With Tunisia’s Democracy At Risk, The International Community Must Take Action

Ten years after the Arab Spring uprisings and the dissolution of its dictatorship, Tunisia’s relatively young democracy is facing a reckoning. Popular dissatisfaction and protests against the political elite resulted in the election of President Kais Saied in 2019 and most recently culminated in his emergency suspension of parliament and dismissal of Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi and other top ministers. Around the world, many influential countries are treading lightly on the subject of President Saied’s power grab, which his opponents in parliament are calling a coup.

Saied was elected in 2019 and was perceived to be a populist and political outsider who would take Tunisia in a different direction than the incumbent political elite. His biggest antagonist has been the Ennahda Party, the leading party in parliament that has faced criticism from the public for its Islamist leanings and its failure to correct economic conditions in the past. Saied’s July 25th announcement was preceded by large rallies and riots that expressed anti-Islamist sentiments and anger towards Ennahda. Saied then invoked Article 80 of the Tunisian constitution to use emergency powers as president, freezing parliament for 30 days, firing top ministers, and removing legislators parliamentary immunity, which would enable their arrest. Many Tunisians celebrated, hoping for a more effective state to improve their living conditions, even if it put democracy at risk.

In many ways, little has improved in the lives of Tunisians since the 2011 revolution that unseated the dictator president, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, and established free elections. That is, aside from improved protections for freedom of speech, which has allowed citizens to make their grievances against the government known. The economy has been stagnant, unemployment rates have remained high, and reports of corruption have continued. In a country dependent on its tourism industry, the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened existing economic challenges, causing unemployment and inflation to soar. 

The democratically elected government has not succeeded in easing this crisis, as the worst surge of the coronavirus thus far hits Tunisia, the economy continues to decline due to mismanagement and political gridlock. The people of Tunisia are growing weary of a democratic system that hasn’t fulfilled its promises of security, opportunity, and public services. Voter participation has decreased, while strikes and protests frequently erupt against the government. 

One disadvantageous and often inevitable feature of democracy is gridlock between representatives of divergent political views. A system that requires cooperation and agreement even between polarized political parties is bound to be slow-moving and at risk of complete deadlock, a problematic outcome when immediate and decisive action is needed in times of crisis. President Saied’s actions to override parliament do not necessarily signal the collapse of Tunisia’s democracy yet, and could be seen as constitutionally permitted measures to respond to a crisis when the usual form of government has become dysfunctional. International actors should note that even the United States’ respected democratic system includes executive emergency powers that supersede legislative powers, especially where U.S. military engagements and foreign affairs are concerned.

If Saied demonstrates a commitment to Tunisia’s democracy and produces a concrete plan to return to it after making his attempt at solving the country’s issues, a regression to Tunisia’s prior authoritarian system would appear less likely. However, the president hasn’t taken these reassuring steps as of yet.

In a statement, President Saied reported that he would issue a decree “regulating these exceptional measures that the circumstances have dictated,” that “will be lifted when those circumstances change.” So far, there has been no such decree. The U.S., Europe, and international donors, which all provide assistance that is desperately needed in Tunisia, especially now with the consequences of the pandemic, have the leverage to ensure Tunisia maintains its democracy and institutes economic and political reforms. 

Lauded as the single most successful democracy to arise in the Arab world after the Arab Spring movement, Tunisia has been a location of focus for the Western world. Europe and the United States have contributed significant amounts of aid and financial assistance to maintain Tunisia’s achievement and have shown concern over Saied’s potential disruption to democratic systems. If Tunisia destabilizes, Europe will experience a wave of migration from its neighbour, which has historically served as a partner in controlling immigration into Europe from the rest of Africa, and now increasingly produces its own migrants seeking stability in Europe. For the United States, a relationship with democratic Tunisia is a key strategy for combating extremism in Africa and the Middle East. 

U.S. President Biden’s administration has publicized its commitment to protecting and promoting democracy across the world, yet the U.S. has not taken a tougher line on this issue. In a recent Washington Post opinion article, Biden stated that as the U.S. emerges from the coronavirus pandemic, “we will be stronger and more capable when we are flanked by nations that share our values and our vision for the future — by other democracies.” As of now, the U.S. response to Tunisia’s political crisis has been mild, as the White House urges all sides to maintain calm and look for solutions that respect democracy and freedom of speech. Many international analysts and figures in Tunisia have questioned why the U.S. is not taking a stronger stance when the Biden administration has been clear about its goal of promoting democracy so recently. Tunisia’s fragile democracy is an important indicator of how democracy could potentially function in the rest of the Arab world, thus becoming more involved in its current political situation would clearly be in alignment with the United States’ goals. 

Important international actors can uphold their commitments to democracy by strongly asserting their expectations of Saied: that he will immediately, publicly, specify his plans during the period of his emergency measures and delineate the duration of the period. They should also incentivize and support economic and pandemic recovery efforts to be navigated via national dialogue rather than through power consolidated in one man’s hands.

A strong autocratic ruler vested with powers unimpeded by the checks and balances of democracy has become an appealing idea to some Tunisians who want to see immediate changes in their economic realities. It is hard to blame them for supporting Saied’s power grab when the existing government has proven to be a dysfunctional democracy, but in the longer term, national dialogue and efforts towards cooperation will aid progress while maintaining a governmental system that prioritizes safeguarding citizens rights

Saied has contributed to the gridlock that has prevented progress, for instance, by blocking nominations to form a constitutional court as planned in 2014, which could adjudicate on disputes over the constitution, such as the debate over the constitutionality of his recent actions. This is only one instance where cooperation would have helped Tunisian democracy function properly, allowing for checks on presidential power and resolutions of disputes between parties. Working to untangle the conflicts that lead to gridlock is a better option for those frustrated with inaction, as an alternative to taking control away from democratically elected representatives. 

The international community also can not overlook freedom of speech protections in Tunisia. Free speech has been a key area of progress in Tunisia since democracy was established, and it has allowed Tunisians to advocate for their rights and wellbeing in response to government mismanagement. If people can continue to speak and protest safely, they are empowered to deter their government from the path to authoritarianism. Close monitoring of any freedom of speech violations will be necessary to ensure Tunisians continue to have a hand in the governance of their country. 

 

Related

Leave a Reply