Thank you.
As I was saying, as a person who was born in and lived through a civil war, worked in international development for the Canadian government on conflict-affected countries and has done significant research on these countries, I can tell you first-hand that this type of legitimacy is very important. It is often confused with clientelism, and the crisis that it causes is often misunderstood to be one of corruption. However, it is real and it has significant impact on the goals of building a legitimate and stable state, especially as it relates to the work that Canada is doing in these countries.
Turning back to COVID-19, without legitimacy, the best public health care systems and policy responses are likely to bear minimal fruit. What we now see in many fragile and conflict-affected countries is this double-edged sword at play. State institutions lack the capacity to respond throughout the country, if they wish to do so. They often lack the legitimacy, in the eyes of at least a segment of the population, to impose the rules. This possibly leads to the following five main outcomes:
First, the government has to use violence to pacify the population and force them to follow the rules, if they care.
Second, the various leaders, even those working in the government or the state institutions, use this pandemic to fuel conspiracy theories, or join the battle by providing their own support and services, earning legitimacy themselves.
Third, local organizations step into this vacuum and give guidance, and help to support the population and keep it safe.
Fourth, large international organizations step into the fray to either support local organizations or act as a replacement of the government and local organizations.
Fifth, citizens themselves self-organize, support each other and help the fight.
I'll quickly mention Lebanon. When COVID first hit, the state was very slow to react. People reacted and the rest followed. People believed the government. When the state started to get involved, people then thought it was a conspiracy theory, because the state wanted to end the revolution. People stopped believing in the existence of COVID-19. Then the leaders started taking over. These leaders are in the government. They started providing the services, which then, again, made the state look more impotent, and made them look strong. That played into the whole legitimacy dynamic of the country regarding the support and power for these leaders.
The other interesting part of this situation is that any actors, including international NGOs, are also involved in contributing to the transfer of legitimacy between groups. Their replacement of the state and local organizations, and their direct or indirect influence over the plight of these local organizations transfers this legitimacy away from local organizations and local actors, which tends to also exacerbate the legitimacy crisis inside the country. This is something we should not take lightly. This is something that Canada has to focus on, especially in situations that are fragile, and in conflict-affected countries that don't have the capacity.
It's a balancing act. We have to take action on all fronts. We cannot ignore the role of local organizations and the issue of legitimacy. If we withdraw legitimacy from these groups, we will cause more harm in the long term than in the short term.
Thank you for inviting me and giving me an opportunity to speak about this very important subject and to share my expertise.