ResearchPDF Available

‫لمنظور‬ ‫ووثائقي‬ ‫شفوي‬ ‫تحليل‬ ‫في‬ ‫المتمثل‬ ‫الغربيين‬ ‫الداعمين‬ ‫في‬ ‫السالم‬ ‫وبناء‬ ‫التنمية‬ ،‫الفلسطينيين‬ ‫لمساعدة‬ ‫برامجهم‬ ‫مساعدات‬ ‫فعالية‬ ‫عدم‬ ‫وسياسة‬ ‫المانحين‬ ‫الضررفي‬ ‫إلحاق‬ ‫الفلسطينية‬ ‫األرض‬ ‫المحتلة‬

Authors:

Abstract

بمناسبة الذكرى الخامسة والعشرون على اتفاقية أوسلو، يقيم هذا التقرير النهج الذي اتبعه تسعة من أكبر الدول/المؤسسات المانحة الغربية التي حددت على مدار عقود بنية المساعدات التنموية في ا رض الفلسطينية المحتلة. ولهذه الغاية، يركز التقرير على الفترة 2016-2010 من خ ل تحليل كمي ونوعي لـ 80 تقريرا صادرا عنها، با ضافة لتحليل مقاب ت مع عشرات المسؤولين الذين ساهموا في تشكيل السياسة. وأ ِعد هذا الفحص بهدف تقديم فهم أفضل لكيفية نظر هؤ ء المانحين لعملية أوسلو للس م والتنمية الفلسطينية والحكم العسكري ا سرائيلي، وا ستعمار المستمر ل راضي الفلسطينية والنزاع الناتج عن مزيج من هذه العمليات. ونُفّذ ذلك باستخدام مجهر ‘فعالية المعونات’ في ظل التركيز على القيادة المحلية والمعرفة المحلية، وبا خذ بعين ا عتبار إطار ‘الدول الهشة والتي يتخللها النزاع’ ومبدأ ‘عدم إلحاق ا ذى’. وبالتالي، يقر تحليل التقرير أن المانحين المشاركين في ظروف ناتجة عن نزاع يصبحون أطرافاً في هذا النزاع. ولهذا السبب، يجب أن يسعوا إلى توفير مساعداتهم بحيادية قدر المستطاع، ويحب أن يكونوا مدركين للسياق الفعلي الذي يتدخلون فيه (من خ ل تحليل قوي) كي يتسببوا بزيادة ا وضاع سوءاً. ويضم المانحون التسعة الذين يحللهم هذا التقرير بعض أكبر مصادر التمويل في أكثر من 30 مليار دو ر صرفت كمعونات وسلو منذ عام 1993، با ضافة إلى ‘المحركين الفكريين’ الذين حددوا شكل هذه المعونات – والمؤسسات ا قتصادية وا جتماعية الفلسطينية. ويشمل هؤ ء المانحون الو يات المتحدة التي هيمنت على عملية الس م في الشرق ا وسط سياسياً كمح ّكم في بناء الس م ا سرائيلي-الفلسطيني، وا تحاد ا وروبي الذي عمل مع الدول ا عضاء لديه كالمساهم المالي الرئيسي لمساعدات أوسلو، والبنك الدولي الذي لعب دوراً ريادياً في إعداد التقارير بشأن حالة النمو الفلسطيني وفي توجيه المانحين من خ ل عملية إعطاء ثنائية. كما وشمل المؤثرين المحللين ا خرين صندوق النقد الدولي وكندا والمملكة المتحدة والنرويج والسويد وألمانيا، والذين مولوا نموذج لبناء الس م مبني على المنظور الضمني أن الفلسطينيين بحاجة لهبة مؤسسات ليبرالية ديمقراطية كي يتمكنوا من التعايش بس م مع إسرائيل، حيث يتم تكريس هذا الس م بنا ًء على تجارة حرة دولية وتمويل التنمية لتحفيز الفلسطينيين على التخلي عن العنف. كما ويوفر هذا التقرير سياق ظروف العيش والظروف السياسية في ا رض الفلسطينية المحتلة، والتي تقارن بسياسات المانحين ووصف كل منهم. وبذلك، يسلط التقرير الضوء على الفجوة القائمة بين نموذج أوسلو للمعونات الذي يشكل المظلة وسياسات مانحين، با ضافة إلى الظروف الفعلية في ا رض الفلسطينية المحتلة وما الذي يعتبر معونات فعالة. ويصف هذا التقرير أيضاً الفجوة الب غية الملحوظة بين سياسات المانحين وأنشطتهم، ويحدد الفوارق البسيطة في مواقف المانحين. ويضم التقرير آراء خبراء بشأن وضع أوسلو وا رض الفلسطينية المحتلة، في ظل تقديم توصيات بحاث مستقبلية حول دور هؤ ء المانحين ا قوياء والذين تتوفر أبحاث كثير بشأنهم. Publication Date: 2019 Publication Name: Aid Watch Palestine
A preview of the PDF is not available
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
This article examines politics of states recognition. Despite the significance of the concept of recognition to international politics, only recently has international relations (IR) scholarship begun to appreciate its analytical value. How states employ their prerogatives to grant or withhold recognition has received less attention in IR. The article extends this discussion by shedding light on politics of recognition in contexts of contested states and territorial conflicts. It does so by scrutinizing Sweden's recognition of the Palestinian statehood in October 2014. The findings underline the importance of foreign policy and recognition narratives for explaining and critically evaluating recognition in such contexts; therefore, the analysis of foreign policy needs to be integrated more consistently into the study and theorization of the problem of contested states’ recognition.
Article
Full-text available
Norway’s ambiguous approach towards Israel and Palestine can be traced back to the 1940s when it was the most pro-Israeli of the three Nordic countries. Since then, there has been a change in perceptions of Israel amongst the Norwegian public and at the official government level. The article follows this change through four crucial phases: the first focuses on the period 1978 up until 1993; the second highlights the Oslo Accords period; the third elucidates the Second Intifada phase and the fourth concentrates on the time of the Gaza war of 2014 up to this day. While Middle East events influenced Norwegian public opinion vis-à-vis Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territory, policies of Norwegian governments throughout these periods did not necessarily reflect public opinion. Nowadays, the Norwegian government continues to enhance its economic relations with Israel, in spite of the more pro-Palestinian stance amongst the general public in Norway.
Chapter
This chapter opens with a discussion of the mutable vocabulary of empire and liberalism, before analyzing some of the most important recent scholarship on the subject. It argues that two main weaknesses run through scholarly commentary on liberalism and empire: a tendency to overlook the significance of settler colonialism and an over-reliance on canonical interpretations of liberalism. Settler colonialism played a crucial role in nineteenth-century imperial thought, and liberalism in particular, yet it has largely been ignored in the burst of writing about the intellectual foundations of the Victorian empire. Utilizing canonical interpretations of liberalism, meanwhile, has generated some skewed claims about the historical connections between liberal political thought and empire.
Article
Over time, Germany’s stance towards the Israeli occupation settlement construction has become more critical. This article will show that one reason for this shift lies in a widening gap between German public opinion and government policies. Accordingly, while the German population has become more critical towards the occupation over time, the German government has only responded to this trend with certain delay. At the same time, however, as a crucial historical context, Germany’s stance towards the occupation can only be understood if contextualized with the German special relationship with Israel. As this contribution will point out, the German government follows an interrelated strategy of Europeanization and legalization, which enables Germany to follow a critical stance towards Israel without questioning this special relationship. In this context, the article will not only deal with the German position on Israeli settlements and labelling but also with the different positions on a boycott of settlement products, also pointing to the shrinking spaces for an endorsement of a boycott.
Article
No modern conflict has contributed so much to the development of international law as the Israeli–Palestinian conflict yet, paradoxically, no conflict has so undercut the efficacy of law by its political marginalization of a rights-based framework throughout the Oslo peace process. International law has a potentially redemptive role to play in securing a just and lasting peace in Israel/Palestine, but its absence in the formative agreements of the Oslo process – supported by the international mediating powers and the occupying power – has contributed mightily to the failures of the past quarter-century. Europe has played a muffled role during this process, advocating for the principles of international law – such as the illegality of the Israeli settlements and the annexation of East Jerusalem – yet unwilling to enforce these principles through the adoption of political measures against Israeli policy in the occupied Palestinian territory. As Israel's prolonged role as belligerent occupier crosses a bright red line into illegality, the importance of Europe taking an effective stand to end the occupation assumes an increasingly greater significance.
Article
Sweden’s decision to recognise Palestine on 30 October, 2014, was a controversial one and this article explores two key aspects. First, it contextualises the decision in relation to doctrines about the recognition of states in the international system. Here, the Swedish decision provides further evidence of the growing trend in the 21st century that recognition of new states is primarily determined by politics rather than law. Second, the article examines the decision within the history of Swedish policy towards the conflict. By analysing the position of Sweden’s main political parties and of past governments, it shows that recognition simultaneously represents both continuity and change. While Carl Bildt worked through the EU to achieve progress on the two-state solution, by recognising Palestine Margot Wallström decided to change Swedish foreign policy, and sought to impact European member state positions. The outcome has, however, been limited and much continuity has ensued. Nonetheless, Swedish officials are confident that history will do them justice, despite the current lack of progress.
Article
What has been the tangible impact of Israeli and Palestinian organizations working to promote human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories? The research shows that these organizations have been effective, not only on the individual level but also in effecting policy changes to improve respect for Palestinians’ human rights. An analysis of case studies identifies and quantifies the contribution of various advocacy tools. Despite its many achievements, the human rights community has so far been powerless to influence the broader trend of Israel’s entrenched military occupation. The research concludes with questions as to whether the human rights community can and should develop strategies aimed at addressing the root cause of human rights violations.
Article
The occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) are a major recipient of global aid flows, ostensibly aimed at improving development outcomes for the Palestinian population. This article presents a critical analysis of the ways that development is being conceived and practiced by major actors in the oPt. By analyzing different conceptions of power, the article examines how dominant approaches to development hide the ongoing reality of Israeli settler colonialism by dehistoricizing Zionism and its project; incorporating the structures of Israeli occupation into official Palestinian development strategy; and promoting an economic perspective that views development as an objective and disinterested process operating above (and outside) power relations. After considering some of the ramifications of current approaches to development, the article concludes with brief remarks on how this critique can help to reframe and articulate an alternative strategy. © 2016 by the Institute for Palestine Studies. All rights reserved.