Michael Tselentis on Chelsea Manning

Dear Sir John, Warden Kiss, and Rhodes Trustees

I wish to record my strong objection to the Warden’s invitation to Chelsea Manning to participate in a Rhodes Forum on technology in November. Although I am not a US citizen, I consider that I am entitled to do so because this invitation raises issues of importance to the Rhodes Scholarships generally.

Rhodes House’s highly selective introduction to Chelsea Manning describes her as having “significantly contributed to discussions on government transparency and the ethical implications of artificial intelligence.”   

What the introduction does not mention is that Chelsea Manning (or Bradley Manning as he was then known) was an intelligence analyst in the Army with Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information security clearance, who provided over 700,000 classified and/or sensitive documents and videos to Wikileaks, which published them. These actions caused considerable detriment to the USA and its allies, including placing at risk the lives of many service personnel and civilians. He was convicted by a court martial in July 2013 of violations of the Espionage Act and other offences, and sentenced to 35 years’ imprisonment. His conviction was upheld by the US Army Court of Criminal Appeals. Although President Obama commuted the 35-year term in 2017, he made it clear that he was not pardoning Manning’s offences.

Rhodes House’s invitation to a convicted felon, whose surreptitious actions in breach of important duties have caused significant damage to the interests of her own country, which provides the single largest cohort of Rhodes Scholars each year, is an egregious error of judgment. It sends out the message that Rhodes House is indifferent to the criminal  actions of this individual and its consequences, and that it regards such a person as qualified to speak on matters of transparency and ethics at a Forum to be held under the prestigious auspices of the Rhodes Trust. It is quite wrong for Rhodes House, which administers a Scholarship which includes integrity and adherence to duty among its qualifying characteristics, to provide a public platform, and an opportunity for self-promotion, to an individual who by her actions has shown herself to be conspicuously lacking in these attributes.    

I have seen the Warden’s response to Admiral Blair’s letter, in which she says that the aim behind the invitation is to “put forward a diverse range of voices,” because the Rhodes community is “committed to the power of the ‘unlikeminded.’”

The Warden’s reliance on the notion of the “unlikeminded,” which I take to be a reference to a tolerance of diverse opinions, is singularly unpersuasive, and is contradicted by Rhodes House’s own actions.

One of the most divisive events (as concerns the Rhodes Scholarships) in recent years has been the Rhodes Must Fall movement which has seen its adherents accuse Cecil Rhodes of a wide variety of crimes and misdeeds. Despite the fact that many  (if not most) Rhodes Scholars strongly disagree with these accusations, Rhodes House has seen fit to adopt the Rhodes Must Fall narratives and to launch ideological crusades against “institutional legacies of slavery, imperialism, colonialism, white supremacy, racial exclusion and bias” (quotation from a letter dated 14 June 2020 posted by the Warden on the Rhodes Trust website). Where is the tolerance of diverse opinions within the Rhodes community here?

Indeed, Rhodes House has shown itself distinctly intolerant of any anti-Rhodes Must Fall sentiments on the part of incoming Rhodes Scholars, ominously suggesting that their minds need “decolonizing” and subjecting them to indoctrination, as is shown by Dr Kiss’s letter:     

“Since 2015 Rhodes House has incorporated workshops on Cecil Rhodes’ legacy and on Decolonising the Mind as part of our annual orientation for new Rhodes Scholars, thanks to leadership from current Scholars, including members of the 2015 Rhodes Must Fall movement.”

There can be no justification – whether on the grounds of “unlikemindedness” or otherwise – for this invitation. It risks causing serious reputational damage to the Rhodes Scholarships, and should be withdrawn forthwith.

Yours sincerely

Michael Tselentis KC

Rhodesia and Magdalen, 1973