
Lebanon's strong civil society model should be preserved
https://arab.news/zkkc2
This time it is not our fault. We cannot take the blame for Donald Trump's funding freeze or EU aid cuts. But these will affect Lebanon more than other countries because of the strength of the nongovernmental organizations sector and its dependence on aid. It is chaotic out there in the NGO and civil society world — many risk closure and were not even aware that their grants were originally part of a chain of US Agency for International Development subcontracts. Thousands of lives will be affected and it seems to have happened almost overnight, with little warning.
It is not ideal, but the Lebanese have long since had no choice but to learn how to manage with a weak, absent, hijacked or paralyzed state, especially since the civil war. They have done so through civil society, communal and nongovernmental bodies, and the private sector. It has worked for them because it builds on existing traditions and age-old associations. While it is crucial to restore a functioning state, it is even more urgent to rescue society's homegrown institutions. It is not a zero-sum game between the state and civil society — they have learned to work together.
To illustrate this, consider the aftermath of the Beirut Port blast of August 2020. The government was in complete paralysis and had actually just resigned, while the banking sector was in collapse mode after the state declared its bankruptcy and defaulted on loan payments. Major hospitals were partly destroyed by the blast and were overwhelmed with casualties. Someday, an admirable story will be told of how society mobilized to help clear up and rebuild and rehouse, feed and care for itself, while no politician even dared show up to face the angry crowds.
Lebanon mostly skipped the 20th century, which in other countries of the region was characterized by secular nationalism and strong states. Its politics are a continuation of the Ottoman Empire's system of millets, which was based on recognized semi-autonomous religious communities. This was how the empire managed its diversity, by allowing each community to manage its own affairs, such as education, personal status laws and other services. Lebanese communities had their own schools, hospitals and tribunals and a model gradually evolved in which NGOs worked in partnership with the ministries but sometimes competed with state institutions.
While it is crucial to restore a functioning state, it is even more urgent to rescue society's homegrown institutions
Nadim Shehadi
The system has many critics, especially when communal services are also tied to politicians who use them for votes and clientelism. Defenders of the system argue that religious institutions and even sectarian parties have direct and easier access to recipients and are mostly open to everybody, rather than exclusively being for their constituents. The system can become more equitable with proper state regulation.
Over time, large secular NGOs like arcenciel, which helps people with disabilities, created a model to mitigate some of the disadvantages. This formula is based on the principles of rights and access, with the state playing the role of regulator and consumers having a choice of which supplier to go to. This also creates healthy competition that improves quality. The model has even been copied and used by donors in places like Palestine, Algeria and Mozambique.
Pierre Issa, the co-founder of arcenciel, explained to me that the name, which is French for rainbow, is written all in lower case because its members do not use capital letters as a sign of humility. Activists of his generation were influenced by Bishop Gregoire Haddad, who once explained to me that social work should be promoted in order to create a responsible society. He said that this intangible outcome was more important to him than the aid itself and that it created a culture of humanity.
Smaller NGOs like Skoun Lebanese Addictions Center are in danger of closing down because of both the banking crisis and the international funding crisis. If Skoun were to close, it would mean the loss of 22 years of experience in the field, which would be difficult to replace. The founder of an independent media NGO also told me it had lost 90 percent of its funding and was running a skeleton staff in a bid to avoid closure.
The funding crisis has many components, in addition to the sudden and unexpected USAID freeze. USAID was founded in 1961 by the Kennedy administration. This was the beginning of what became known as the development decade, which also saw states in Western Europe join in with the objectives of eradicating poverty, promoting democratic values and, at the time, fighting communism.
The proportion of spending on aid increased as military spending decreased with the end of the Cold War and the declaration of a 'new world order' by President George H.W. Bush. Even the World Bank, which normally dealt only with governments, opened a civil society program around that time.
The trend continued with increased support for democratization, as well as humanitarian support, and it peaked in the early 2000s. Both the US and the EU had policies to promote democratization and development as a way to combat both immigration and terrorism. But this started to reverse after 2015, with another increase in military spending and decrease in aid.
There may be some benefits from a reset triggered by the USAID freeze and the European squeeze
Nadim Shehadi
There may be some benefits from a reset triggered by the USAID freeze and the European squeeze. The sector, as it grew, became too bureaucratized and inefficient, if not with a certain degree of corruption. One extreme example is where layer upon layer of subcontracting meant that less than 10 percent of the original funding reached actual beneficiaries.
The USAID slogan of 'From the American People' had less to do with the American people and more to do with its bureaucrats and taxes. Government aid, which distributes compulsory taxes, also decreases the social responsibility and empathy element that is achieved through voluntary charitable donations. An example of this came in the aftermath of the First World War, when Near East Relief was created to help Armenian and Greek refugees from Turkiye. It raised $110 million, equivalent to $1.25 billion today, from some half a million small donations, all organized by volunteers in the days of snail mail. That was real aid from the American people and the voluntary element was as valuable in terms of international goodwill as the material aid itself.
Lebanon is unique in the region for having independent institutions that collaborate efficiently with ministries. It is also almost unique globally for having maintained a strong civil society despite the post-Second World War trend of greater dependence on the role of the state. In fact, that system of state provision has proven to be unsustainable, as the new generation pays far more in taxes for far fewer services.
We are hopefully entering a new era in the region with less conflict, but a great deal of work is also needed to repair the damage in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq and Yemen. This should not all be done by governments and state institutions. The Lebanese model of collaboration between state and society helps with the healing of both physical and psychological wounds and it should be preserved. It is proof that wars and hardship can bring out the best in people, as well as the worst.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
US senator moves to limit Trump's war powers on Iran, as Mideast conflict escalates
A Democratic senator introduced legislation on Monday to prevent US President Donald Trump from using military force against Iran without Congress's authorization, as an escalating battle between Israel and Iran raised fears of broader conflict. Tim Kaine of Virginia has tried for years to wrest back Congress's authority to declare war from the White House. During Trump's first term, in 2020, Kaine introduced a similar resolution to rein in Trump's ability to wage war against Iran. That measure passed both the Senate and House of Representatives, winning some Republican support, but did not garner enough votes to survive the Republican president's veto. Kaine said his latest war powers resolution underscores that the US Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the sole power to declare war and requires that any hostility with Iran be explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for the use of military force. 'It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict,' Kaine said in a statement. Under US law, war powers resolutions are privileged, meaning that the Senate will be required to promptly consider and vote on the matter. Israel's military launched attacks on Iran on Friday with the stated aim of wiping out Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Iran, which says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, responded with missile attacks on Israel. Both countries have kept up their attacks, killing and wounding civilians and raising concern among world leaders meeting in Canada this week that the biggest battle between the two old enemies could lead to a broader regional conflict. Trump has lauded Israel's offensive while denying Iranian allegations that the US has taken part and warning Tehran not to widen its retaliation to include US targets. Before leaving for the summit in Canada on Sunday, Trump was asked what he was doing to de-escalate the situation. 'I hope there's going to be a deal. I think it's time for a deal,' he told reporters. 'Sometimes they have to fight it out.'


Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
Pakistani delegation wraps up diplomatic tour to convince Western capitals after India conflict
ISLAMABAD: A Pakistani delegation formed by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to present Islamabad's perspective on its recent conflict with India wrapped up its Brussels tour on Monday, the chief of the mission said in a statement, calling on European leaders to help steer the region back 'from the brink' of war. Former foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari was heading the high-powered Pakistani delegation that visited the United States and the United Kingdom before arriving in Brussels last week. India and Pakistan both dispatched delegations of diplomats and parliamentarians to world capitals. Both Islamabad and New Delhi engaged the international community following their days-long armed conflict in May, which ended in a fragile ceasefire on May 10 brokered by Washington. During his visit to Brussels, the delegation met the European Union parliament, the EU Commission, the Belgian leadership, members of international think tanks and foreign media. Bhutto Zardari pushed for dialogue and counterterrorism cooperation with India during the tour, warning of the dangers of a nuclear-armed conflict between the two nations. 'Europe, as a champion of the rules-based international order and international law, must help steer the region back from the brink,' Bhutto Zardari wrote on social media platform X. Wrapped up our high-level peace mission to Brussels. Engaged transparently and across the board, with the EU Parliament, Commission, Belgian leadership, think tanks & media. Brought Pakistan's message of restraint and dialogue after a fragile ceasefire, warning of the lowest-ever… — BilawalBhuttoZardari (@BBhuttoZardari) June 14, 2025 The former foreign minister highlighted that during his visit to Brussels, the Pakistani delegation called for restraint and dialogue after a 'fragile ceasefire.' He said the delegation had also warned of the lowest-ever conflict threshold in South Asia and India's' weaponization' of water and global mechanisms. Bhutto Zardari in recent weeks severely criticized India's move to suspend a decades-old water-sharing treaty with Pakistan in April. The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 governs the usage of the Indus river system. The accord has not been revived despite the rivals agreeing on a ceasefire on May 10. Islamabad had said after India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty that it considered any attempt to stop or divert the flow of water belonging to Pakistan to be an 'act of war.' About 80 percent of Pakistani farms depend on the Indus system, as do nearly all hydropower projects serving the country of some 250 million. Former information minister Sherry Rehman, a prominent member of the delegation, said some members would head back to Pakistan while others would next visit the French city of Strasbourg. Today we wrapped up the Brussels diplomatic tour with @BBhuttoZardari who led the delegation with exceptional energy, maturity and brilliance. As some of us head back to Pakistan,others will carry on to Strasbourg with the mission. It's been 2 relentless weeks of non-stop… — SenatorSherryRehman (@sherryrehman) June 14, 2025 'When the world needs diplomacy, multilateralism and the power of intl law to return to its centerstage, the rules that support order are under strain like never before,' she wrote on social media platform X.


Al Arabiya
3 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
As GOP pushes spending cuts, many say Medicaid and food stamps are underfunded: AP-NORC poll
As Republican senators consider President Donald Trump's big bill that could slash federal spending and extend tax cuts, a new survey shows most US adults don't think the government is overspending on the programs the GOP has focused on cutting – like Medicaid and food stamps. Americans broadly support increasing or maintaining existing levels of funding for popular safety net programs, including Social Security and Medicare, according to the poll from The Associated Press–NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. They're more divided on spending around the military and border security, and most think the government is spending too much on foreign aid. The poll points to a disconnect between Republicans' policy agenda and public sentiment around the domestic programs that are up for debate in the coming weeks. Here's the latest polling data on how Americans view federal funding: Most want Medicaid and SNAP funding increased or kept as is. Many Americans see Medicaid and food assistance programs as underfunded – even as Congress proposes significant cuts to Medicaid and food and nutrition assistance programs – and few say too much money is going to these programs. About half of US adults say too little funding goes to Medicaid, which is a government health care coverage program for low-income people and people with certain disabilities. Nearly half (45 percent) say food and nutrition assistance programs (like food stamps, SNAP, or EBT cards) are underfunded, according to the poll. About 3 in 10 US adults in each case say those programs are receiving about the right amount of funding, indicating that most Americans likely do not want to see significant cuts to the two programs. About 2 in 10 say Medicaid is overfunded, while about one-quarter say that about food assistance programs. Republicans are especially likely to say too much is spent on food and nutrition assistance programs when compared with Democrats and independents – 46 percent of Republicans say this compared with about 1 in 10 Democrats and independents. When it comes to Medicaid, fewer Republicans (about one-third) say the government is spending too much. Many believe Medicare, Social Security, and education are underfunded. About 6 in 10 Americans say there is not enough government money going toward Social Security, Medicare, or education broadly. But Democrats overwhelmingly think too little money is allocated to these areas, while Republicans are happier with the status quo. Very few think Medicare, Social Security, and education are getting too much funding. Only about 1 in 10 Republicans say this about either Medicare or Social Security. Roughly one-quarter of Republicans say too much is spent on education. When it comes to Social Security, about half of Republicans say too little is spent compared with about 7 in 10 Democrats. Americans are divided on money for border security and the military. Americans are more divided on whether the government is devoting too much money to the military or border security. About 3 in 10 say the government is spending too much on the military, while a similar share say the government is spending too little. Close to 4 in 10 say the government is spending about the right amount. Republicans are much less likely to say too little is being spent on border security than they were before Trump took office again in January. Now 45 percent of Republicans say too little is being spent, down from 79 percent in a January AP–NORC poll. On the other hand, Democrats are more likely to say that too much is being spent on border security. About half of Democrats now say this compared with about 3 in 10 in January. Most US adults say foreign aid gets too much funding. The Trump administration has asked Congress for deep reductions to foreign aid programs, including cuts to global health programs and refugee resettlement initiatives. Foreign aid is one area with more general agreement that there is too much federal spending. Most US adults (56 percent) say the US government is spending too much on assistance to other countries, which is down from 69 percent in an AP–NORC poll from March 2023. There is a deep partisan divide on the issue, though. About 8 in 10 Republicans say the country is overspending on foreign aid compared with about one-third of Democrats.