The situation prevailing in the Palestinian civil society differs from that of any other Arab country; not because there is more freedom, but because the conditions that have created it are very exceptional. The lack of an authority, of a state, and of laws, etc., gave Palestinian civil society a major role in sustaining the society. Civil society has constituted an important part of Palestinian society and came into existence in response to particular circumstances and needs. The number of NGOs is estimated at some 1,800-2,000, which is a lot for a small country such as Palestine. In the past, the NGOs offered a variety of much needed services, and there is no doubt that in the absence of any law or authority many of them have made a valuable contribution to the development of the society at large.

With the emergence of a Palestinian Authority (PA), some sort of clash over responsibilities, pertinence, and relations was inevitable. The view on the part of NGOs is that with the event of the PA some of their previous power and responsibilities were taken away. The government wants to impose its control and authority over the NGOs and to build a system that is able to offer the necessary services, whereas the NGOs and other civil society organizations are afraid of losing part of their mandate, power, and financial income. Thus, there is unmistakably a conflict of interests, and the NGOs and charitable societies remain in a state of internal battle as to how to (re-)organize themselves and whether and how to form links with the governmental organizations that have appeared. The government, meanwhile, is trying to draw up laws and rules to regulate the relation between the two sides. Thus far, there has not been a great interference on the part of the PA in the work of the NGOs. Exceptions include those NGOs that have ceased to offer services, that do not offer services but only exist on paper, or those that do not offer the services they are supposed to provide. The NGOs in Palestine need to be evaluated in order to see which ones are working and which ones are not. Some NGOs have signs on their doors and spend money and yet there is no one inside the offices. This is what the PA opposes, at the same time as it helps those who benefit society.

Currently, there are hardly any governmental projects that do not involve the NGOs; even in cases where the government did not want them to be involved, the World Bank and donor countries insisted. The situation in Jerusalem, where the NGOs are still operating as before, is an exception, because the PA has no role there yet.

What is needed now is an open dialogue on how to organize and build the overall system and the relationship between the NGOs and the governmental organizations. This is part of the strategic plan; the planning process requires a system on which, among other things, an open dialogue between the governmental and non-governmental organizations can be built. Together the two sides should attempt to overcome prevailing problems, such as the wasta (connections) and the unprofessionalism that still characterizes many institutional and personal relations in our society. Although in comparison to Jordan, for example, this is as yet a rather small aspect, it must be dealt with now before it exerts a real influence. We must create a link between the civil society and the governmental organizations by means of rules and regulations that will ensure their complementing each other. NGOs are an extremely helpful force for the government because they offer important services to society. Strengthening NGOs is also important due to their role in pointing to many negative developments within the government, which are often more visible when viewed from the outside, and also because they have the direct contact with society. Due to this linkage with society, NGOs are also better aware of the real needs and appropriate services required. Thus, they can give valuable feedback to the PA, allowing both sides to correct the situation together.

One of the main subjects of contention regarding the conflict between the NGOs and the PA is that there is no transparency regarding spending by the NGOs. No one really knows where the money goes and it should be the PA’s right to ask the donors who support NGOs to explain where and how the funds are spent, just as these donors demand of the PA that it account for the money it receives. Transparency must be broad; it cannot be limited to the government’s activities.

However, the real problem lies not so much with the local organizations but with the international institutions. If an institution is supported by the World Bank or the EU, for example, there is a good chance that the support will continue, because it is in these institutions’ interest to go ahead with programs and projects once they have been initiated. Thus, there is an international system that tries to create links and extend its influence to parts of the society. There are positive and negative aspects: the positive include the support and assistance as such, the negative, the direct intervention in forming policies and strategies on the part of these foreign organizations. The organizations have preferences, influence, and political relations, and they are closely connected to political decision making. Many Palestinian NGOs maintain international relations, not only with donors, but also with governmental bodies that support some of the local NGOs, partly by connecting them with foreign NGOs. On the other hand, there is the PA, which is trying to build a system, establish a defined process, and to reach a future vision for development, based on specific strategies and reasonable policies. Translating these into concrete activities and projects creates a complex framework, and here lies the problem: How can a proper system be established to the benefit of the society while there are others who are building a number of additional systems? Clearly, a strategic and future-oriented policy must be formulated that defines the framework within the confines of which everyone will work and develop relations.

In Palestine, future-oriented strategic planning has only recently begun and it revolves mainly around political matters, relations, agreements, and related issues. In contrast to other countries, Palestine is trying to build itself from within a vacuum, not knowing where its borders are and what resources are available, and unable to enter freely into relations and exchanges with other countries or to mobilize and fully utilize the resources at hand properly. The options for Palestine are confined to specific political agreements that contain many obstacles, restrictions and constraints, and make planning very inflexible - even more so since Palestine relies completely on the donor community, which agreed to provide funds until we start to walk by ourselves and use our own resources.

One should bear in mind, that for the time being, any policy or strategy is confined to this framework and developed against this background. Any strategic planning effort for the improvement of the living conditions of the Palestinian people depended from the beginning on the financial support pledged by the donor countries. The World Bank took on the role of a ‘secretary’ to the donor community and had a significant say in formulating strategies and policies. There was substantial interference from international organizations, such as UNSCO and the World Bank, and the strategic plan that was drafted was not Palestine’s own plan, vision or strategy. The World Bank was deeply involved even in the first report on the Palestinians’ living conditions, on the basis of which the donor countries’ were to make their decisions concerning aid to Palestine.

For the Palestinian side this was the first experiment of this kind. The important thing was how to get over the bridges that the donor countries placed in front of us so that they would pledge $2.5 billion for five years. We called it an investment program, because it was not our own strategic plan. However, we needed to start somewhere, implement projects, especially concerning the infrastructure, and not waste time. The investment plan looked at ways to distribute the donor money over the years on specific projects that would help accomplish the vision we had. The focus on infrastructure – with projects related to water, electricity, wastewater, roads, etc. – was also meant to help the private sector start working.

When we began we were enthusiastic about achieving our goals, but we faced a lot of problems. We started with no institutions in place, which made it impossible to establish a system. The governmental organizations had the ability to spend millions of dollars in donor funds but there was no system or procedure for spending the money. Nevertheless, projects were drafted, feasibility studies conducted, and agreements reached on what must be done, and the required international procedures were fulfilled. Once we were ready for the implementation stage, however, all the problems in the world arose at once. The closure, for example, affected everything: materials could not be supplied, and people could not move from one place to another, etc., and all the projects were pushed back from the first year to the second year to the third, without results. This kind of shortcoming is nothing to be ashamed of: it was natural, in that we did not have the power nor the governmental organizations to grasp and deal with all these difficulties. There were people employed but no work mechanism had been established, and there was no system to follow, no experience and no rules. Things have slightly improved, but even today we have only a general framework for a development plan, not a plan itself. Within this general framework, there is a ‘menu’ from which the donor countries can pick the projects they want to support. This is far from being ideal but this is our situation. The structure of the government still requires a lot of work and the actual project undertakings amount to nothing, or very little.

There is a difference between the Planning Ministry and other ministries. In the Planning Ministry, we began planning with the resources available and then expanded the scope little by little with the ultimate goal being to provide work for everyone and to involve as many people as possible in the development process. At the very beginning we looked at the structures of planning ministries around the world, in countries such as Jordan, Egypt and those in Europe. There is no one structure that can be used as a model, because the circumstances and obstacles here are peculiar, and there are no parallels elsewhere in the world. The Jordanian development plan is excellent; we studied it in detail and it can be said that it stands out from amongst the economic plans that are being put into operation. No plan can be considered a ‘best model’ because the conditions differ from country to country. However, one can pick those elements that suit the given circumstances and elaborate on them, taking into consideration the resources available and other influencing factors. In Palestine, we are still in the process of creating a working system and we should look at the experiences of others – Jordan’s system, for example, has been in place for some 50 years – to learn from their lessons and search for ways to avoid or redress and restrict the mistakes they have made.

One of the early tasks the Planning Ministry set was to put down main goals and objectives, a strategy, and then ask every ministry for theirs. Every ministry had to reply and also name the projects it wanted to implement in order to accomplish its strategic goals. I believe it is natural for the Ministry of Planning to act as a coordinator between the different other ministries, and to decide on the changes in strategies as part of its national scanning operations. However, some ministries resisted this. The Ministry of Economy, for example, insisted on making its own decisions, and there were others that referred to their own leadership capacities and financial resources and refused to accept the coordinator role of the Planning Ministry. It needs time to develop and nurture relations built on coordination between those involved.

The agreements Palestine is bound to are restrictive in many ways, but despite all the threats and constraints we still have to work on our strategic goals and towards our vision, otherwise we will disappear. We must look for those instruments that can be utilized under the given circumstances; this is part of survival. For the time being, we also have to overcome bad ‘habits’ such as frequently employing one’s connections in order to achieve goals or at least get closer to achieving them, rather than follow a system.

Unfortunately, people tend to emphasize only the negative aspects, while the positive things are not even mentioned. Criticism, however, can lead to improvement, and it is certainly better to correct mistakes today than after ten years, by which time the problems might have reached unmanageable proportions.

It appears that over the past 30 years there has been a tendency not to criticize, even in the positive sense. The Ministry of Planning is often accused of not having a plan, although there is strategic planning. There is an important difference between anything that is presented to the donor countries, because it is presented on the basis of a specific demand, and what is put down as our long-term strategy as part of the vision.

There is more than one definition concerning the meaning of strategic planning and this can lead to misunderstandings. There are different ways of interpreting and applying strategic planning, depending on the kind of problem that is being addressed or the type of goal that is aimed at. A strategy is specific and refers directly to development planning, whereas the word ‘development’ is somewhat vague, despite all the PhDs that have been written on the subject. There are many different theories and methods, and every country views the meaning of development from a different perspective.

Strategic planning has many perspectives and can be small-scale or large-scale; in the Middle East, for example, one could draw up a strategic plan on how to establish good relations with neighboring countries in the region. Part of any strategy is to build a system, which will then start to develop by itself and adjust with time; many things included in the early stages of a strategic plan might not be applicable five years later.

One should also bear in mind that vision, strategy, goals, and objectives, as well as the various models that can be applied to them, are only options. It is not a case of one plus one makes two. There are many factors that affect an issue, a tool or a decision.

The Palestinian Development Plan (PDP) was drafted in the context of the deterioration of the economic conditions – which led to a considerable decline in the per capita income and in the number of Palestinians working - of the post-Oslo era and the prevailing impediments to economic development in the Palestinian Territories. These impediments can be categorized as follows:

Logistical reasons (goods, persons)

Limitations on access to and disposition of resources, including a discrepancy between donor investment targets and actual investment

The closure

Insufficient and deteriorated infrastructure

Inadequate regulatory framework

Limits of the new administration

The PDP was first presented in Paris in January 1996 and was intended to form a framework for ministries and institutions that would enable them to realize development objectives using strategies that take into account Palestinian needs, best-practice global experience and the constraining political and socioeconomic environment.

The PDP states as follows: "The Palestinian Development Strategy is a primarily private sector lid, an outward-looking and a human resource-based strategy."

It is outward looking inasmuch as it sees beyond the known limits and confines and takes into consideration the kind of external relations Palestine could have in the future. It is a human resource-based strategy, meaning it relies a great deal on the human resources available, because there are hardly any natural resources to utilize. Therefore, the emphasis is on how to mobilize the human resource most effectively and turn it into a positive factor in the strategic planning process.

The PDP, which is based on a medium-term planning approach and national objectives (not a wish list!) is designed as a ‘bottom-up’ capital-budgeting exercise that involves donors, government ministries, institutions, and the private sector, and encourages the participation of NGOs. The strengths of the PDP are as follows:

It clarifies the future recurrent cost implications

It explores domestic financing possibilities

It provides more consistent objectives and sectoral strategies in the ministries and institutions

It considers donor input, and

It addresses the constraining environment, by doing the following:

Considering the difficult logistics (e.g., Gaza Port, industrial estates)

Prioritizing projects approved by the joint Palestinian-Israeli committees (e.g., water projects)

Including projects not requiring mutual agreement (e.g., urban roads)

Following a three-year rolling plan for flexibility

On the way to accomplishing the plan, there are various intermediate objectives. The first one is to realize a maximum, sustainable and feasible economic growth rate, driven by an export-orientated private sector, based on the optimal use of resources. The question is how to reach economic growth in the light of so many obstacles, first and foremost the Israeli-imposed closures. The vision here is that even if there are closures and Israeli-controlled borders, economic growth can still be achieved. The starting point must always be the reality, the present situation one faces, and then the search for available opportunities during which more detailed questions arise, such as how to create productive employment for a fast-growing labor force; how to overcome the legacy of occupation and build the basis for environmentally sound and sustainable growth; how to improve access to the regional and international markets; how to develop an independent infrastructure with roads, electricity grids, etc.; how to develop and expand water resources; how to protect the environment by improving sewage systems; and how to reduce poverty and meet basic needs.

The national development objectives outlined in the PDP can be summarized as follows:

Employment generation and economic growth

Rural revival and development

Development of financial institutions and policies

Improvement of social conditions and human resources development

To achieve these objectives, the PDP foresees the establishment of policy and legal frameworks to foster private sector activities as the engine of growth, focus on good governance and improve the social services. Furthermore, the development strategies include limitations on direct government intervention, while, at the same time, they continue to build a stronger infrastructure, invest in education and rural development, and address the needs of the poor.

The PDP consists of the following four components:

Physical infrastructure and environment/natural resource management;

Institutional capacity building;

Human and social development;

Productive/private sector development.

Development strategies are processes that gradually build a system; there are various forces that come into play during the course of the plan, which make it a rather vibrant piece of work. The Palestinian Development Strategy was put together in 1994 and faced various changes over time with regard to the means and priorities, but the four main components remained the same. At the beginning, the experiences of other countries were considered and the plan was called ‘Preliminary Thoughts on Strategic Planning in the Palestinian National Authority’. A planning process was put together outlining long-term objectives as well as an envisaged development process. The idea was that the Ministry of Planning would work with the other ministries on strategic planning in order to attain a sound basis on which they would interact with each other as well as with other institutions. The aim was to coordinate and agree on general goals and mechanisms. Since then, many things have changed and the plan adapted to these changes in terms of concepts, not in terms of its components.

Each of these components has its own intermediate objectives and work plans as illustrated below. Each of these sub-categories can be called a strategy as each defines a certain goal or objective.

The objectives are to provide basic infrastructure - in accordance with human needs - where the private sector cannot, to develop outside trade links and to strengthen the public sector capacity in addressing environmental ‘hot spots’.

The objectives are:

to strengthen the capacity to develop sectoral policies and enforce a good legal and regulatory framework;

to cultivate democratic and pluralistic norms and practices; and

to improve planning for sustainable service delivery.

The objectives are:

to sustain economic growth;

to reduce poverty; and

to improve the welfare of the population in the short-term with a focus on social assistance, housing, basic education and health care.

The objective is to create an enabling environment for private investment in agriculture, industry, and tourism through the provision of infrastructure, support services and regulatory structures, term financing, and risk mitigation mechanisms.

The Palestinian plan drafted a short-term strategy, as opposed to one for the medium or long-term. There are different arrangements depending on the overall situation; sometimes there is both short-term and long-term strategic planning and in this case it is important to have a link between them, i.e., a mechanism to integrate the short with the long-term. Experience has shown that short-term planning is often more appropriate in unstable situations. In education, for example, the Palestinian Development Strategy foresees a reduction in the number of students per class from 60 to 20. This is a long-term plan as the number cannot be reduced within one year due to the lack of facilities. Until today, not a single five-year plan in any developing country has succeeded. In principle, a vision should not be restricted to a certain period, e.g., five years, since the future is not predictable and changes that have not been considered and integrated in the overall plan sometimes occur. Setting definite time limits is necessary but also difficult; if there is a five-year plan people want a solution in five years, and if a solution is not reached within that period they think the world will collapse. The world is moving and will continue to move and so will the overall development process; it is a continuous process.

Regardless of whether the plan is long- or short-term, one of the most important elements is the monitoring and evaluation process, which should be carried out on a regular basis (e.g., every year). Monitoring and evaluation helps assess changes, their effect on the plan, and whether the pursued policies are correct or need to be adjusted to suit the particular circumstances.

What was presented to the donor countries was a general framework for a three-year development program. The underlying concept was a strategy related to the above mentioned four major components. The content, however, was not fixed but more of a basic outline, because everything depends on external assistance and no one knew how much the donors would pledge.

The implementation of the PDP requires funding. Thus far only for 21 percent of the overall project funds have been secured. The infrastructure component has the highest funding needs, followed by the social/human sector, the productive sector and institutional capacity building. Continued financial and political donor support for economic development is crucial for the success of the PDP.

When planning for the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, we talk about the framework of a national development plan, a physical plan on the scale of the Palestinian Territories as a whole. However, due to political constraints - mainly the division into Zones A, B and C - it cannot be implemented properly. There are many districts that are not yet included within the PNA’s area of responsibility and the concerned areas cannot be included in many projects.

An article published in the English magazine The Architectural Review in a special issue on the Middle East (March 1998) has caused an uproar in the Israeli media. This was simply because the article, which dealt with the Palestinian National Plan, described some of the Ministry of Planning’s work on issues such as landscape, coordination, environment, etc., that embraced the whole of Palestine, i.e., including the Dead Sea area, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. When asked about this, Bar Ilan, Netanyahu’s advisor, said, "Those Palestinians are dreaming." I answered, "No, we are not dreaming: we are determined to accomplish this, whether it takes ten, 15, 20, or 30 years." This is no longer a vision only; determination is a strategy that leads to accomplishments.