Tarek Kahlaoui Ayoub Menzli Shreya Parikh
The events of July 25, 2021 in Tunisia were termed a coup d'état under President Kais Saied, involving the dismissal of Prime Minister Hisham Mashishi, the freezing and later dissolution of the elected parliament, and the adoption of a new constitution in 2022. Since then various terms like coup d'état, authoritarianism, populism, and fascism have become commonspeak. On June 17th, 2024, the Orfalea Center for Global & International Studies held a webinar on the importance of rethinking the language and terms we use to address particular moments and situations, and challenging binary narratives. Experts from institutions in Tunisia, the US, and Italy were invited to address the challenge of discussing vocabulary difficulties in this context. Shreya Parikh, a dual Ph.D. candidate in political sociology at CERI-Sciences Po Paris and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Ayoub Menzli, a former Nonresident Fellow at TIMEP focusing on political economy in Tunisia, and a current PhD student in Political Science at Roma Tre University; Tarek Kahlaoui is an Associate Professor of History at MSB - South Mediterranean University.
“These terms never seem to fully capture what we are witnessing in Tunisia, partly because they imply a comparison to the period before 2021,” said Shreya Parikh. The decade following the revolution – 2011 to 2021 – were often labeled as a time of democratic transition. This binary framework of success versus failure is not unique to Tunisia but is applied globally, as terms we use can explicitly or implicitly reinforce this binary narrative. This webinar invited us all to consider what terms we should use to describe our current situation. Should we discard terms like authoritarianism, populism, fascism, and coup d'état? Or should we continue to use them without framing Tunisia's contemporary history in a binary manner?
Historical Context and Problematic Political Narratives
How can we understand the present moment in Tunisia or challenge narratives without knowledge of historical context? To qualify and describe the present moment, an understanding of how we got here is required. Asking, “Why did the Tunisian Revolution happen?” does not provide a single answer, but does elucidate certain historical triggers. The Revolution was a reaction neoliberal capitalism, an economic model which shifted many features of Tunisian society and within the Tunisian state. These shifts may need no introduction to some – privatization and weakening of labor regulations, a foreign investment environment, free trade, etc. – and were imposed on Tunisia after a debt and a currency crisis. “After 2011, there was not only a failure to deliver on the economy, which is a dominant narrative as well, but there was also an artificial separation between the economy and politics,” said Ayoub. Most dominant scholarly and political discourse surrounding Tunisia, especially with regards to events such as the 2011 revolution and the constitutional referendum of July 25th, 2022, are oversimplifications. Referring to these events by terms such as "Facebook Revolution" or "Jasmine Revolution," oversimplify the complex socio-political dynamics at play. This oversimplification plays into a narrative of universal history that sees various instances of revolution or events as just another event happening in another place: an approach that simplifies what is happening to “minimize the differences, the specificities of what's happening in the Arab world, including Tunisia,” said Tarek.
Tunisia cannot be viewed in isolation from its Arab geopolitical context, as the 2010-2011 Revolution was part of a broader Arab phenomenon. The term "Arab Spring," while capturing the regional scope, also carries orientalist undertones that overlook the intricate interplay of local and international factors. Tarek highlighted the persistent anti-Western sentiment in the region, fueled by historical grievances and the perceived failures of Western policies and interventions. In his final points, Tarek dissected the failures of Tunisia's post-revolutionary elite, who he claimed were overly influenced by Western ideologies and lacked genuine connections with the electorate. This disconnect, he argued, paved the way for populism, which emerged as a natural consequence of the post-revolutionary context. He noted that the populist surge began as early as 2011, gaining momentum in subsequent years, and culminated in the election of populist leaders by 2019. President Kais Saied, who capitalized on this populist wave, openly rejected the 2014 Constitution and advocated for an anti-elitist agenda. The international community's involvement in shaping Tunisia's democratization process further complicated the situation, leading to a hybrid political system characterized by both democratic and authoritarian elements.
Rejecting Deterministic Narratives
The split between politics and the economy mentioned by Ayoub necessitates a re-examination of the political concepts that have shaped narratives and realities over the past thirteen years. The political discourse post-2011 has been dominated by several problematic narratives. The first is a teleological narrative that assumes that moving away from authoritarianism inevitably leads to democracy. Similarly, determinism suggests that as societies industrialize, they move linearly from democracy to autocracy. “There is nothing causally necessary in that process and in that transformation towards any predetermined outcome.” said Ayoub, “On the contrary, such transformations are always contested. They are open ended and they are precarious.” Even when acknowledging non-linear political transformations, the dominant taxonomy remains polar, with authoritarianism and democracy at opposite ends and a preference for liberal democracy. This framework creates a normative hierarchy where procedural aspects of democracy are prioritized over other aspects, thereby closing off potential debates and limiting the conceptual framework available to policymakers and scholars, such as a a choice in which they can focus on civil and political rights over social and economic ones, or focus on state capacity or civil society.
Ayoub critiqued the conceptual hegemony that imposes Western-centric notions of democracy, statehood, development, and governance as universally applicable standards. This Eurocentric and colonized thought process lacks the necessary tools to critique and dismantle existing systems and structures. Addressing the concept of democracy, noting that democracy as a concept itself is contested, he highlighted survey data from the Arab Barometer and World Values Survey, which reveal that Tunisians view basic necessities, equality under the law, safety, and absence of corruption as pillars of democracy. Despite economic challenges, a majority still believe democracy is better than other systems, which contradicts the notion that Tunisians are disillusioned with democracy. Instead, they desire a democracy that works for all, providing basic necessities, equality, and justice. Ayoub concluded by stressing the importance of understanding these perceptions and developing new concepts to describe the current reality. He calls for rethinking human rights in a postcolonial context, beyond pre-2011 political cleavages, to create a more inclusive and accurate framework for democracy and governance in Tunisia and other countries in the Global South.
Reframing the “Migrant Crisis”
A global talking point, and one that is important in the understanding of contemporary Tunisia is migration. Shreya invited us all to think through the term “migration crisis,” which has been used extensively in global popular news media and discussion. Even within Tunisian journalism reports, multiple terms – migrant, migration crisis, irregular or undocumented migrants – are used synonymously in the Tunisian context. Shreya stated that these terms “have been used to homogeneously signify the sub-Saharan migrant population.” Looking at the basic legal definition of a migrant – someone who is a non-citizen living on the Tunisian territory – shows us that there are tens of thousands of both European migrants and sub-Saharan migrants. There are also migrants from other neighboring Arab countries and Syria, yet, as Shreya explained “at the same time, in the sociopolitical construction, the term migrant has increasingly come to be used synonymously with sub-Saharan African migrants. The Africans as a term, irregular migrants or undocumented migrants, the illegal migrants, these are the terms that get used synonymously to construct this population, the sub-Saharan migrant population, as intrinsically illegal, as intrinsically criminal, as having this intention to migrate illegally from the Tunisian shores towards the northern shores of the Mediterranean Sea.”
This synonymous framing and labeling has its own history and shifts. Before 2011, European Union border externalization policies and migrant control were mainly framed as a question of controlling Tunisian migration from the shores of Tunisia itself. After the revolution, however, the refugee camp Shusha formed with the help of the UNHCR to host migrants fleeing the Libyan war, yet hosted mostly Black and sub-Saharan refugees and migrants. Subsequently, the media portrayed Black migrants as a threat to Tunisia's borders. Blackness became associated with illegality and criminality, exacerbated by President Kais Saied's statements linking irregular migration to a threat to Tunisia's Arab and Muslim identity. This racialization had tangible consequences, including state-supported and civilian violence against Black migrants and black Tunisians.
Recently we have seen Tunisians linking societal woes to a lack of border security: a popular discourse that has been used to justify the influx of European arms and funding for border policing. It is important, stressed Shreya, to note that what we are witnessing in Tunisia under the label of “migrant crisis” is not new. Framing President Kais Saied's actions as mere scapegoating oversimplifies the issue, ignoring the long-standing genealogy of anti-Blackness and border externalization policies that have shaped the region's dynamics. This historical context suggests that the current politics against migrants are part of a broader, more entrenched narrative rather than a sudden or isolated phenomenon.
Decolonizing Knowledge and Conceptual Reanimation
How do we create alternatives to these narratives? How do we keep challenging them? Ayoub stressed the importance of decolonizing knowledge and rethinking political concepts from a post-colonial perspective. He argued for the development of new theoretical frameworks that emerge from the lived experiences of post-colonial societies and called for a critical examination of Eurocentric notions in favor of more localized and relevant concepts. Ayoub's emphasis on conceptual reanimation underscored the need for a more inclusive and reflective understanding of political realities. Ayoub highlighted the need for conceptual innovation and reanimation in political theory. He argued that the current concepts used to analyze political phenomena are often rooted in colonial histories and ideologies, making them inadequate for understanding postcolonial contexts. By developing new concepts and rethinking existing ones, scholars can create more accurate and relevant frameworks for analyzing political realities. Ayoub also emphasized the importance of addressing economic and social rights in discussions of democracy. He pointed out that for many Tunisians, democracy entails more than political rights but involves access to basic necessities, equality, and justice. This broader understanding of democracy challenges the dominant narrative that prioritizes procedural aspects over substantive outcomes. Ayoub concluded by quoting the words of a Tunisian economist. “It is impossible to democratize a system that has not been decolonized yet.” Ayoub added to this, stressing that decolonization is a prerequisite of democratization, but instead, “I believe that they are two political processes that have to go hand in hand.”
➔ To watch the full webinar, click on the following video:
Comments