have
presented no difficulty; but his removal had been advocated
by /aKelin in his renort, which had been seen and discussed
by fhe Education Committee, had been the subject of gossip
among the merchant community, and intrigue among the friends
of the teachers. Now that so many knew the source of the
proposal it was very difficult for him to insist on dismissal,
in the face of opposition, without incurring the charge of
allowing himself to be dictated to by the Educational
Adviser - a point, I - have no doubt, that Abdul Moneim’s
friends will have been at pains to stress.
5. I replied that if he kept on Abdul Moneim he
would of course be taking upon himself a larger measure of
the responsibility for the satisfactory working.of the
Department,and relieving the Adviser correspondingly. ^
6 . You will by now have received Felly’s comments on
the case. I have not been here long enough to have any very
definite views; but it appears to me that, if Abdul Moneim is
as bad as Wakelin reports' it will not be long before he is
an embarrassment to the Shaikh and to the Education Department,
in which case there can be no doubt where the responsioilitjr
lies. Time will tell; and I would suggest that we do not
attempt to force the Shaikh’s hand for the present, but rather
that we await developments.
Pble Sir Geoffrey Prior, K.C.I.E.,
^litical Resident in the Persian Gulf,
BUSHIRE.