You Are a Burden

There is no doubt that the interventions of the dissolved National Assembly were among the most significant factors hindering development in Kuwait over the past twenty years. The practices of many of its members were overshadowed by populist and reactionary ideas that were incompatible with the competitive landscape among neighboring and fraternal countries. The citizen paid the price for the paralysis that afflicted the country, resulting in damage to state projects, commercial enterprises, and public sector employees who were exhausted by nepotism, favoritism, and poor performance.

For years, members of parliament opposed vital legislation, including the Real Estate Developer Law, the Mortgage Law, and the Owners’ Union, thereby depriving thousands of young people of opportunities to own homes suited to their financial means. They also campaigned against the local agent for global companies, portraying merchants as whales and vested interests under the slogan “Merchants are eating us!” Instead of encouraging investment, opening the market, and creating opportunities, they pursued populist decisions that drained the budget and engaged in conflicts that disrupted state interests.

It was only with the decision of His Highness the Amir of Kuwait to dissolve the Assembly that a corrective path was announced. This was not a rejection of democracy, which His Highness had warned could deviate, but rather a necessity imposed by the circumstances, following the proverb “Forcing your brother makes no hero.” The dissolution aimed to pave the way for reformist legislation, more open and flexible mindsets, and the equal application of the law to all, in accordance with the principle that “the comb is for all the Russians.”

Despite this, some officials still adhere to outdated mindsets through decisions lacking proper study and economic perspective. Consequently, efforts to address loopholes have turned into restrictions that hinder investment and job opportunities. For instance, in the fight against “guarantors” and to identify the “beneficial owner,” Article 19 mandates a capital requirement of 100,000 Kuwaiti dinars for a resident foreign partner. This fails to consider the capacity of small businesses such as grocery stores, tanneries, salons, and restaurants, which require realistic oversight rather than requirements they cannot meet.

Similarly, the abolition of the local agent for global companies is a decision whose rationale is difficult to understand when applied broadly across sectors. The Kuwaiti agent is not merely a beneficiary of a profit margin; rather, they are a partner who facilitates licenses, maintenance, and follow-up, transfers expertise, creates job opportunities, and ensures the rights of clients. Strategic, military sectors, and mega-investments could be exempted through the Direct Investment Promotion Authority without harming Kuwaiti companies operating in oil, engineering, hotels, and retail.

Regarding the Golden Visa, requiring 5 million Kuwaiti dinars for a 15-year residency raises questions about its viability. Meanwhile, fraternal countries offer permanent residency with better benefits for approximately 80,000 Kuwaiti dinars. How many investors can afford 5 million dinars?

The crux of the matter is that it is unwise to close a hundred doors of livelihood to address a loophole in a single door. Reform does not mean amplifying restrictions and burdens, but rather correcting imbalances without suffocating investment. We need renewed and bold governmental mindsets that facilitate labor laws, support entrepreneurs, and break down bureaucracy, rather than replicating practices that have stalled development.

“Leaving behind the burden-bearers” – this was said by the First Deputy Prime Minister, and we echo it with him. Kuwait needs open, flexible, and adaptive minds that evolve with the changes of the times, not closed-minded approaches that strive to exhaust the people and close doors of livelihood under the pretext of catching loopholes.