Civil Society in the MENA Region

Transcription

1 Middle East and North Africa Summary Civil Society in the MENA Region 25 November 2013 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/ speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions, but the ultimate responsibility for accuracy lies with this document s author(s). The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery.

2 INTRODUCTION This is a summary of discussions that took place during a meeting hosted by Chatham House in partnership with the Asfari Foundation on 25 November 2013, focusing on civil society in the MENA region and the role of donors in supporting civil society organizations. The meeting brought together a range of civil society representatives from Arab and international NGOs, as well as academics, analysts and donors, mainly from the Arab world. These discussions had a particular focus on the distinct role that private foundations can play in contrast to government or other donors. Some of the main findings of the meeting include: The definition of civil society in the Arab world is ambiguous but the ambiguity of the term may be constructive as it allows it to accommodate many different groups. Donors should be wary of using strict definitions to ensure their support can reach the groups whose work is most effective. There is a long history of civil society activism in the region but it has received increasing Western attention since the Arab Spring and faces new challenges and opportunities. It is important for international donors, public and private, to support civil society in the MENA region by building the capacity of organizations and helping them to make a difference during political transitions. Private foundations can play an important role in strengthening civil society as they are nimbler and more flexible than larger and more bureaucratic organizations such as government donors, and can take more risks. Donors face many challenges in determining which civil society organizations to support, particularly in politically polarized contexts and in difficult security conditions. The programmes of donors should be co-ordinated, sustainable and strategic and their priorities determined by members of the communities they are working in. There is a particular need for more long-term funding as significant harm is caused to civil society organizations by shifting donor priorities and inconsistent funding sources. 2

3 There should be more funding for research on civil society by people from the region, but it is necessary to ensure that it is accessible and will have a practical impact on the work of donors and civil society groups. The meeting was held under the Chatham House Rule and the views expressed are those of the participants. The following summary is intended to serve as an aide-mémoire to those who took part and to provide a general summary of discussions for those who did not. The Chatham House Rule When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed. 3

4 SESSION 1: DEFINING CIVIL SOCIETY AND ITS ROLE IN MENA Definition of civil society In the first session participants discussed the definition of civil society in the Arab region, with particular reference to how donors could usefully direct their support to civil society groups in the MENA region in future. Participants agreed that the concept of civil society in the MENA region was ambiguous and that there were different views about what characteristics led to groups being accepted as civil society organizations. For example, it was questioned whether religious groups and GONGOs (government organised non-governmental organizations) should be seen as part of civil society and if informal groupings that rejected formal structures such as the new youthled hirakat (movements) could be classed as civil society organizations. Some questioned whether civil society really exists as a unified sector. It was highlighted that the role of civil society varied in different countries as a result of different environments, traditions and needs. For instance, one participant noted that in Lebanon and Palestine the purpose of many civil society organizations was to deliver public services that the governments could not, while in Egypt the key civil society groups were quasi-governmental organizations. It was also questioned whether groups were mainly shaped from within or through the availability of funding from external donors. Furthermore, one participant highlighted that some in the region see civil society as a Western construct that did not exist in the Middle East, and that American and European funding for certain civil society organizations before the Arab Spring has left negative perceptions of the concept. The definition was proposed by a participant that civil society described a people-centred phenomenon outside of the state and that civil society organizations were groups of citizens seeking to represent certain interests and to have an impact on the governing of the country. Others focused on organizations working for the public good. However, another participant offered three different ways for donors to approach the question, and suggested each donor should choose the most suitable approach: Formal and informal organizations of citizens grouped together around interests working to represent these interests to governments; 4

5 From what society sees as the meaning of civil as an adjective, i.e. groups unified around a vision of a secular, tolerant society; and Laws and rules of the game which form the civil society ecosystem, such as the legislative environment and institutional sustainability of groups. (Such an approach is taken by the USAID CSO Sustainability Index). Nevertheless several participants suggested that the ambiguity of the term could be constructive as it would be unhelpful to create a definition that excluded many organizations doing important work on the ground. It was accepted that any definition needed to be broad enough to accommodate many different groups and to be able to cope with the fast-changing scene in the region at the moment. It was suggested that the most important criteria in assessing groups in the region should be the effectiveness of their activities on the ground, i.e. focusing on the action rather than the actor. Whether organizations had a true local constituency was also seen as important. Recent developments in civil society It was argued that the recent Arab uprisings had focused more Western attention on civil society in the MENA region but that there was a strong tradition of such organizations there. Guilds, spiritual orders and charitable organizations were cited as examples of civil society groups that have a particularly long history in the region. The proliferation of social media has made it harder for states to control the activities of civil society, by giving the latter more independent means of communication. One participant also noted that there are now more informal and temporary civil society organizations as groupings are created around a specific issue and afterwards dissolve rather than become institutionalized. This is a global trend. Participants mentioned many examples of important work that new civil society groups were carrying out in the region, such as private sector mentoring in schools, the HarassNet initiative in Egypt and the Local Coordination Committees in Syria. Civil society priorities Participants discussed the diverse set of priorities of civil society in the Arab world. One participant noted that everything was seen as a priority in the 5

6 region as there were so many issues that needed to be addressed. Other participants suggested that the priority of people on the ground was economic empowerment and the provision of educational and employment opportunities, particularly for youth. This led one participant to question whether civil society organizations were best placed to deal with such issues. It was said that civil society groups were also facing country-specific challenges. It was argued that in Syria the provision of safety and security, especially for women and refugees was the priority at the moment but that transitional movements to support the establishment of concepts such as the rule of law, human rights and government transparency were also needed. One participant also highlighted the need to provide psychosocial support to help those who had been traumatized by recent violence in the region, particularly as such trauma could have a detrimental effect on the civil society of the future. SESSION 2: SUPPORTING CIVIL SOCIETY Needs of civil society Participants discussed the support that donors could provide for civil society groups in the region. It was argued that groups did not want help in determining their aims and objectives but assistance in achieving these aims. One participant noted that attempts by donors to assist groups by teaching them about democracy and civil society had caused resentment; local civil society actors felt that they had already demonstrated their understanding of such concepts through the groups and networks they had established themselves. Many participants agreed that the priority of donors should be to strengthen the organizations themselves to provide them with the capacity to implement their own ideas. The importance of helping groups become self-sufficient and no longer dependent on donor support, such as by training them to raise their own funds and to reach out beyond the converted to a wider group of stakeholders, was highlighted. It was suggested that donors should help civil society groups devise strategies to use social media to reach out to different sections of society and establish dialogue and debate, helping them to become opinion-makers in the region. It was argued that it was necessary to help groups develop the skills to work both upwards (influencing governments and businesses) and downwards (engaging and mobilizing communities and providing local services). It was 6

7 suggested that groups that received capacity-building support could go on to assist other organizations in the region. Participants also stressed the need to help civil society groups cope with the challenges of political transitions. One participant argued that it was necessary for donors to consider what will happen the day after violence ends in Syria and that they needed to support those who would have a crucial role in the peace process and the foundation of a new state. Many participants agreed that donors needed to help equip Syrians with the necessary skills to rebuild the state, such as mediation and negotiation, and support preparatory political and legal work, including investigating lessons from other countries and facilitating the discussion of ideas. It was argued that donors had left it too late in Egypt and the lack of preparatory work had allowed the postrevolution governments to successfully clamp down on civic engagement. It was also said that donors could help promote social cohesion in divided communities by facilitating dialogue and consensus building. It was argued that it was important to support civil society organizations at all levels as if there were only grassroots groups it would be difficult to channel their demands to the national level and to take advantage of opportunities to influence the government. Donors can provide direct and indirect funding to civil society organizations. A large variety of innovative examples of such funding were mentioned, including encouraging organisations to become sustainable through income generation and community support. Private foundations Participants discussed the role of private foundations in supporting civil society. It was said that, as donors, they have advantages over governments and large public organizations, especially during transitional periods. They were described as more nimble and able to respond to events more quickly. It was also suggested that private foundations could take more risks as, although they have to adhere to the regulations specific to their status, they were not bound by the same level of restrictions as large publicly funded NGOs or governments. Thus it was possible for private foundations to try out schemes and acknowledge when they did not work, allowing both public and private donors to learn from their experiences. It was argued that the role of private foundations should be to support pilot initiatives that, if they work, could be models for others including local governments to scale up. One participant also suggested that private foundations lacked the same political sensitivities as governments and thus could support important 7

8 schemes that Western governments were unable to for political reasons. The promotion of independent media in Syria was cited as an example. It was argued that, although the importance of supporting media was accepted, Western governments were uncomfortable funding local media outlets and giving local communities ownership over them out of a fear of the messages that would be articulated. It was suggested that instead a private foundation could support such schemes. Challenges of supporting civil society Participants discussed the challenges that donors face in supporting civil society in the MENA region. It was agreed that it was often difficult for donors to decide which groups to support. Supporting religious organizations Participants discussed whether donors should support religious organizations. One participant argued that it would be unwise to refuse to support groups involved in religious activities because it would be ignoring big sections of society as many communities in the Arab world still had strong ties with religious establishments. It was highlighted that some groups had no choice but to be involved in religious activities, while it was also suggested that it would be beneficial to work with moderate religious organizations as it would be easier for them to combat the arguments of jihadists and to establish a dialogue with those under extremist influence. It was argued that there is an artificial dichotomy of secular and religious groups and that they often share similar aims, such as the opposition to the recent curbing of civil society activism in Egypt. Furthermore one participant stressed the need to base funding decisions on the activities of organizations rather than their identity as it was argued that a group could have a secular, democratic-sounding name but be engaged in completely different activities and vice versa. The example of Ukraine was also mentioned, where donors had worked with the Orthodox Church on issues such as HIV/AIDS because it was the organization that had the most trust from society. Operating in polarized societies and challenging security conditions Participants also discussed the problems caused by Western government regulations designed to prevent funding reaching terrorist groups. For example, a participant highlighted how many donors were prohibited from funding any groups with links to Hamas but that this excludes around 80 per 8

9 cent of the population of Gaza. It was pointed out that the multitude of informal groups after the Arab Spring posed challenges for donors as government regulations made it difficult for British private foundations to fund informal groups. Participants discussed the difficulties for donors operating in polarized societies, such as Egypt, where they have to be careful not to perpetuate cleavages through their selection of groups to fund. One participant noted the difficulty for donors in supporting inclusivity when the groups that they were in partnership with wished to exclude certain elements of their society. Several participants brought up the difficulties for civil society support in the Syrian context due to the security situation. For example, it makes it difficult to organise activities inside the country. It also means that some groups have problems communicating directly with their funders leading to strained relations. Furthermore some groups are refusing funding for their own safety as they did now want their organization to be widely known or perceived to have connections with Western donors. It is also the case in other countries that some local groups believed that accepting Western funding would lead them to lose their credibility. Challenges for donors One participant highlighted that the funding application processes of foreign donors were prohibitive for small groups and that many were deterred from applying because of this. It was argued that processes often unfairly advantaged groups that had the ability to effectively articulate and promote their proposals, but which were not necessarily those doing the best work on the ground. Furthermore many excellent groups are not actively seeking funding. Thus it was argued that donors should conduct investigations on a regular basis to discover the best organizations to support. Furthermore, it is much easier and quicker for groups to obtain funds from Gulf countries than European bodies. The dangers of this situation were highlighted as it was argued that much funding from the Gulf appeared primarily directed to Islamist groups. It was argued that it was necessary for donors to carry out effective checks on groups before they provided them with funding. Participants warned that many groups in the region pretended to further civil society in order to benefit from international funding. One participant stressed the importance of scrutinizing the organizations themselves rather than just looking at the proposals they had submitted. It was suggested that donors should examine the management of groups and 9

10 their activities on the ground, and check that their processes were transparent and legitimate. One participant argued that donors faced a fundamental tension as many see civil society as political, yet the national government under which these organizations worked saw anything political as a threat. However another participant argued that it was possible for donors to support civil society and human rights without having broader political aims and that this was the case for many donors. Yet it was suggested that the work of civil society organizations was in competition with political groups both in their attempts to influence government and in their efforts to engage citizens and provide services for them. One participant drew attention to the fact that in some counties the authorities perceived any independent initiatives as a threat. Recommendations for donors Improve coordination Participants agreed that donors needed to co-ordinate their actions with each other at all levels to avoid duplication and to learn from the experiences of other donors. One participant pointed out that it was impossible for a single organization to change the world and the importance was stressed of donors meeting to exchange ideas and make plans. It was argued that it was vital that people followed up on the ideas that came out of such discussions and that they had the time and money to do so. At the moment much effort is wasted due to a lack of co-ordination as, for example, the same training is replicated in the same communities by different groups. It was also suggested that resources could be used more effectively if donors made concerted efforts rather than conducting separate smaller projects in different areas simultaneously. Participants also highlighted the importance of connecting civil society groups on the ground with each other and encouraging them to co-ordinate their work and to create opportunities to meet, debate and run small projects funded locally or through small, community-managed grants. The importance of the donor taking time and getting to know the partner and the local situation was also stressed. Participants emphasized the benefits to donors and civil society groups of learning from the experiences of other countries. However it was also noted that some groups in the region were reluctant to listen to examples from other parts of the world. 10

11 Sustainable support and long-term commitments Participants stressed the need for donors to provide sustainable support and to make long-term commitments. It was argued that donors should focus on long-term processes and how their activities fit into them rather than only thinking of individual projects. Participants highlighted the problems caused for groups by short-term funding as groups subsequently have to seek assistance from other donors who have different objectives and priorities. It was also suggested that, when donors supported only one project and then left, it gave people the impression that they did not care. One participant pointed out that the need to provide long-term support to groups meant that they could not flit between different organizations depending on which one was believed to be carrying out the best work at the time. Instead it was argued that donors should identify specific groups to support and then provide them with consistent assistance. Improving programme strategy It was also argued that the programmes of donors needed to be strategic and based on a theory of change. It was suggested that donors should determine what change they wanted to see and direct their activities towards that aim. One participant also stressed the importance for donors to reflect on their experience and learn from it rather than just continually working on new projects. Donors were advised to identify tipping points when they could have disproportionate impact, and also to think of processes of change rather than projects. Many participants also highlighted the importance of a bottom-up theory of change, arguing that local people should determine the priorities of programmes and define what sort of society they wanted. This is vital in order for local communities felt they had ownership over the projects. The role of the donor should then be to provide catalytic funding to local initiatives that local people had created to solve their own problems. One participant highlighted the predicament of organizations in Palestine who had to unwillingly conform to the agenda of donors to allow them to receive the necessary funding to provide citizens with essential services. Support local knowledge generation Participants agreed that donors should provide more support for research on civil society in the region. It was argued that it was important to fund research conducted by local people as so much research about the region is currently generated in the West. Most centres in the region are underfunded, and 11

12 donors were called upon to fund both think tanks and independent researchers. It was suggested that the Arab Spring had provided new opportunities for this as many new writers, particularly among the youth, were now writing about the uprisings. It was also argued that research could help combat sectarianism and support intercommunity relations by reducing misunderstanding between communities and between countries. Make research accessible Participants stressed the importance of ensuring that such research was easily accessible and that it was shared widely with civil society groups. It was argued that at the moment there was much research that people were not aware of and did not know how to access. One participant advocated the creation of a database of researchers and publications that could be categorized by topic. The need to ensure that research was accessible was also highlighted, with reports needing to be written in Arabic and using nonacademic language. Participants discussed the risk of research being purely academic and having no practical impact on the situation on the ground. It was argued that it was important to ensure that reports were policy- and practice-orientated and that the work was relevant to groups in the region. New approaches to capacity building Participants also discussed the best ways to support civil society groups through capacity-building. Topics seen as useful included helping organizations define their own work and to identify, engage and define the needs of their stakeholders. Strategic thinking and planning were also seen as important. Providing local organizations with examples of how to do successful advocacy was also emphasized. One participant argued that rather than just using traditional methods, such as workshops, donors needed to employ more creative and interactive techniques. Art, theatre, sport and social media were suggested as alternative mediums through which to conduct training. Making capacity-building available through new ways, such as an online capacity-building market place, was also mentioned. Information and ideas about fresh approaches being developed in other parts of the world could make a contribution to the dynamic civil society already functioning in the Arab world. 12

13 ABOUT THE MENA PROGRAMME The Middle East and North Africa Programme, headed by Dr Claire Spencer, undertakes high-profile research and projects on political, economic and security issues affecting the Middle East and North Africa. To complement our research, the MENA Programme runs a variety of discussion groups, roundtable meetings, workshops and public events which seek to inform and broaden current debates about the region and about UK and international policy. We also produce a range of publicly available reports, books and papers. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This workshop was held with the support of The Asfari Foundation, a registered British charity set up and funded by Ayman and Sawsan Asfari. It aims to help young people make a valuable contribution to society by empowering them through education, research, and the power of free thinking. The Foundation also supports programmes that encourage the development of civil society, as well as providing humanitarian relief in emergencies. The Foundation works through reputable partner organisations in the UK, Syria, Palestine and Lebanon. 13