{"id":103318,"date":"2017-12-18T12:00:58","date_gmt":"2017-12-18T12:00:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=103318"},"modified":"2017-12-10T18:06:22","modified_gmt":"2017-12-10T18:06:22","slug":"palestine-towards-a-freedom-from-funding","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2017\/12\/palestine-towards-a-freedom-from-funding\/","title":{"rendered":"Palestine: Towards a Freedom from Funding"},"content":{"rendered":"

My Story with the Donors<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

October 2017 – <\/em>Thirty years ago, when I was still accused to be a leader in the Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), I wrote a study about funding, suggesting that we should not accept any funding that is not directed to the development of our economic productivity. The study called for the development of self reliance and for the rejection of any international funding that will be conducted in coordination with the Israeli Civil Administration (Salem, May 1987, pp. 72-76).<\/p>\n

At that time, I was a militant young of 30 years old. Today (Another Thirty years after) I feel that my 1987 message is still generally valid, while there are other components that should be added to it, as it will be explained in this series of stories.<\/p>\n

At that time, we were better off as \u00a0 Palestinians without that \u201cinvasion by aid\u201d. Voluntary work was conducted with sincere and good spirit; we were also depending on ourselves. Besides that the funding resources which were mainly Arab and Islamic were directed to support our productive base such as small manufacturing (with less to agriculture unfortunately). As well this support was directed to support our steadfastness (Sumud) by the funding to projects such as housing projects. The Arab financial support we enjoyed was combined with actions taken by solidarity movements in the world who were providing us with political support that we badly needed. At that time the pubic\/ committed\/ critical\/ organic (Said, Gramsci, Banda, Habermas, and Sartre) intellectuals and leaders were the models that people follow.<\/p>\n

After 1993 Oslo, a new language of \u201cpost conflict\u201d emerged, and the language of liberation\/ emancipation\/ non violent resistance was replaced by the language of \u201cPeacebuilding\u201d and \u201cConflict resolution.\u201d Accordingly the public\/critical intellectuals left their place to new class of \u201ctechnical experts\u201d in all levels. I admit that I got convinced at the beginning that Oslo will give us a state, and then I found myself involved heartedly and enthusiastically with the new post conflict agenda. I made myself a \u201ctrainer\u201d of Democracy, strategic planning, and policy making for more than thirty thousand Palestinians; also I ran tens of civil society and peacebuilding projects.<\/p>\n

Today, I declare that this path was\/ and is wrong. I call upon all my people to shift from it. The reasons are manifold:<\/p>\n

First:<\/strong> The assumption and the starting point of the emergence of a post conflict situation that requires state building, capacity building programs and peacebuilding ones is fully wrong. We are still under occupation which also moving to annexation, and the expansion of the settler colonial projects on the expense of our people.<\/p>\n

Second:<\/strong> The move of the international community from the 1950\u2019s to 1980\u2019s solidarity agenda with our people to a new partnership agenda starting from the 1990\u2019s was a fatal mistake. Partnership was understood first as partnerships in projects only, and stop with the end of these projects (Usually the stop to be made by the donor according to his changing agenda and his unilateral evaluation of the project as well). Second these partnerships will be in projects that take place in our country, therefore the donor own the project in my county with me which deviates with the principles of local ownership. Third: The donor will impose his own financial and administrative guidelines (and more importantly his theories of change). Fourth: With that happening the local organizations lose their visionary roles, and become scribes who spent most of their times in micro issues such as writing funding proposals and reports, and responding to donors inquiries, in the expense of working with their people and take their commitments towards the emerging developments in their environment.\u201cModern slavery\u201d \u00a0is just a good name of this newly invented other \u00a0\u201c neo- colonial tool\u201d of control. Fifth: Since money is involved, these projects became a source of life for thousands of international and Israeli organizations and experts (consultants, evaluators and others) who take big parts of the money that is supposed to be allocated to the Palestinian people.<\/p>\n

Yes, then if we want to go back as Palestinians to our emancipatory agenda, and to our nonviolent comprehensive struggle we should break this cycle of funding \u00a0that just \u00a0helped sustaining the Israeli occupation, by transforming us to bureaucrats acting in projects and getting salaries and benefits on the expense of volunteerism and its spirit. As such our individual personalities were\u201d Personified\u201d by becoming characters who act along imposed guidelines and procedures rather than speaking of ourselves. \u201cStaying within\u201d becomes the case to many rather than \u201cSpeaking out\u201d of what we believe (Malki, 2006, p.13). Such a \u201c Personification\u201d created also a \u201c thingification process\u201d (Aime \u00a0Cesaire), in which the donor will deal with you as being a technical thing, and as apolitical and ahistorical object , who will be rewarded and punished( by the donor) according to the quality of your reporting and proposals \u00a0( of course on the basis of their standards to reporting). This all regardless of all your previous history and experience that do not count.<\/p>\n

As a Palestinian State Authority we need to struggle back to solidarity agenda for political and financial support that will require the donors to report to us about what they are doing for us.<\/p>\n

As Palestinian individuals, we need protection from the authoritarian guidelines of control imposed by the donors that fits also with stable situations rather than a one of permanent turmoil like ours, and we need to rebuild solidarity civil society networks with an agreed upon agenda for non violent struggle locally and internationally. This agenda will be the subject of the next story.<\/p>\n

A Proposal for an Alternative Path<\/h2>\n

Above I presented a brief analysis of my experience with Aid, especially over the last 30 years. Here an alternative path for Aid to Palestine is presented both in regard to the trends of funding, and the management of it.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In a context of annexationist policies, and creeping settler colonialism, it is time to look over Aid to Palestine. The key is to move beyond the post- conflict agenda, and its dependence on institutions and technocrats as if we in the stage of state building.<\/p>\n

As Dr Khalil Nakhleh recommending Aid should be instead \u00a0on in the service of an emancipatory development agenda initiated by the people( Nakhleh,2011). In other hand Dr Hadeel Al Qazzaz suggested that Aid to the Palestinians should be based on their human rights, rather than to pressure them to accept an unjust solution with Israel (Al Qazzaz, 2016, p.69).<\/p>\n

I will add also the following:<\/p>\n