Middle East
Is Tunisia standing at a critical crossroads?
In Tunisia, which has been rocked by corruption, unsolved murders, and economic crisis under the 10-year Ennahda administration, the government is now in the hands of an unauthorized assembly and the President, whose public support weakens day by day. “Tunisia, where the tradition of grassroots democracy is relatively strong, will seemingly be standing at a critical crossroads in the near term,” notes Dr. Selim Sezer.
An early general election was held in Tunisia on December 17 to determine the new members of the 161-seat parliament. According to unofficial results, Independent High Authority for Elections in Tunisia announced that turnout rate was 11.22 percent. “In the first round of parliamentary elections, 1 million 25 thousand 418 voters cast ballots. After the votes counted, the turnout was measured as 11.22 percent,” said ISIE member Farouk Bouasker. The number of valid votes was 956,16 Bouasker reported, adding that the number of invalid votes was 45,613 and the number of blank votes was 23,789.

Farouk Bouasker, Head of the High Election Board, announced the election results. Photo: Yassine Gaid/AA
Bouasker announced that 23 candidates, who could win more than 50 percent of the votes in the region they were racing in, were elected to parliament in the first round, and a second round would be held in 131 regions to determine the remaining deputies. The final results of the early general elections are expected on January 19.
Before President Kais Saied dissolved the Assembly, the country had been ruled by the governments of the Ennahda Movement, the Tunisian affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, for 10 years. After the economic crisis hit the country and the Parliament chaired by Rached Ghannouchi became dysfunctional, Kais Saied froze the work of Parliament and lifted the parliamentary immunities. On 13 December 2021, Saied announced that with the “road map to the exit the political crisis”, the referendum on the constitutional amendment will be held in the country on 25 July 2022, and early general elections will be held on 17 December 2022, and the Parliament will remain closed until then. The referendum held on July 25 with the participation of 30.5 percent of voters, approved the new Constitution with 94.6 percent “yes” votes.
The fact that the turnout rate was low in the elections due to the parties boycotting the election, left questions over Saied’s legitimacy. The National Salvation Front, which includes opposition parties in the country, especially the Ennahda Party, has called for mass protests and sit-ins, demanding fresh presidential elections.
We talked about the process that led Tunisia to early elections, discussions on the President’s legitimacy and what awaits the country with Gedik University Faculty Member, Dr. Selim Sezer.
‘The Council will be Saied’s ‘advisory council’’’
- What was the process that brought Tunisia to the point where the President dissolved the Parliament, which resulted in the referendum and the election? Why did the country hold an early election?
Undoubtedly, the starting point of the process was President Kais Saied’s dismissal of the government in July last year and the dissolution of the Parliament. At the time, Saied alleged that the provisions of Article 80 of the Tunisian Constitution gave him such a mandate, notifying the speaker of the Parliament and prime minister with a phone-call and shelving both legislative and executive bodies. Although the article allowed for a state of emergency that would last only 30 days and said that work of the Parliament would not be terminated in the process, Kais Saied has ruled the country unilaterally for a long time. Again, although the constitution said that the Constitutional Court would decide whether the state of emergency would continue at the end of 30 days, there was no mechanism that could limit it in this process, as Saied prevented the establishment of the Constitutional Court, which was previously envisaged by vetoing the relevant law from the Parliament.
Naturally, during the Ennahda era, the country’s political atmosphere, in which serious corruption and unsolved murders prevailed, prompted the reaction of majority of the Tunisian people. However, Saied’s coup was supported by some of the main political actors in Tunisia, while at the same time it was the target of criticism from many actors, including some of Ennahda. Exactly one year later, during a new constitutional referendum in July this year, which gave the President very broad powers, the criticism became much more intense and spread to a much broader base. Tunisia’s Workers’ Party, for example, defined this referendum as “the registration of an autocratic regime to the public” and “clowning.” As is known, the participation rate in this referendum remained at 30%.
In order to complete the establishment of Saied’s personal regime, and at the same time to constitute a formal “legitimacy”, a new parliament had to be opened in place of the dissolved one. For this reason, the first round of the election was held recently, and a second round will be held in the coming months, and if there is no unexpected development; the Parliament, which will not go beyond Saied’s “advisory council” at best, will take office by March.

Photo: Royal Court of Saudi Arabia
‘People do not believe that the parliament will find a solution’
- The low turnout in the elections prompted a debate on the President’s legitimacy. Why do you think turnout rate was low? What are the challenges facing the President, whose legitimacy is questioned?
The record low voter turnout is due to several complementary reasons. First, the new parliament to be formed will have almost no real function. Deputies will not be able to dismiss the president and give the government a no-confidence vote. The draft laws submitted by the president to parliament will be a priority.
There will be no party groups in this dysfunctional parliament. Individual candidates have been placed before voters, not party lists, and most of these candidates are not recognized by the people.
Tunisia, on the other hand, has been experiencing a serious economic crisis for a long time. Basic consumables such as milk, sugar, butter is hard to find. People do not believe that a parliament that will arise from an election held in this environment and under these conditions can find a solution to any problem.
As a result, Tunisia’s major political parties, non-governmental organizations, and trade unions such as the UGTT had called for a boycott of the election. These calls received a fairly broad response, and 90 percent of voters did not go to the polls. In the previous elections, turnout rate ranged from 40-60%. After the participation rate was officially announced, the opposition formation called “Salvation Front”, including Ennahda, and many other movements and figures announced that Saied had lost his legitimacy and called for his resignation and public demonstrations. The pressure on Saied will be intense in the coming weeks and months.
‘He’s losing support day by day’
- Despite the opposition in the country, where does the President get the power to manage the process that began with the dissolution of the Parliament?
It is not possible to say that Kais Saied has international support that is worthy of note. Inside the country, he initially had much greater support and was elected president with more than 70 percent of the vote in 2019. What allowed him to advance the process that began with the dissolution of the Parliament in the summer of 2021 was that he was able to receive the support of the political spectrum at least in the early periods, and that he was deemed more preferable to various circles than to a political equation in which Ennahda and its allies were strong. However, it is possible to say that he loses another piece of its power, prestige, and legitimacy every day and his support base shrinks rapidly. Saied’s ability to maintain his current position seems to be due to the fragmentation of the opposition and the lack of a stronger actor within the country.

Necip al-Shaabi thinks that the people no longer support Said. Photo: Yassine Gaidi/AA
‘Ennahda’s fate is intertwined with the Salvation Front’
- For the last elections, “The last nail in the coffin of the Ennahda Movement” comments were made. Does Ennahda have a future in Tunisia?
Although the Ennahda movement has now lost much of its former strength as a political actor, it appears to be in a recovery effort with some of its allies. As a matter of fact, five political parties and some grassroots movements, including Ennahda, came together under the roof of the “Salvation Front” about six months ago. Ahmed Najib Chebbi, left-wing politician, has become the leader of this Front. The coalition aims to rebuild democracy after Kais Saied’s intervention in political life. From time to time, the movement was accused of trying to restore Ennahda’s power, but Chebbi repeatedly denied such claims. In any case, Ennahda’s political destiny seems to be intertwined with the destiny of this formation.
Tunisia has been in striking and deep loops for 12 years. In the future, perhaps as an interesting twist in history, it will be emphasized that the date of the rebellion against Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s personal regime and the economic crisis (17 December 2010) coincide with the date of the consolidation of Kais Saied’s personal regime and the start of the passive resistance against the economic crisis (17 December 2022). Although it is difficult to predict the results of the process in the medium and long term, Tunisia, where the tradition of grassroots democracy is relatively strong, will seemingly be standing at a critical crossroads in the near term.
Middle East
France explores Syrian transit routes as alternative oil corridor to bypass Strait of Hormuz
France is evaluating the creation of alternative energy routes through Syria to mitigate potential disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz following the resumption of hostilities between the United States and Iran. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot stated that Paris is working on new transit routes for the transport of Persian Gulf oil, with Syria emerging as a prominent option in this context.
“Among the initiatives we have pursued since the beginning of this crisis is the concept of preparing alternative routes, in order to avoid remaining dependent on blockages that could occur here or there,” Barrot said.
Barrot indicated that Syria, which has entered a process of reunification following the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad administration, could become a “new regional hub.” The French minister characterized the country as a strategic corridor that could transport Persian Gulf oil to the Mediterranean, thereby reducing the impact of potential shipping disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz.
Stating that France wishes to expand commercial and economic cooperation with the Damascus administration, Barrot expressed that they aim to establish a secure transit route for Gulf producing nations through this cooperation.
According to Barrot, implementing this plan requires a comprehensive assessment of existing infrastructure and the provision of necessary security guarantees. The French minister noted that these efforts are of critical importance for securing global energy markets.
Barrot’s remarks followed French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Damascus on Tuesday. During the visit, Macron met with Ahmed Shara, the former al-Qaeda leader who has declared himself President of Syria.
Patrick Pouyanné, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of TotalEnergies, was among the delegation accompanying Macron. Characterizing Syria as a country situated “at the crossroads of the Middle East,” Pouyanné said it could establish a vital energy link between Iraq and the Mediterranean.
In response to the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Iraq has been shipping its oil via tankers through Syria for export since April.
More than 600,000 tons of fuel were exported through this route between April and June. Last month, Iraqi and Syrian officials discussed the reactivation of the Kirkuk-Baniyas oil pipeline and the establishment of energy transit mechanisms.
TotalEnergies has also signed a memorandum of understanding for an offshore exploration block in the Mediterranean. However, Pouyanné stated that beyond this, the company currently has no concrete projects under development.
Stating that security conditions in the country have not yet stabilized, Pouyanné said, “It is clear today that the security situation does not yet permit us to operate here. However, I believe coming here, to Damascus, is a positive initiative.”
Shortly after Pouyanné’s statements, two bombs reportedly exploded near the Four Seasons Hotel, where the French delegation was staying.
Stating that the Syrian administration must be given time to establish control over the country, Pouyanné said, “We must not demand too much,” adding, “We need to be a little patient.”
Middle East
Senior US military officers ignored system alerts on obsolete targets, leading to strike on Iranian school
Senior US military commanders approved strike lists despite automated system warnings indicating that intelligence on certain targets in Iran was years out of date and required revalidation, according to a CNN report citing three sources familiar with the decision-making process.
The warnings were bypassed to “speed things up” under intense pressure to rapidly designate targets during the opening days of the conflict. One of the targets approved by commanders under these conditions resulted in a strike on a school in Minab.
This military decision is directly linked to the February 28 strike on the Shajara Tayyiba School in Minab, which killed at least 168 children and 14 teachers. The heavy loss of life makes the strike one of the mass casualty events involving the highest number of civilian deaths in the recent history of the US military.
According to the sources, automated system warning messages indicating that the intelligence was obsolete were already integrated into the database used during the target development process. Within this system, a target could only be added to a strike list with the approval of a senior officer. Two sources stated that the decision by senior commanders to ignore these warnings directly contributed to the school being targeted “by mistake.”
Military officials reportedly realized within days of the strike on the school that the error stemmed from outdated information. Despite the passage of months, the Pentagon has not released its investigation report on the incident.
A White House official stated that the investigation remains ongoing, asserting, “As we have said before, the US does not target civilians.”
The Pentagon referred inquiries on the matter to US Central Command (CENTCOM), which declined to comment, citing the active investigation.
School and military facility were located within the same compound
The strike reportedly occurred while the US military was targeting an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) facility located near the Shajara Tayyiba School. Initial military investigative findings also pointed to this conclusion.
Satellite imagery reveals negligence in the target analysis process. Imagery from 2013 shows the school and the IRGC base located within the same compound, whereas imagery from 2016 clearly indicates that the school had been separated from the base by a fence and provided with a separate entrance.
In satellite imagery dated December 2025, dozens of children can be seen playing in the schoolyard.
The strike took place on the first day of operations following Donald Trump’s decision to launch military action, a period during which military officials and intelligence analysts worked under intense pressure to update thousands of targets.
Analysts were unable to update all records in the Pentagon database prior to the operation. As a result, records for multiple targets—including the IRGC facility adjacent to the elementary school—consisted of information that was more than 10 years old.
Due to the accelerated timeline, analysts prioritized updating “high-priority” records, which included moving targets with a high probability of being struck first and locations posing an immediate threat to US forces. Because fixed facilities were deemed a lower priority, the information for the facility near the school was not updated.
Disconnected databases and staffing shortages compounded the error
At the center of the investigation are two separate targeting databases used by the Pentagon. These are known as the Modernized Integrated Database (MIDB), which was built in the 1980s and relies on manual data entry, and the Mitigation and Analysis Reporting System (MARS), a new artificial intelligence-backed digital platform.
Both systems indicated that information needed to be updated before use. However, efforts to fully transition to the MARS system were reportedly years behind schedule, leaving official targeting data still dependent on the legacy MIDB system.
An intelligence analyst had previously noted changes on the ground in a separate digital tool, but because this tool was not connected to the official targeting database, the information did not reach commanders. How this disconnect influenced the targeting of the school is also being examined as part of the investigation.
Following the strike, Donald Trump suggested that Iran might be responsible for the incident, later asserting that responsibility might never be determined. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that the strike would be thoroughly investigated, claiming that the US takes every possible measure to prevent civilian casualties.
However, due to cuts implemented early in Hegseth’s tenure, Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) teams within CENTCOM were reportedly facing severe staffing shortages.
Under the cuts made by Hegseth prior to the conflict with Iran, the 10-person civilian casualty specialist staff at CENTCOM was reduced to a single full-time employee.
Sources added that while the remaining staff did everything they could, they lacked adequate resources due to the budget and personnel cuts implemented by Hegseth.
Middle East
US revokes Iran oil license and launches airstrikes following Strait of Hormuz tanker attacks
The US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has revoked a general license that permitted commercial transactions involving Iranian oil.
According to a statement issued by the agency, the “General License X” regulation, which had been in effect since June 21, 2026, was fully rescinded as of July 7, 2026, and replaced by the newly introduced “General License X1” regulation.
The statement noted that a wind-down period lasting until July 17 has been granted to allow for the completion of transactions initiated prior to the revocation.
The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted strongly to the OFAC decision, declaring that Tehran will take all necessary measures to protect its national security and interests.
In a statement shared on the ministry’s official Telegram channel, Iran stated: “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran decisively condemns the US Department of the Treasury’s decision to revoke the temporary suspension of sanctions on the sale of Iranian oil. This step is a flagrant violation of Article 10 of the memorandum of understanding concerning the cessation of military conflict.”
Following the decision, the US Armed Forces conducted a series of airstrikes targeting Iranian territory during the night of July 8. US officials maintained that the military operation was a response to Tehran’s actions in the region. Washington characterized Iran’s conduct as a violation of the ceasefire regime and a threat to the security of navigation in the region.
The Iranian state broadcaster, IRIB, reported that explosions occurred at various locations across the country. News sources noted that seven explosions were heard near the village of Taherui in the Sirik district, and six explosions were heard near the city of Qeshm.
Previously, US media outlets including The Wall Street Journal and Axios, citing US officials, had reported that despite the active ceasefire, forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had attacked oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz.
According to data shared by the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), a tanker off the coast of Oman was struck by an unidentified munition, causing a fire on board. It was reported that the incident resulted in no casualties, injuries, or environmental pollution.
The Wall Street Journal reported that one of the targeted vessels may have been the “Al Rekayyat,” a tanker owned by the Qatar-based shipping company Nakilat.
The vessel sustained damage to its engine room, though the crew was reported to be safe. Axios reported that while the attacked vessels sustained damage, no major destruction had occurred.
On June 18, 2026, the US and Iran had signed a memorandum of understanding that established a two-month ceasefire and envisioned the initiation of negotiations for a more comprehensive agreement.
Following the start of the ceasefire period, the US had also struck targets in Iran on June 27 and June 28, citing Iranian actions against commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.
Following those strikes, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had announced that operations would be launched against US facilities located in Arab countries.
-
Middle East2 weeks agoQatar and Saudi Arabia acquire hundreds of millions of dollars in Israeli defense technology, report says
-
Europe2 weeks agoBuckingham Palace updates King’s official role to focus on securing faith in multi-faith Britain
-
Interview2 weeks ago“Capitalism does not require a free social order”
-
Asia2 weeks agoSouth Korea unveils $518 billion plan for new southwestern semiconductor cluster
-
Europe2 weeks agoBillionaire Peter Thiel deepens ties with German and Austrian right-wing political elite
-
America2 weeks agoAnthropic withdraws covert China user tracking feature after online backlash
-
Europe2 weeks agoGermany’s BSW proposes cooperation with AfD to break political ‘firewall’
-
Europe2 weeks agoEurope faces 15-year low in winter gas reserves as June storage targets fall short
