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
UNDP estimates $1.38 billion in building damage across southern Lebanon
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research have released a rapid assessment report on building damage in southern Lebanon.
According to Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper, the study relied on satellite imagery and geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI) technologies to assess externally visible damage to buildings along the southern border between October 23, 2025, and April 29, 2026.
The report found that a total of 11,095 buildings had been completely destroyed in the areas surveyed. Based on an assumed average apartment size of 150 square metres, these destroyed structures are estimated to correspond theoretically to 17,891 housing units.
The volume of debris generated in the region is estimated at 3,107,756 cubic metres.
In addition to the buildings that were completely destroyed, the assessment identified partial damage to 2,242 buildings and minor damage to 9,311 others.
At the housing-unit level, the report estimates that alongside the approximately 17,891 units that were completely destroyed, around 5,219 homes sustained partial damage and 18,282 suffered minor damage.
The report stressed that these housing figures are not based on direct field surveys but on mathematical modelling using average floor-space assumptions and therefore constitute theoretical estimates.
Preliminary cost of building damage estimated at $1.38 billion
The report calculated reconstruction costs using a standard benchmark value of $450 per square metre. On that basis, the total preliminary cost of building damage was estimated at $1.384 billion.
Geographically, Nabatieh Governorate accounted for the largest share of the damage, estimated at $1.053 billion, while losses in South Governorate were assessed at $331 million.
At the district level, preliminary costs were estimated at $688 million in Bint Jbeil, $333 million in Marjayoun, $315 million in Tyre, $32 million in Nabatieh district and $16 million in Sidon.
The report emphasised that these figures cover only external physical damage to buildings and do not represent the final cost of reconstruction or the total economic losses caused by the war.
In Bint Jbeil district, the highest levels of destruction were recorded in Aitaroun, where 1,658 buildings were destroyed, followed by Bint Jbeil city with 1,076, Ayta al-Shaab with 539, Beit Lif with 371, Yaroun with 242 and Ainata with 227.
In Marjayoun district, 969 destroyed buildings were recorded in Mais al-Jabal, 824 in Taybeh, 285 in Houla, 199 in Markaba, 184 in Blida and 174 in Deir Siryan.
In Nabatieh district, 71 buildings were destroyed in Yahmar al-Shaqif, 69 in Zoutar al-Sharqiya and 37 in Kfar Sir. In Tyre district, 370 buildings were completely destroyed in Burj al-Shamali, 216 in Naqoura, 162 in Abbassiyeh, 80 in Tyre city and 65 in al-Mansouri. In Sidon district, destruction was concentrated mainly in Zirariyeh, where 65 buildings were destroyed, and Arzi, where 62 buildings were levelled.
The report also outlined significant limitations that prevent the findings from being treated as a definitive final assessment.
The study did not cover entire administrative districts but was limited to areas where clear satellite imagery was available.
As a result, the area south of the Litani River constituted the main focus, while only limited data from areas north of the river were included. Some municipalities were fully surveyed, while only selected sections of others could be examined.
For example, all cadastral zones in Bint Jbeil district were surveyed. In Tyre district, 74 of 75 cadastral areas were fully covered, while one was only partially included.
In Marjayoun, 17 of 33 areas were fully surveyed and 21 partially covered. In Nabatieh, only four of 52 areas were fully analysed, while 15 were partially examined. In Sidon, none of the 77 areas underwent a complete survey, with only five areas partially included in the assessment.
The report listed several additional limitations:
Critical infrastructure damage, including roads, bridges, electricity networks, water systems and telecommunications facilities, was not assessed.
Damage to underground shelters, basements and non-visible interior sections of buildings could not be detected.
No clear distinction could be made between residential, commercial and industrial structures.
Buildings with minor damage were excluded from debris-volume and cost calculations.
Structural density, shadows and narrow streets introduced potential margins of error in satellite analysis.
No field visits or on-site inspections were conducted to verify the findings. The assessment was carried out entirely through desk-based analysis of satellite imagery.
Given the scale of destruction and confidence in the methodology employed, no on-site verification procedures were undertaken in cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces or the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS).
UNDP said the findings should be regarded as preliminary planning data and that the scope of the assessment would be expanded as additional satellite imagery and field information become available.
Officials noted that once excluded categories and infrastructure losses are taken into account, the true cost of the destruction in southern Lebanon is likely to be significantly higher than the estimates contained in the report.
Middle East
Iran makes Lebanon ceasefire prerequisite for final agreement with US
Assessments that efforts to restrain Israel in Lebanon are being shaped less in Beirut or Tel Aviv than in closed-door talks between Iranian and American negotiators resurfaced ahead of negotiations in the Swiss town of Bürgenstock.
Unlike the current approach adopted by the Lebanese government, Iran continues to pursue a strategy of leveraging its influence on the ground to secure diplomatic gains.
The Lebanese government, meanwhile, remains committed to a separate negotiating track that critics say facilitates concessions to Israel at the negotiating table in Washington that could not be achieved on the battlefield.
US Vice President JD Vance, who arrived in Switzerland to participate in the latest round of talks, confirmed that efforts to make the ceasefire in Lebanon permanent would be among the negotiations’ top priorities.
According to CNN, citing a diplomatic source familiar with the matter, the US and Iranian delegations agreed to convene an emergency session on the situation in Lebanon as the first item of discussion, placing the issue at the top of the agenda.
US says it faces difficulties over Israeli withdrawal
According to diplomatic sources cited by Al-Akhbar newspaper, US officials informed the Iranian side that Washington had made intensive efforts to persuade the Israeli government to complete a full withdrawal from Lebanon but had encountered significant difficulties in the process.
US officials requested Iranian support in facilitating Hezbollah’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon as part of efforts to enable an Israeli pullout.
The Iranian delegation responded that Hezbollah was an internal Lebanese matter. While indicating that Tehran did not oppose an agreement by the Lebanese authorities on a timetable providing for a rapid Israeli withdrawal, the delegation outlined what it viewed as its own area of responsibility.
Iranian representatives said both Tehran and Washington had committed to implementing measures aimed at ending the war across the region, including in Lebanon, and argued that the United States should exert pressure on Israel not only to uphold a ceasefire but also to withdraw quickly.
Iran reiterates Lebanon condition for final agreement
An Iranian official also told CNN that ending the conflict in Lebanon was the most important item on the Iranian delegation’s agenda.
During the talks, Vice President Vance said Washington would continue working toward peace between Lebanon and Israel and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could be transformed into a permanent agreement capable of delivering long-term stability.
Speaking before the session, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Tehran would not begin negotiations on a final agreement with Washington unless the war in Lebanon was halted, as stipulated in the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
In a post on X, Baghaei wrote: “It is not possible to move to the negotiation stage for a final agreement unless these provisions are implemented, foremost among them the first clause, which calls for ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon.”
Military and diplomatic developments ahead of the Bürgenstock talks threatened to undermine the understanding reached between the parties. Following Israeli attacks in Lebanon and what Iran described as an escalation of military tensions in violation of the US-Iran agreement, Tehran announced that it had closed the Strait of Hormuz to traffic.
In a statement, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters said the closure of the strait was only the first step in a series of measures planned by Tehran. Iran’s Foreign Ministry subsequently announced the suspension of the Geneva negotiations with the United States.
Following those developments, reports indicated that Washington intervened and increased pressure on Israel, leading Israeli military commanders to issue definitive orders for a complete halt to military operations in southern Lebanon for the second time within 24 hours.
Israeli media reports said the decision was not taken solely on Tel Aviv’s own initiative and that military operations were curtailed as a result of intense US pressure following Iran’s move in the Strait of Hormuz.
Middle East
US lifts naval blockade of Iran after ceasefire memorandum signed
The United States has lifted its naval blockade of Iran on the orders of President Donald Trump, ending restrictions on vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports.
Announcing the development, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said the US military was no longer blocking maritime traffic to Iranian ports and had halted all operations related to enforcing the naval blockade.
The statement added that US warships would remain in the region to monitor compliance with the terms of the agreement.
The decision to lift the blockade follows the memorandum of understanding signed by the United States and Iran on June 18, aimed at ending the war and reopening the Strait of Hormuz to maritime traffic.
After signing the document in France, where he was attending the G7 summit, Trump sent the agreement to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for approval.
In a statement, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said a formal signing ceremony between the two delegations, previously scheduled to take place in Geneva on June 19, would no longer be held.
Negotiations to continue in Switzerland
According to Axios, citing sources familiar with the matter, the signing process for the memorandum of understanding was accelerated in order to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping as quickly as possible.
A planned meeting between US and Iranian representatives in Switzerland has not been cancelled. The talks are expected to focus on launching negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, with US Vice President James David Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf set to take part.
According to CNN, the 14-point memorandum calls for an immediate ceasefire on all fronts, the lifting of the naval blockade, the resumption of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, the removal of oil sanctions on Iran and the withdrawal of US troops from areas surrounding Iran.
The agreement also includes the allocation of $300 billion for Iran’s economic reconstruction, the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets and a 60-day negotiation process aimed at reaching a final agreement on the nuclear programme.
In return, the authorities in Tehran pledged not to develop nuclear weapons.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoTürkiye calls for Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty, highlights normalization steps with Yerevan
