Structured Response #2

           Civil society is an ambiguous term as it encompasses many different organizations and there are many questions as to who should be included in the realm of civil society. Civil society is considered an important factor in the promotion of democracy and relies on the state to regulate and guarantee its autonomy. NGOs are part of civil society, but the line gets blurred with the introduction of different organizations such as religious associations, political parties, family foundations, and violent organizations. Civil societies are usually considered non-political, only working on “development” projects. However, most of the projects civil society organizations work on inevitably lead to some sort of political realm. Civil society organizations are non-political in the sense that they do not try to gain political power; their projects are focused on development, projects like service provision, poverty alleviation, advocacy, and monitoring. However, a project like monitoring elections requires some sort of emphasis on politics. Many civil society organizations, though not looking to gain power themselves, want to support democracy in their region, which could easily be considered a political action.

            In Palestine, civil society has been affected negatively by its change in leadership and funding since the 1970’s and most of the 1980’s when civil society organizations there were vibrant and strong. By 2002, activists in NGOs started to work as “professional development practitioners,” using development rather than mobilization to empower the Palestinian population. Sources of funding also shifted from contributions from regional Arab donors to mostly Western governments’ aid. After 2000 Palestinian civil society was weakened by the Israeli occupation, armed Palestinian groups, and the policies put into place by international donors. Israeli control over Palestinian daily life restricted free participation in civil society, while the influence of western donors greatly affected the types of projects Palestinian civil society organizations could embark on. The increased “professionalization” of civil society organizations affected the amount of grassroots support due to a decrease in volunteerism. The gap between professional and less professional organizations increased as collaboration with peace groups decreased.

            The Palestinian case demonstrates how too much influence and funding from the west, as well as internal conflict, can prove disastrous to the strength of a country or region’s civil society organizations. It is clear that Palestinian civil society was stronger when it was funded from more internal sources and worked closer with grassroots and less professional organizations, as opposed to now. The replacement of mobilization techniques with development also weakened civil society in the area, as fewer people were recruited and were not as involved in civil society. Overall, Palestinian civil society was more effective and successful when it was run and funded internally by NGO activists in the region.