In 2011, a revolution brought a positive hope for the destiny of the people in Maghreb. It was a spark which was not only limited to Maghreb, but it illuminated and filled constructive energies in the lives of the people around the world with the commitment to ensure peace, dignity and well-being along with justice and equality for all.
Arab Spring began with the overthrow of the Tunisian autocratic President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. The first free elections since independence from the French colonial rule[1. Tunisia achieved independence from France in 1956 led by Habib Bourguiba, who later became the first Tunisian President.] were held in the country. Along with silver hopes, many challenges came up before the Tunisian citizens after the election. Many people who have been part of the revolution, are now rethinking their responses, having a sense of guilt because they are assuming that there is no better condition if compared to the rule of autocratic former President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. These declining hopes and trust in the people need concrete actions to endorse their well-being. It is relevant to identify why is it so, and what are the causes of determining these losing hopes. Retaining trust of the people by the political parties is essential.
The present world is also contributing in promoting and propagating the misleading context of the issues and concerns of the Tunisian people. It is unfortunate that all the segments of Tunisia are becoming active actors of this manufactured web. They do not understand the crucial context. The assassination of Chokri Belaid[2. A veteran leader of leftists and prominent critic of Nahda] is certainly a tactic of the powers outside Tunisia to disrupt the political democratic process, because it will not allow the different ideological parties to sit together despite their differences to write the destiny of a new Tunisia.
It needs to be understood that Tunisia has an association agreement with the European Union and is a member of the Arab Maghreb Union, the Arab League, and the African Union. It is an export-oriented country in the process of liberalising and privatising economy. The European Union remains Tunisia’s first trading partner, currently accounting for 72.5% of Tunisian imports and 75% of Tunisian exports. Tunisia was the first Mediterranean country to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union, in July 1995. It was the first Mediterranean country to enter in a free trade area with the European Union. Global hegemonic power centres do not want any kind of interruption after the revolution in their profit-making process. They want to retain the old agreements with Tunisia. That is why all of them are trying hard to push Tunisian politics in a different fabricated direction, so that they should not come up with their real issues and concerns. It is simple to recognize that all these will not enable a political environment for political parties in Tunisia to think about their alternative political economy.
During the rule of former President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, only three political parties functioned as independent parties: the PDP, FDTL, and Tajdid. The Islamist opposition party Ennahada[3. Moderate Islamist Party (Nahda)] was deemed a ‘terrorist organisation’ and outlawed by the Zine El Abidine Ben Ali government in 1991, but promptly reaffirmed its position as a major political player following the party’s legalisation by post-Zine El Abidine Ben Ali government. Political parties in Tunisia are growing like mushrooms, and now there are over 100 legal political parties in the country. It is also resulting in the increase of political hunger to gain power among the different segments of the political classes in Tunisia after the revolution. Multi-party political system is good for democracy, but now it is contributing to fragmentation in Tunisia.
After the Tunisian revolution, the Nahda became the leading political reality in the country. The party’s leader, Rashid Al-Ghannushi, sent a delegation to Jews in Djerba[4. Djerba, an island in the Gulf of Gabes, is home to El Ghriba synagogue, which is one of the oldest synagogues in the world. It is a Jewish pilgrimage site.], assuring them that they have nothing to worry about in a democratic Tunisia, where the Islamists will play a larger role. He even sent gifts to the Jewish nursing homes. It was a welcome step because majority of Tunisian people (approx. 98%) are Muslims who belong to the Maliki School of Sunni tradition in Islam; about 1% follow Christianity, and the remaining 1% follow Judaism and other religions.
It is unfortunate that the harmonious intention could not cover the vision for the alternative political economy. Nahda is only talking about Political Islam, which is a kind of compartmentalising process of Islam, and also wrong interpretation of the Islamic principles. One wonders why they are willing to adopt the previous trade agreements and only looking towards the World Bank and International Monetary Fund as trouble shooter. For this, they are trying to explore the possibilities of Ijtihad which is a principle in Islam to make a decision in Islamic law by personal efforts, independent of any school of jurisprudence. But a Mujtahid[5. Islamic Scholar] is required who is competent enough to interpret Islamic law by Ijtihad. On the one hand they are criticised by leftist political parties, and on the other they also have challenges of religious extremist, hence they are justifying their intent to cooperate with global hegemonic power centres.
Outside Tunisia, whole world is assuming that Nahda has established Islamist government in Tunisia. Many in the Muslim world were hoping that Tunisia will add a silver chapter after the establishment of Khilafat[6. Islamic state] Some of them are feeling threatened after the revolution and interpreting the Arab Spring as counter-productive. Contrary to the perceived understanding about Tunisian politics, Nahda neither ever claimed to establish an Islamist state in Tunisia, nor has any political intention to establish an Islamist state in future. They are reluctant about the establishment of Khilafat and they are accepting it in open public forums. They are proclaiming time and again the receptivity of the democracy. But at this point it is important to know that Khilafat has an alternative vision of political economy and if time allows, it may counter the hegemonic political economic structure of the present world. By talking about Political Islam, Nahda is revealing its mission and approach to address the issue of power and authority other than Khilafat; and it certainly does not want to use the concepts and practices of the Islam on finance, investment, banking, etc.
The debate in Tunisia revolves around identity politics. The constitution declares Islam as the official state religion and requires the President to be a Muslim. Despite that, the constitution encourages acceptance of other religions and religious freedom. But with regard to the freedom of Muslims, the previous Tunisian government had restricted the wearing of Hijab[8. Head Scarves] in government offices and reports revealed that the government discouraged women from wearing them on the streets and at public gatherings. There are many reports that Tunisian police harassed men with ‘Islamic’ appearance (such as those with beards), detained them, and sometimes compelled men to shave off their beards. In 2006, former President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali declared that he would ‘fight’ the Hijab, which he refers to as‘ethnic clothing’.
In the absence of the people’s right to freely practice their religion, Nahda came up as the biggest political party in the first independent national elections. Left political parties are committed for secularist tradition and not able to recognise the fear of the people about their identity. People are considering leftist political parties as the same previous Zine El Abidine Ben Ali government in terms of standing against the practice of wearing Hijab, etc. Though unemployment and poverty are the challenges before Tunisian citizens, it is the issue of their association with religion and attachment to use of religious symbols and practices that is close to their hearts. Political analysts are not recognising how significant it is. Allowing wearing Hijab and following other religious practices are not going to establish Khilafat. Khilafat is certainly not a symbolic thing; it is comprehensive, and no doubt, beyond the issue of Hijab and other religious practices.
In the absence of the people’s right to freely practice their religion, Nahda came up as the biggest political party in the first independent national elections. Left political parties arecommitted for secularist tradition and not able to recognise the fear of the people about their identity. People are considering leftist political parties as the same previous Zine El Abidine Ben Ali government in terms of standing against the practice of wearing Hijab, etc. Thoughunemployment and poverty are the challenges before Tunisian citizens, it is the issue of their association with religion and attachment to use of religious symbols and practices that isclose to their hearts. Political analysts are not recognising how significant it is. Allowing wearing Hijab and following other religious practices are not going to establish Khilafat. Khilafat is certainly not a symbolic thing; it is comprehensive, and no doubt, beyond the issue of Hijab and other religious practices.
It is time to resolve the problems and work together on the more serious concerns such as unemployment and poverty. Nahda and left parties have to understand that Tunisian society has to ensure that those who want to wear Hijab, should have the right to do so. There should not be any compulsion for wearing or not wearing the Hijab or practicing any other religious practice. It is unfortunate that the people who are in left parties supporting in favour of those who want to wear the Hijab as personal freedom are at the margins.
It is a significant moment in the history of the Arab world, because Tunisia is the first country in the region which has constitutionally given the rights to women. It is rare in the Arab world that women hold more than 20% of seats in both chambers of parliament in Tunisia. Other countries in the region do not want these kinds of processes because it will put pressure on them to allow the people’s participation in their respective countries. Predominantly, neighbouring Muslim countries will not allow any political process which wants to think about Khilafat and at the same time trying to push them towards the directions in which no one talks about alternative political economy – Islamist or non- Islamist. All these rulers in the Muslim countries are doing so to secure their autocratic political authority and power. They do not want Khilafat or Democracy because both are threats to their political establishment. Historically, many present Muslim rulers in the region belong to the families who supported the global hegemonic power centres and ruined the Khilafat in the late 1920s. Voices are emerging and somehow rulers are using their power to suppress the information. It is certain that these voices will break all the barriers. Hence, all the political actors have started stopping the people’s process to decide their future.
Both Nahda and left political parties should come together with diverse opinions to explore the possibilities of working out solutions. They will have to tackle the different challenges. Both are incomplete in terms of understanding. They need to understand each other’s position because the issues raised by Nahda are not important for left political parties, and the issues raised by left political parties are not important for the Nahda. Nahda has to understand that alternative political economy and at the same time left political parties have to understand – what is the relation of an ordinary person with his/her religious identity. What does it mean for him? If both can come together, only then they can give space to the alternatives. They can tackle the global hegemonic power centres on the one hand, and religious extremism on the other. At the moment, left political parties should initiate the discussions with Nahda. It is important to recognise that Nahda is an Islamist party but not the extremist. If they will work separately, without understanding each other’s position, they will only contribute in strengthening the grip of hegemonic power structures and the religious extremism together in the region which definitely will expand the geographical coverage.
