Connect with us

Middle East

Is Tunisia standing at a critical crossroads?

Published

on

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.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Middle East

US envoy says Syria interim leader Sharaa seeks Israel normalization

Published

10 hours ago

on

23/10/2026

By

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack stated that Syria’s interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, wants to normalize relations with Israel.

At the same time, he called for an end to Israel’s military operations in Syria and questioned whether Washington should intervene to halt them.

Speaking at the Global Security Forum held in Doha, Qatar, Barrack said Sharaa had managed difficult circumstances well and was trying to reassure Israel that his government poses no threat.

“I think President Sharaa has done a very good job under very difficult circumstances,” Barrack said, describing the message he believes the Syrian leader is conveying to Israel: “I am not aggressive, I have no problem with Israel, I want relations with Israel to normalize.”

Barrack also urged Israel to stop its operations in Syria, while voicing uncertainty over whether the US should step in to end them:

“It’s time to stop this [Israel’s actions in Syria]. I don’t know if it’s time for the US to intervene to stop it.”

Israel intensified its military operations in Syria following the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad on 8 December 2024. Israeli forces entered the demilitarized “buffer zone” along the Golan Heights and took up positions on the Syrian side of Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Shaykh), with Israel describing the deployment as a temporary security measure.

Israeli air strikes have also targeted military facilities and weapons depots across the country.

Barrack pointed to Syria’s political transition as an example of how groups once viewed as adversaries could be incorporated into new political and security structures.

“You can take Nusra, which was once designated a foreign terrorist organization; following the transformation that took place on December 8, many people today evaluate this example as ‘here is a model,'” the US diplomat said.

The Nusra Front was a jihadist group that emerged during the Syrian civil war and, after pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda, announced its departure from the network. The organization was designated as “terrorist” by several countries and bodies, primarily the US and the UN.

The group’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Julani), subsequently headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which led the offensive that ousted Assad.

Barrack also highlighted the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) into the Syrian national army as an outcome many had previously considered unlikely.

“Nobody thought you could reintegrate this Kurdish entity, the SDF, into a national army, but it happened,” the US official said.

Damascus and the Kurdish-led forces signed an agreement on 10 March 2025 to integrate the SDF’s military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state.

However, delays occurred in the implementation of the agreement due to disputes over integration terms and the future of self-administration in the region.

Barrack nevertheless expressed doubts about the effectiveness of earlier US interventions in the Middle East, citing Washington’s involvement in what he characterized as “23 regime changes” across the wider region.

“Whenever we have tried to intervene, to change a person or a regime, it seems to have been a mistake,” Barrack said, while also questioning the value of US intervention in Yemen, describing it as apparently “senseless.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say

Published

1 day ago

on

22/10/2026

By

The US and Israeli defence ministries have drawn up plans for a fresh assault on Iran, with the envisioned offensive under consideration to launch after the US Congressional midterm elections on 3 November.

Citing sources, The New York Times reported that the blueprint anticipates a brief but intense campaign.

As military units step up their drills, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth discussed prospective strike options with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The list of targets encompasses Iran’s nuclear sites, its energy infrastructure, and its arsenals of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Several officials who spoke to the newspaper argued that a new wave of attacks could deal a heavy blow to the Iranian economy, forcing the leadership in Tehran into concessions.

Conversely, other sources doubt whether a resumption of fighting would prove any more successful than the earlier campaign conducted between February and April.

That previous offensive drove energy prices higher and drained US stockpiles of interceptor missiles.

It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump will authorise the operation.

Domestic political calculations in Israel could also influence the trajectory of the plans, given that the country faces general elections on 27 October.

While some experts speaking to the newspaper contended that Netanyahu could leverage the threat of war to form a national unity government, others pointed to the opposition’s distrust of the prime minister.

Washington fears regional spillover

The US administration also harbours concerns that the fighting could engulf the wider region. On Wednesday, the US State Department ordered non-essential government personnel and their family members to leave Saudi Arabia following attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis.

A US military build-up, comprising three aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, and special forces units, is slated to be fully deployed to the region by early November.

The targets under review include the deep underground nuclear facility code-named “Pickaxe”. Trump suggested that the high-yield GBU-43/B bomb, known as the “mother of all bombs”, could be deployed against the site, though experts doubt whether the ordnance can destroy a complex buried so deeply.

For its part, Tehran is preparing for a potential escalation, threatening to broaden its target list. Retaliatory options under consideration by Iran reportedly include data centres and subsea internet cables, in addition to shipping and energy facilities.

Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to an Iranian negotiator, dismissed US hopes of wrapping up a new campaign within 72 hours as a “fantasy”. Mohammadi warned that Tehran’s response would be more severe and unpredictable.

The Financial Times previously reported that an Israeli strike on Iran set for 10 October had been called off because the US president was unwilling to risk a broader conflict ahead of the Congressional midterms.

According to that report, the Israeli military had prepared a multi-day assault on nuclear sites, Iranian government targets, power plants, and civilian infrastructure on Netanyahu’s orders. The strikes had been designed to exceed the intensity of the campaign begun in February.

Washington seeks to secure an agreement from Tehran covering both the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear programme.

“It will either be a deal or a strike,” one source told the Financial Times, adding that an operation could get under way in the coming weeks.

Another official who spoke to the paper suggested that Israeli preparations might serve as leverage to squeeze Iran in negotiations.

Axios also reported that the Pentagon had issued orders to prepare for renewed strikes, though the directive contained no specific date and Trump has yet to take a final decision.

The US and Israel launched their offensive against Iran on 28 February. Iran hit back by targeting US and Israeli assets across the region and curbing vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although both sides signed a memorandum of understanding in June that provided for a ceasefire and talks to lift the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, reciprocal attacks between the US and Iran have persisted.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu trails Eisenkot in Israeli polls despite Trump backing

Published

2 days ago

on

21/10/2026

By

As general elections scheduled for 27 October approach in Israel, the opposition camp led by former Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot continues to lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public opinion polls.

Survey data published in the Israeli press on 19 and 20 October reveal that the governing coalition has failed to catch the opposition, despite explicit backing from US President Donald Trump.

However, the current distribution of votes documents that neither wing can reach a governing majority on its own.

Neither bloc reaches the 61 seats needed to form a government

According to a survey conducted by Channel 13, if an election were held today, Eisenkot’s bloc would win 51 seats, while the Netanyahu coalition would take 50.

A Channel 12 poll indicates that the gap has widened slightly, projecting 55 seats for Eisenkot’s alliance and 51 for the governing bloc. A minimum of 61 seats is required to form a government in the Knesset, Israel’s 120-seat parliament.

A key factor deadlocking the political arithmetic is the refusal by both sides to form a coalition with parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel. This stance stands as the most tangible obstacle to securing a parliamentary majority after the election.

Channel 12 data shows that overall voter turnout is expected to remain at 72%. The inclination to head to the ballot box climbs to 81% among opposition voters, compared with 74% measured among Netanyahu supporters.

The same poll notes that Eisenkot has widened his lead over Netanyahu by two further points in prime ministerial preferences.

Yashar party climbs after Gantz bows out

A survey published on the Walla news site shows that the balance shifted after Benny Gantz decided to withdraw his Blue and White party from the race. Following that move, Eisenkot’s Yashar party increased its projected tally to 23 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud dropped by one seat to 19.

Eisenkot’s party and the “Zionist Opposition” bloc it anchors have remained atop the polls for several months.

In an earlier message of support, Trump praised Netanyahu as “a great fighting prime minister and an even greater partner for peace.” Public opinion polls document that this diplomatic and political backing has not proved sufficient to tip the preferences of the Israeli electorate in favour of the incumbent government.

Support for Ben Gvir rises among young voters

Although Netanyahu’s alliance trails in overall strength, far-right figures within the coalition appear to be expanding their grassroots base. Gauged interest in the Jewish Power party of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is climbing, particularly among younger voters.

Speaking to a study conducted by Agam Labs, affiliated with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an 18-year-old student described his shifting preference: “I used to think he was a bit crazy, but then I actually looked at what he was saying, and it all made sense.”

Another Israeli citizen stated that Ben Gvir’s push to arm West Bank settlers gave them “room to breathe.”

Ben Gvir is known for leading settler incursions into the Al-Aqsa compound and distributing military-grade rifles to tens of thousands of settlers since 7 October 2023.

Criticized for escalating violence against Palestinians, Ben Gvir has called for starving Gaza, maintaining military operations in Lebanon, and bombing Beirut. The far-right minister’s militaristic stances also find a political constituency across several opposition parties in Israel.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey