When the state disappears, who governs?

Movements often emerge from moments of crisis.

People come together because they have to, whether it's in response to conflict, to repression, or to state failure.

But there is a big difference between mobilizing in an emergency and building something that can last.

What allows a movement to make that transition from people coming together to respond to a crisis to actually creating structures that communities can rely on over time?

Yeah, I think what works best is in Yemen, whether or in Syria, Lebanon, or in Libya through our efforts, And my experience personally when I joined the 2000 movement in the Arab Spring and then we moved into different political and community level initiatives to try to institutionalize the movements that came.

Mobilization actually happens in crisis because people have the common goal.

common interest, common threat that they want to speak about, but rarely they move into institutions.

And that move actually happens when people start asking the right question of, okay, what are the functions that we need to do? What are the relationships that we need to build? What are the rules and regulations that we need to put in place for us as a movement and usually there are three components that i feel that people if they have will be successful in terms of establishing a movement first they need to have a problem solving mindset with the people that they are working together what is the problem that they want to solve and how do they want to solve it and because Usually, it is not only about the crisis that you come together.

If you want to continue providing for your community, for the constituents that you are representing, and they selected you as a leader, you need to have the problem mind solving set of how to solve issues and how to recommend the solutions that comes to place without going into confrontation.

With actually working with the government, working with the local authorities, working with the local governments, political parties to get the consensus of everyone that you can actually reach problem solving mindset.

Second is the individuals.

I know that a lot of movements come across with charismatic individuals that are they become activists and they become super famous, and they are the ones who lead the conversations, the media, the interviews, but as soon as these people are gone, whether they are gone by decision because they move into other stuff, they move into their own businesses, or they are captured, or or misdisplaced like what happened in Yemen with the Houthis.

They misdeplaced a lot of people who worked with international organizations and were activists.

So a lot of movements just dissolve.

So building this institution around the rules and responsibilities and functions rather than people would move into an institution.

Other than that, it would continue to become a movement that is led by a famous person, a famous activist that is very likable by some other embassies and international partners and political parties that they will push to the front.

But it is very risky that we have only individual.

And third, I think, is accountability.

It does not mean that this institution have to have like roles, responsibilities, internal constitution and all of that.

But at least they need to have the understanding of institution and accountability.

Who takes the decision? Who speaks on our behalf as a community? What happens if a problem arise between us as members? How do we solve fragmentation? How do we do code of conduct between us as members while we are representing the community? So I think accountability is very important roles and responsibilities and clarity around the institution that wants to take things forward and move from only movement.