This is a short story of a gift from the Ministry of Higher Education of Iran to the George Washington University (GW) in 1974, which inexplicably evaporated into thin air some 45 years later in 2019 and after that unbelievely reappeared in 2022.
The management and status of the Aryamehr-Iran Endowment at George Washington University need to be investigated and reported to hold GW responsible to the government of Iran, acknowledge the generosity of the Iranian people and assistance Iranian education.In 1974, the Ministry of Higher Education of Iran made a gift to GW, creating an endowment to support Iranian education (the 5-page contract was signed by Irans Ambassador to the U.S.).
It was the very first endowed chair at the GW School of Government and Business Administration and the largest university chair at GW.
This endowment remained in part established due to the fact that the Shah and the president of GW (Lloyd Elliott) were Free Masons and understood each other.
This gift was so essential to GW that President Elliott took a trip two times to Iran to secure this endowment of $1 million, which was more than 5 percent of GWs overall endowment in 1974, a huge transformational gift and if purchased the S&P 500 with the dividends reinvested would have totaled up to over $100 million today.The first faculty beneficiary of this endowment was Professor Phillip Grub (a Free Mason) who retired in 1992-1994.
The endowment afforded him a stipend on top of his university salary, a full-time secretary, various research assistants, travel assistance and scholastic supplies.
When he retired, GW used income and even a few of the principal from the endowment to money unassociated endeavors during 1992-1998.
Teacher Hossein Askari accepted the chair in 1998.
He redirected his research toward areas of interest to Iranians and lectured on finance in Iran, in order to satisfy the goal of the Aryamehr Endowment for the very first time considering that its inception.
Around 2002, the federal government of Iran wanted the name of the endowment altered from Aryamehr to Allawi, so Askari consulted with the GW president to discuss the matter.
Noteworthy is the racist way in which the president welcomed Askari as he entered the space, particularly, Do I require bodyguards? In the end, the president decided to rename the endowment Iran due to the fact that he stated that Iran would constantly exist, while routines modification and have different ideologies.
The Iranian government did not object.As holder of the Iran Chair Professor Askari got regular monthly expenditure reports on the endowment for about 8 or two years and at the end of each year he would be informed the quantity that would be available to him (these figures did not reflect GWs prospective misuse of funds or the annual income that was being contributed to the principal of the endowment) so that he might submit a monetary report with the executive vice president for scholastic affairs (the chief academic officer of the university).
Disrupted by the management of the endowment, Askari questioned GWs practices.
After much back and forth and Askaris filing of a grievance, the executive vice president of GW consented to start a program for Iranian fellowships, awarding a 50% tuition fellowship for five inbound graduate students (pursuing a masters degree in all fields except law and medicine) each year, starting around 2006.
The program was established with the full involvement of Professor Askari who, as holder of the Iran Chair, was entrusted with the supervision of this initiative, picking student awardees, advising them, monitoring their development and reporting each year to the executive vice president.
The program prospered and helped numerous students get an education.
The program did not involve any out-of-pocket costs for GW as much of the receivers would not have actually registered at GW without such support and the fellowship was awarded by GW and not from the Iran Endowment.
While this did not attend to most of the issues that troubled Professor Askari about GWs management of the endowment, it was a goodwill gesture that Professor Askari appreciated and hoped would be broadened to benefit the education of Iranians.Things changed in 2010 with a provost and associate provost.
The inbound provost was very helpful of Professor Askaris work, on the other hand with the passage of time and without Professor Askaris understanding, the brand-new vice provost suddenly cancelled the Iran Studies Fellowship Program.
The cancellation was posted on GWs fellowship website and Professor Askari was made of this development by a student.
Professor Askari was so disgusted that he decided to take early retirement from GW as soon as an early retirement plan ended up being available.After Professor Askari took early retirement, GW did not designate a successor to the Iran Chair and the personality of the Endowment ended up being even murkier.
As the last holder of the chair, Professor Askari was contacted by the vice president of President of Iran to look into the matter-- to see what was happening with the visit of a brand-new Iran Professor, to get an accounting of the funds and of the status of the Iran studies fellowships.
The vice president of Iran (himself a GW doctoral graduate in economics and earlier noted by GW as one of its prominent graduates) wrote two letters in 2019, asking the president of GW to fulfill Professor Askari and to supply him with an audit and details relating to the status of the Iran Endowment.
The president of GW would not meet with Professor Askari and wrote that Askari could rather meet the provost who earlier as vice provost had actually ended the Iranian Fellowship Program.There was little point to such a conference as the provost informed Professor Askari in an email that there was no endowment or chair and it had actually ended in 1977.
How could this be? Teacher Grub had the chair for about 20 years! Professor Askari had held the chair for another 20 years! The name of the endowment had even been changed from Aryamehr to Iran ! Teacher Askari had about 100 regular monthly monetary reports clearly marked for the Iran endowment.
The provost now stated the endowment and chair had ended in 1977! Why GW decided that the endowment had ended is something that GW MUST answer.Although a popular attorney was introduced to Professor Askari, he decided to avoid a legal battle that might have unexpected ramifications.
In 2022, GW designated an interim president who wrote a letter to all GW professors (Askari was and is still a faculty member as Emeritus Iran Professor) about the significance of principles.
In March 2022, Professor Askari composed an email to the GW President about the Iran Endowment.
The GW President composed that he would look into the matter.
He came back with the same story that was given earlier by the provost, who had actually considering that relinquished his function as provost, with his vice provost becoming the brand-new provost.
At that point the former executive vice president for academic affairs, a principled male, intervened in an email revealing his surprise after he was copied in the email by Professor Askari.
He had actually taken part in the name modification to Iran Endowment, authorized Iran Studies Fellowships and had kept an eye on the programs performance through a yearly report that was provided by Professor Askari.
How could the endowment have evaporated into thin air in 1977? Professor Askari notified a number of GW alumni about what had happened, recommending that they may want to compose to the GW President and the chair of the board of trustees.Only then, as an outcome of the former executive vice presidents intervention and the letters written by alumni, the GW President astonishingly discovered that the endowment did still exist which he was grateful to Professor Askari for his persistence.
This was followed by a 30-minute zoom call between Professor Askari, the GW President and the Provost.
A variety of emails were also exchanged.On November 1, Professor Askari composed to the GW President with a copy to the provost: As you have actually seen from my earlier emails, I have actually recommended three problems that should be addressed [( i) There can be no going back to re-establishing the endowment without correct accounting or an equally agreed capitalization of the endowment going forward.
(ii) The fellowship program ought to not just be restored, but it ought to be a focus of the endowment moving forward.
(iii) The operational structure of the endowment should be codified.
Do you agree that these are the 3 problems to be resolved through a discussion between us? I require to understand if you have made any development on these and when we will talk about each of these problems to come to a friendly service? I have made it clear that I can decline a one-sided unilateral choice, especially after all that has happened-- questions regarding the capitalization of the endowment in 2022, GWs unilateral termination of the fellowship program resulting in my decision to take early retirement and GWs claims that the endowment had actually ended in 1977.
Late on November 7, Professor Askari received an e-mail from the GW President asking for a call on November 8 for an upgrade.
After exchanging more emails, on December 1, it became clear that GW would not accommodate the legitimate requests of its major donor-- Iran-- for an audit and cooperative discussion with Professor Askari, but would continue unilaterally with no input from Iran.
Professor Askari wrote the following to the GW President: Needless to state, I am dissatisfied in your reply.
You and I have been at this for seven months.
You state that I have actually raised your and the provosts consciousness of a crucial opportunity for GW.
I ask to differ.
I would say that I have actually raised your consciousness of a necessary duty and dutythat GW voluntarily put aside for numerous years.
I say put aside, due to the fact that I repeatedly brought GWs financial obligation to Iran and to Iranian students to the attention of the universitys administrators since GW callously cancelled the Iran Fellowship program and hid the endowment from view.
It has taken over [3] years for GW to admit that yes there was and there is an endowment.
Iranians and Iranian Americans have been played.
You have not addressed the demand of the Iranian federal government to supply an audit of the account, a written demand that was sent to GW.
You have not even told me what you declare to be the possessions of the endowment as of now, while you indicated earlier that you had a number but might not remember it! Nor have you said whether you have added back funds that were diverted to non-related programs, of which I have a partial list.
I was naively pleased when you trumpeted the value of ethics at the time you presumed the post of interim president.
Now we will have to let others choose just how much principles matter to you, to other GW administrators and more generally to GW when it comes to this present that amounted to over 5% of GWs endowment when it was made by the individuals of Iran in 1974.
Given the effort and time that I have dedicated to this matter and where we stand now, I can not support your plan moving forward for the Iran Endowment.
I will instead pursue other options to restore the rights of Iranian trainees.
What has actually transpired need to be viewed as GWs inexplicable mismanagement of a present from the Iranian individuals to support Iranian education.
GW is welcome to have distinctions with the government of Iran, however not to conceal the legacy that was bestowed by the people of Iran through the Ministry of Higher Education to benefit Iranian students.
It is a matter of right and wrong.
While Irans name has been so tarnished in the United States that anything goes when it comes to attacking Iran, however Iran and Iranians will exist long after this GW fiasco.Why has GW done this? Only GW understands.
However could GW be to use the cash (Professor Askari estimates that there should be more than $40 million if an accurate accounting is done) for other purposes offered Irans standing in the U.S? Or could it be hatred of Iran and Iranians? Or could it have been to secure its recent $20 million gift from Saudi Arabia? Whatever the reason, it is just plain wrong! And why did the new interim president of GW support the unlikely story of the previous provost and vice provost for seven months? Teacher Askari has actually been client for over 3 years in the hope of finding a friendly resolution to benefit Iranian trainees along with GW.In amount, GW has refused to treat the genuine demands of a significant donor-- to supply an accounting of the income and expenses for the Iran Endowment, to fix all impressive problems with Professor Askari, restore openness and place the endowment on a strong footing moving forward.
GW continues instead to run behind a drape and choose matters unilaterally.
Assisting Iranian trainees must be the centerpiece going forward, given that the initial goal of the endowment was to support Irans instructional needs and that Iranians need support in the face of extreme financial sanctions.
Provided GWs previous mismanagement of this endowment, can GW be depended be ethical without external oversight to bring back the Aryamehr-Iran Endowment with correct accounting and a program that benefits Iranians after GWs claim that there was no endowment for over 3 years and its resistance for an independent audit? What would have taken place to this Iranian gift if it had been another country? Probably nothing.
What would have taken place to this present to the George Washington university if Professor Askari had not continued for 3 years? The response is clear from the earlier communications of the GW President-- there would be no endowment and so the resources would clearly be utilized for something aside from what was intended by the Ministry of Higher Education of Iran.
It is a sad day for an American university when it acts so.
American university endowments need government oversight to examine if universities are performing the wishes of their major donors, no matter who is the donor.