When Law No. 98 appeared in the spring of 2013, announcing the birth of the National Fund for the Care and Development of Small and Medium Enterprises, with a vast capital approaching two billion dinars, broad hopes rose on the horizon. People whispered that a new page was about to open in Kuwait’s economic record: a page promising to free it from the constraint of single-resource dependence on oil, that rent which had long shackled ambitions and narrowed the horizons of diversification. It seemed as though the Fund would be the awaited lever, lifting the private sector from the circle of dependency into the field of productivity, and the bridge by which the economy would cross from the shore of rentier income, hostage to external markets, to the shore of plurality, balance, and stability. Yet the winds of application did not come as the ships desired. Before long, the broad texts of the law — drafted to serve as a comprehensive and flexible umbrella — revealed themselves as branching gaps open to interpretation, from which contradictory doors could be opened and paths taken that did not align with the legislator’s aims or society’s hopes. Yet Allah, the Exalted, says: “Perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good” (An-Nisa: 19).

A deeper reflection on Article 3 of the law, with its noble purpose of developing the national economy, creating job opportunities, and diversifying sources of income to ease the burdens on the state’s general budget, reveals an elevated intent and a great objective. Yet this article, together with Article 11 of an indicative nature, came with such unconstrained breadth that they became like a lamp casting its light on more than one face. They are interpreted in every era according to the inclination of the administration in place: at times the focus is placed on jobs as though they were an independent end rather than a natural fruit of growth; at other times employment is treated as an outcome rather than a condition; and at a third point, the objective of opening the doors to developing export output is replaced by pushing projects into the circle of government tenders.

The Broad Law: From a Tool of Empowerment to a Weapon of Improvisation

Thus, the texts that the legislator intended as a key to renewal became a field in which strategies of sincere intention and pure purpose were presented, only for some of them to later appear burdened by weak competence and narrow experience, unable to secure for those efforts a share in reaching the objectives drawn in the text. This inability then accumulated and transformed, until the noble purpose itself became, for some, a means of administrative maneuvering and a tool colored by political orientations. The Fund began to appear as though it had been created to chase its own shadow, panting after it in vain: neither grasping its truth nor approaching the essence of its mission.

There lies a bitter paradox: sincerity, when it stands alone without experience, is like good seed planted in salty soil; it grows weakly and withers before bearing fruit. Experience, when stripped of sincerity, is like a skilled builder constructing on shifting sands; it perfects the form but destroys the meaning, losing the path and wasting the purpose. Between these two limits, the Fund continued to sway. It was not saved by good intentions, nor strengthened by complete wisdom, but fell instead into a limping gray zone, alternately visited by the shortcomings of the well-intentioned and perhaps the schemes of the cunning. If wisdom says that “when speech becomes too general, it becomes obscure,” then the generality of the law was the reason for this fragmentation. When generality is not disciplined by elaboration and detail, it turns from flexibility into ambiguity, and from a tool of empowerment into a weapon of improvisation.

The True “Savior”: Between the Pitfalls of Care and Neglect

For the picture to be seen clearly, not through the darkness of its fragments, the Fund must be placed within the broader framework of the national economy. In its current structure, this economy rests on two poles, with no third. The first pole is the state, with its government apparatus, deriving most of its revenues from exporting oil. The second pole is the private sector, which does not possess real independence from the state, and which branches into three parts: one that feeds on the spending of employees of both poles; one that depends on government capital and service expenditure; and a third that rests on the export output of goods, services, and expertise. This third branch is the smallest in size and weakest in weight. Yet this last branch is the true “savior,” after Allah. It is the defender of the nation’s future, and it is what fulfills the major purposes of the spirit of the Fund’s law. Here lies the heart of the illness: as long as the private sector lacks genuine independence from the state, any effort that does not expand the base of that “savior” will remain incapable of producing the desired qualitative transition.

The National Fund had been hoped to become the bridge leading to this decisive transformation. Instead, it entrenched practices that reproduced the same dependency and increased the swelling of the dependent branches within the private sector. What deepened the dilemma was that, throughout its journey, the Fund produced mostly consumer-oriented or struggling projects, except for rare attempts — by Allah’s mercy — that did not significantly change the broader scene. There appears the face of bureaucracy when it rises above insight, and when a legal text is left broad and loose. The Fund then turns from a tool of reform into a field for contradictory experiments, standing in place without taking the promised strategic step. Even when some administrations attempted to place projects within sincere strategies, those attempts remained little more than movement within the same orbit. The law stipulated the diversification of income sources, not their recycling within a closed circle. As long as projects remain confined to the domestic market, and job opportunities are counted as numbers rather than productive fruits, the distance remains vast between what the text intended and what application has become.

The Threefold Recommendation: From Loophole to a Path of Empowerment

Experience has taught us that when texts are not supported by precise mechanisms, they turn from a bridge hoped to bring reform into a passage for circumvention and maneuvering. From here, the first indispensable recommendation, after Allah, is to reconsider the text of the law through detailed economic elaboration that establishes clear standards not open to interpretation. How is added value measured? Is it measured by raising the burden of exports, by reducing imports, or by both together? What is the fair financing ratio in light of that? Yet the matter does not stop at these dualities alone. It extends to include the project’s effect on increasing gross domestic product in its two sustainable components: export output, with what it carries of expansion and openness; and investment output, with what it contributes of internal solidity and productive structure. Alongside this comes the project’s impact on strengthening value chains that connect sectors to one another, the innovation and knowledge it adds to enrich the national economy and bring it into the horizons of the age, and the mark it leaves on sustainability, so that its projects become plantings that bear fruit today and cast shade over tomorrow.

The second recommendation is institutional and supervisory elaboration, so that the connection between the Fund and the resources of state agencies and authorities is governed properly, such as with the Public Authority for Industry, in a way that ensures a smooth mechanism for granting industrial land to projects that satisfy the conditions drawn in the economic elaboration. The relationship between the Fund and supervisory bodies should also be redefined on a basis that distinguishes between oversight that detects deviation and corrects it, and obstruction that shackles hands and extinguishes the spark of initiative. True oversight is not an adversary that disrupts the path, but a watchful eye ensuring that the Fund walks the road drawn for it, not side paths that take it away from its purpose.

The third recommendation is administrative and organizational elaboration, so that detailed mechanisms and regulations are drawn for attracting, preserving, and empowering competencies — not through salaries alone, but through flexible and modern work models that open doors for participation without closing off their original horizons.

When we examine these recommendations closely, we find them like organs in one body, each supporting the other, ultimately gathering in service of economic elaboration. It is the pillar that, if made sound, makes the rest sound. From this standpoint, that generality which appeared on the surface as a loophole can, if properly directed, become a conscious experiment; the experiment can become rooted expertise; and the expertise can become reform founded upon insight. Thus, the door born for maneuvering becomes a path of empowerment, leading toward enabling the state to reach its purposes, the economy to reach its deliverance, and society to reach its tomorrow.

The National Fund: Let It Be a Conscious Rudder, Not a Slack Sail

This reading, with the criticism and analysis it carries, is not intended as an end in itself, nor does it seek to be the final word. Rather, it is a bell rung in the heart of awareness, a call to reflection and the exercise of insight. Perhaps it may awaken in souls a truth long absent or postponed: that when law is left broad, without regulating elaboration or precise standards, it turns from a means of advancement into a heavy burden on development, exhausting it more than lifting it, and transforming legitimate ambition into lifeless paper covered with dust. But when it is redrafted with deep awareness, penetrating wisdom, and sincere will, it becomes a powerful lever capable of moving Kuwait’s economy out of the captivity of dependence on a rent approaching depletion, and into the horizons of an economy built on the sweat of its people, the productivity of their minds and hands, and exports that carry the nation’s name to the world not as a seller of resources, but as a maker of value and a producer of knowledge.

That, in its purest meaning, is the hope to which we must cling: a hope translated by sincere resolve, not slogans; by penetrating vision, not improvisation; and by firm insight that neither changes color nor deviates. If we understand this, the door of reform will open wide before us. If we turn away from it, we will remain circling in an empty loop, consuming our resources until they are exhausted, and postponing our reform until the caravan has passed us. Let the Fund’s law be a conscious rudder, not a slack sail. Let it bring us reform that enables Kuwait to move beyond the age of rent, reach the age of production, and write for its children a future worthy of its history and its standing among nations.

O Allah, ordain for this nation a matter of right guidance.

Why is institutional reform connected to the factor of cost?

Institutional reform becomes difficult when interests, administrative habits, and weak accountability accumulate; it needs lasting rules, not scattered decisions. This makes cost an important test that separates temporary treatment from capacity that can endure.

How does flexible laws and institutional misuse affect Kuwait?

Its effect appears in how costs, incentives, and resources are managed, and in Kuwait's ability to turn decisions into sustainable value. The direct context is kuwait’s National Fund law, calling for clearer economic, institutional, and administrative standards to enable productive growth.

Why is legal loopholes connected to the factor of cost?

Legal loopholes give corruption a safe path within the text of rules, so reform needs precise drafting and institutional oversight. This makes cost an important test that separates temporary treatment from capacity that can endure.

Why is governance and reform connected to the factor of cost?

Governance makes reform executable because it defines responsibilities, closes loopholes, and links decisions to accountability. This makes cost an important test that separates temporary treatment from capacity that can endure.