Signs Tunisia’s Revolution Is
Regressing Cause Concern

Political engagement and the divergence of views in Tunisia are positive developments in the new era that followed the ouster of the old regime, especially considering that the movement against former President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s rule came primarily as a result of one party and one opinion dominating the country, while all who dissented were excised, be they parties or individuals.

But it cannot be in Tunisia’s best interest that signs are beginning to emerge, 20 months after the popular revolution’s success, that point to the resurgence of some of the old regime’s tactics in dealing with opponents of the policies of Ennahda, the ruling party. Nor are these signs beneficial to all those who strive to see Tunisia take a confident step forward, toward a new era that is completely different from the one it replaced. The signs also hinder the realization of the Interim Foreign Minister Rafik Abdessalam’s “expectations” that the “renaissance” in Tunisia’s rule would last “many years to come,” as he said.

Tunisia’s Interim President, Moncef Marzouki, Ennahda’s partner in government, began to raise the alarm lately, complaining that the party’s actions resembled those of Ben Ali’s regime, in so far as trying to control all sensitive governmental positions, in addition to the intentional delaying of developmental projects.

Marzouki expressed his concerns at a time when a multitude of real and very serious fears emerged, that did not bode well for Tunisia’s transition to the better state, for which the revolution arose. Following are the main three concerns:

First: The “campaigns” orchestrated by some Salafist factions to spread fear all over the land, which occurred in conjunction with warnings issued by the Tunisian Ministry of Culture about the increase of a type of religious and ethnic polarization foreign to Tunisia’s society, which is known for its tolerance, in addition to the opposition “Popular Movement” cautioning the government and the Ennahda Party against inflaming the fires of sectarian strife.

Second: Warnings by the Tunisian legal scholar, Ayad Ben Ashour, head of the Tunisian Association of Constitutional Law, that the new draft constitution paved the way for a theocratic dictatorship, which, in his opinion, constituted a counter-revolution and is incompatible with the revolution’s demand for transition towards a civil state.

Third: Signs of restrictions being imposed on civil liberties and the rejection of all opinions that objected to the government and ruling party’s policies; signs that the Tunisian Human Rights League warned about, and which clearly manifested themselves in the forced cancelation of a critically satirical television program aired on the Al Tunisia channel after it received “pressure from the authorities,” as well as the issuance of an arrest warrant for the station’s director because it criticized symbols of the Ennahda movement.

Is this why the revolution for change took place in Tunisia?