SEMINARS Passia Seminar 1999 Media and Communication Skills

 

 

Dr. Ishaq Y. Al-Qutub[1]

 

The foundation of any civil society is the provision of civil freedoms in­clud­ing the freedom of worship, ideology, movement, residency, thought, con­science, organization and public assembly, in addition to freedom of ex­pression. Basic freedom means the welfare of the individual and the devel­opment of his life and personality within the context of the welfare of the community and society, and it is the constitution of the State, in addi­tion to religion and the prevailing culture and values, that define the vari­ous kinds of freedoms. Democracy prevails only when freedom exists, which is why the constitution of the State also mentions implicitly the means of defend­ing those same freedoms.

 

An important aspect of civil freedom is the protection of the rights of indi­viduals and groups. Such rights, including equality before the law, should be preserved by the State, regardless of the color, religion, race, ethnicity or language of its citizens. As for freedom of conscience, it means the right of the individual to develop his/her thoughts and beliefs concerning moral issues on the basis of his/her faith and religion or from an ideological standpoint. Naturally, these same thoughts and beliefs will usually dictate how one behaves.

 

 

Definition of Civil Society

 

The term ‘civil society’ is used as an analytic term in social sciences. It is also used as a ‘normative category’ that is subject to change in accor­dance with the changing political and historical circumstances as well as changing theories. In this context, we talk about liberalism, the concept of social de­mocracy, the concept of radical democracy and the Islamic con­cept. One can pose the question: Is ‘civil society’ a synonym of ‘democ­racy’ or is it equivalent to political participation, or a parliament? How do we consider the local initiatives of citizens in organizing such institutions as neighbor­hood councils or groups to protect the environment or con­sumers and the like? How do we view non-governmental organizations: as a mode of life, as an alternative culture or as pressure groups?

 

Philosophers, sociologists and thinkers such as Hobbs, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Jean Boden, to name a few, view civil society as a form of: a) the rule of the law, b) the separation between the State and society, and c) the balance among authorities, or between the prevailing forces in society and the State.

 

Finally, a distinction should be made between ‘nation’ and ‘nationality’ or national identity. A nation can be transformed into a civil society, and in turn, the civil society can be transformed into a sovereign state. Ensuring that individual human needs are compatible with the collective needs of the society and the market system is an important way of facilitating the move toward civil society.

 

 

Why Civil Society?

 

Throughout history, civil society came into being in response to one-party rule in communist states, to highly centralized decision-making in liberal states, and in response to market economy control over social, economic and cultural life. In addition civil society emerged in response to the pres­ence of dictatorships in Third World states and finally, in order to overcome stagnant organizational and traditional structures within society.

 

The ultimate goal of any people should be the establishment of a society in which equality, participation, representation and justice prevails. I want to emphasize that democracy and civil society are two separate concepts, with the former envisaging the means to achieve the latter.

 

 

Prerequisites of Civil Society

 

In a paternalistic, patriarchal society, such as Palestinian society, it is use­ful to define the relationship between the citizen and the State as fol­lows:

 

·       There should be a separation between the State and the household. The two are structurally different: the household often consists of only one family, while the State is made up of thousands of families; hence the difference between the head of the household and that of the State.

·       There should be a clear distinction between the State and society or in essence between the State institutions and those of society.

·       The individual should be viewed as a citizen, a distinct legal entity re­gardless of his/her loyalties. There should be clear distinction between the mechanisms, goals and functions of the various social and eco­nomic institutions.

·       A clear distinction should be made between societal organizations con­sisting of citizens who voluntarily pool their resources to achieve com­mon goals and the usual organic social structures.

·       Civil society will not develop in a weak state, i.e., one where the author­ity is weak, but emerges when there is a strong state in order to provide a balance of power.

·       There is a need to monitor the State authority, since the State can monitor society and has the potential and ability to exceed its mandate and obligations.

·       There is a need to define the relationship between the State and soci­ety, since the possibility of the former suppressing the latter exists.

·       Civil society is a function of the relationship between State and society and a source from which the legitimacy of the State can be strength­ened.

 

 

Palestinian Society: The Challenges

 

Throughout history, Palestinian society has been affected by a succession of regimes; this is clear in the fact that Jerusalem has been conquered and re-conquered approximately 25 times. In modern history, Palestine wit­nessed the transfer from the Ottoman Turks to the British Mandate rule, then the change from British colonialism to the partitioning of Palestine, which resulted in the declaration of the State of Israel, including over two thirds of Palestine. The West Bank and Gaza Strip became two separate entities under separate administration: the former became part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, while the latter was put under the admini­stration of the Egyptian Government. In 1994, following the Oslo Agree­ment, parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were placed under the rule of the Pal­es­tinian Authority. This succession of regimes meant there was a tran­sition from authoritarian, colonialist and militaristic rule and the division of society into two distinct classes (namely the upper rich and the lower poor) to a society seeking independence, building a civil social, po­litical and eco­nomic order, and a three-class society (upper, middle and lower). Any final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, from a Palestinian per­spective, must result in Palestinian sovereignty and self-dependence, re­quiring the proper utilization of human and physical re­sources, sustainable institution building, and subsequent social and eco­nomic development.

 

The first challenge arose with the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which called for the establishment of national home for the Jews in Palestine: a clear violation of the rights of the Palestinian people. The process of strength­ening the Jewish community in Palestine involved the consolidation of Jews mainly, from European countries with the subtle but effective coop­eration of the Western forces, mainly the British Mandate government. The forma­tion of the purely Israeli institutions such as the kibbutz, the moshav, and the Histadrut, in addition to the various educational institutions, was essen­tial to the formation of the Jewish State later on.

 

The second challenge was to restore the Palestinian self-identity and to resist the expansion of Jewish settlement in Palestine. When the Palestini­ans reacted to the new situation, their attempts were marked by a lack of good planning and other serious weaknesses pertaining to structure and performance.

 

The third challenge arose when the Arab League involved itself in making major decisions related to the future of the Palestinians. At the same time, Palestinians felt the need to structure their contemporary society by en­gaging in institution building; consequently, a large number of political par­ties, labor and professional unions, charitable organizations, clubs, and mass media institutions were established.

 

The fourth challenge was the most difficult; namely, to achieve unity after the dispersion of the Palestinians following the War of 1948. The aim of the State of Israel, since its declaration, was to create entities and prevent unity or direct communication between the areas where Palestinians ex­isted within the cease-fire line, which separated the residents of over 90 villages from their farms and land. Three areas were defined: the southern region encompassing Bedouins, the collective villages of the Triangle, and the northern region around Nazareth. The Palestinians were treated as second-class citizens and restrictions were applied covering various as­pects of their social and economic wellbeing.

 

 

Palestinian Society After 1948

 

After 1948, the Gaza Strip and what became known as the West Bank were outside the range of Palestinian control. The two areas were physi­cally separated, there was a vast difference between them regarding the availability of natural resources, and both their economic and authority systems were distinct and unconnected.

 

The overall status of Palestinians between 1948-1967 can be summarized as follows:

 

·       Jordanian (West Bank) and Egyptian (Gaza) government systems were applied, meaning that the Palestinians gradually lost control over their political, economic and civic affairs, whilst becoming increasingly de­pendent on the Arab states, which by now were playing a significant role in attempting to resolve the conflict with Israel and restore the rights of the Palestinian people. Moreover, the role of the local civil or­ganizations was marginalized by the Jordanian and Egyptian authori­ties.

·       Palestinian performance inside Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip was inconsistent and varied from one area to the next. In Israel the Palestinians were denied any contact with the Arab states and were obliged to start establishing their civil societies from zero. The fact that they were forced to accept Israeli sovereignty necessitated the adapta­tion to new conditions. In the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Pales­tinians encountered diverse conditions such as: 1) the cutting off of di­rect communication between the two areas; 2) the slow revitalization of civil societies that had been established in Palestine starting in the 1920s; 3) the necessary but difficult adaptation to new local govern­ment sys­tems; 4) an increase in the population density; 5) greater par­ticipation in government administration; and 6) the emergence of an oil economy in the Gulf region with Palestinian involvement. New political parties were formed such as the Ba’ath, National Liberation, and Mos­lem Brother­hood parties, while Arab nationalists functioned both se­cretly and openly until free elections were held.

 

 

 

 

Israeli Occupation in 1967

 

The impact of the Israeli occupation on the development of the Palestinian civil society was minimal due to the practices of the military authority. The following adverse conditions prevailed:

 

·       the uprooting of Palestinian society and the demolition of its infra­struc­ture due to the longest occupation in the history of the region;

·       the shift from state building to settlement expansion in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and on the Golan Heights;

·       the refusal of Israel to abide by tens of UN General Assembly and Se­curity Council resolutions and other international human rights conven­tions and treaties;

·       the application of severe restrictions on Palestinian economic, social, educational and cultural development, the aim being the creation of high dependency on the Israeli economy and other services.

 

 

The PLO and Civil Institutions

 

The establishment of the PLO in the mid 1960s contributed to the success of the attempts to create and restructure civil institutions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Nevertheless, the institutions were forced to function un­der abnormal conditions and severe military occupation restrictions far away from the Palestinian leadership.

 

The Palestinian civil system and the development of local institutions went through various phases, characterized by adverse socioeconomic and po­litical conditions as follows:

 

·       Jordan played a dynamic role in overlooking the operation of local in­stitutions in the West Bank. In Gaza, the National United Front was formed but with non-civil objectives and did not play a major role in structuring the civil societies.

·       When the PLO was acclaimed in Rabat 1974 as the sole representa­tive of the Palestinian people, the Palestinian Front was created en­com­passing various factions such as Fatah, the Communist Party, the Lib­eration Front, the Democratic Front and others.

·        Internal and external structures became aware of each other and two types of institutions emerged: formal ones, including domestic ones concerned with health, education, welfare, etc., which were recognized by the Israeli Military Authority, and unrecognized and unapproved grassroots movements, which were involved mainly in voluntary work in rural and urban areas.

·       In the municipal elections of 1967, Palestinian nationalist groups man­aged to secure seats in main village and city councils and were able to organize openly under their own leadership. This created a shift from the philanthropic concept to that of development. Institutions like the Palestinian Higher Education Council were formed and a conference that dealt with the issue of supporting Palestinian institutions was held in 1981. The Jordanian Palestinian Joint Committee was established in 1978 as a result of the Arab Summit held in Baghdad.

·       The Israeli Military Authority took a series of steps to weaken the Pal­estinian civil organizations, which Israel often considered as subversive institutions. Amongst these steps were attempts to have secret infor­mants from among the Palestinians infiltrate the local organizations.

·       The role of the PLO, when it had its head offices ‘outside’, increased in running the affairs of the Palestinians who were ‘inside’. The PLO dele­gated a number of Personalities for Dialogue with the USA through Jor­dan, without consulting the Palestinian ranks and file in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This marginalized the process of making collec­tive po­litical and social decisions and created a temporary gap be­tween the ‘outside’ and the ‘inside’.

·       The Intifada emerged due to local deteriorating political and economic conditions, which led to gradual self-management, the amalgamation of political factions under a united leadership and linkage with the ‘out­side’ leadership, the PLO. This resulted, amongst other things, in an in­crease in foreign aid to local institutions.

 

 

The PNA and Civil Society

 

Palestinian society shares several features with modern societies but whilst being characterized by traditional peculiarities in defining the politi­cal and social identity. The areas and type of environment in which Pales­tinians live, i.e., village, urban area etc, and strong familial and tribal ties all con­tribute to the prevailing social structure and affect Palestinian devel­opment and policies. Neutral groups and individuals were marginalized from the decision-making process. Today, both Moslems and Christians share to­gether the responsibility for building a civil society and should be equally aware that a strong civil society entails cooperation between the two groups in striving toward a common goal.

 

The influence of the upper class, which once was prominent in Palestinian politics, has gradually diminished as a result of various factors, most im­portant of which is the election of the Palestinian Legislative Council. The election of the council brought to the forefront middle and to a lesser extent lower class individuals (who had become powerful through joining the long national struggle of the PLO).

 

 

The Future of Palestinian Civil Society

 

The development of civil institutions has strengthened mainly as a result of international aid. However, the PNA has taken measures in an attempt to organize the non-governmental and philanthropic organizations both in Gaza and West Bank with a view to regulating funding, ensuring more effi­cient use of human and material resources, and dealing with the over­lap in services and functions. Clearly, there is a need to ensure better co­ordina­tion between the various NGO unions that are currently classified under various categories.

 

At present, non-governmental and civil institutions have limited power and are unable to influence the decision-making process. The PNA, in at­tempting to improve the organizational structure, register these organiza­tions and evaluate their status and role still needs to develop a clearer concept with regard to establishing the appropriate procedures. Grassroots organizations fear that their effectiveness, autonomy and impact on the formation of a civil society will become further marginalized as a result of governmental checks and controls.

 

The following are conditions to be met in order for the Palestinian civil in­stitutions to make an effective contribution towards building a civil society:

 

·       Regulation and legislation of NGOs to strengthen their role and re­sources such as in programs for institution building, organization and management. A national council (for the West Bank and Gaza Strip) would be instrumental in the development of policies and strategies.

·       allowing greater NGO and civil institution participation in the political decision-making process, with relevant implementation and coordina­tion mechanisms;

·       building a civil society requires autonomy, an understanding of roles status, values, and norms related to the role and structure of related in­stitutions. This requires national training programs and further devel­opment of the leadership;

·       facilitating local, rural and urban community involvement in the policy­making, planning, implementation and evaluation of civil institutions: the objectives, processes, outcomes and impact on sustainable devel­op­ment;

·       establishing links with Arab, regional and international civil institutions through a system of exchange and joint projects and activities.

 

In conclusion, a sustainable Palestinian civil society can be achieved through concerted efforts, the coordination of human and material re­sources and the application of sound principles with the support of proper legislation. The ultimate objective is to provide the opportunity for Pales­tinian citizens to enjoy their identity, freedom, equality, and justice, all of which were denied to them for decades.

 

 

Bibliography

 

Galioun, Burhan, et al., Around the Democratic Option - Critical Studies. Ramallah: Muwatin, 1997. (Arabic)

Bisharah, Azmi, A Contribution to the Critic of Civil Society. Ramallah: Muwatin, 1996. (Arabic)

Al-Hermassi, Abdul Baqi, “The Civil Society and the State as Implemented in Western Politics”, in The Civil Society in the Arab World, The Center for Arab Unity Studies, Beirut, 1992. (Arabic)

Ibrahim, Hassanien T., “The Structure of Civil Society - Quantitative and Quali­ta­tive Indicators,” in The Civil Society in the Arab World, The Center for Arab Unity Studies, Beirut, 1992. (Arabic)

Daqqaq, Ibrahim, “Towards Building a Palestinian Civil Society” in The Civil So­ciety in the Arab World, The Center for Arab Unity Studies, Beirut, 1992. (Arabic)

 

 

---