The Tunisian President accused illegal immigrants of being a source of “violence and unacceptable actions” (Tunisian Presidency’s Facebook account)

The rise of authoritarian capitalism in Tunisia - under the leadership of a president who is increasingly concentrating his power - has contributed to creating a climate of uncertainty and economic stagnation, without reducing the country's dependence on the West or encouraging investment, which contradicts the goals set by the head of state.

On the contrary;

This has exacerbated dependence on Europe and remittances from Tunisians abroad, while the fight against corruption has led to arbitrary arrests in the business sector, where economic actors - forced to violate unenforceable laws and risk severe penalties - live in fear.

This situation poses great risks to the stability of Tunisia.

Because this exacerbates political and social polarization, especially with diminishing economic opportunities, and can fuel discontent among large segments of the population.

The nationalist and populist rhetoric of Tunisian President Kais Saied further politicizes this dynamic, dividing society along ideological lines.

Despite stagnant economic growth, confrontational rhetoric is gaining popularity.

This legitimizes in advance potential acts of violence more serious than those targeting sub-Saharan migrants in 2013.

 Ineffective authoritarian capitalism

In the face of these developments, Tunisia's allies and donors must recognize the potential for instability inherent in the system being created, and take measures to encourage governance and human rights reforms.

It is also necessary to clearly condemn this aggressive rhetoric to avoid possible escalation.

Tunisia has not been able to regain the growth it lost after the Covid-19 pandemic, which is worrying in more ways than one.

The growth accumulated over 3 years was unable to compensate for the contraction, which reached 8.7% in 2020, and declined in 2023, barely reaching 0.4%.

Many economic factors independent of political power help explain this poor performance. Certainly, 3 consecutive years of drought, a decline in the country’s sovereign rating, a contraction in credit at the international level, an increase in raw material prices following the war in Ukraine, and the burden of public debt;

All of these factors contributed to the slowdown in economic activity.

However, the focus of President Kais Saied's political rhetoric on the fight against corruption, and the imprisonment of an increasing number of politicians, trade unionists, senior civil servants, businessmen and ordinary citizens;

It greatly hinders growth.

Authoritarian capitalism being established under the auspices of a president who controls the majority of power has not made the country less dependent on the West, nor has it added a moral dimension to the economy, nor has it encouraged investment.

On the contrary, dependence on the West has become more important than ever despite the sovereign rhetoric that says: “We must rely on our own resources.”

Political discourse

The populist anti-corruption slogan is embodied in the increase in arrests in the business community, whose undeclared goal appears to be to bring the business class into the political line and return money to state coffers.

Furthermore, the vast majority of individuals are presented in the media as corrupt and have committed customs, tax, and foreign exchange offenses. A large majority of citizens do so due to the unenforceable nature of the laws, which have been passed over decades, mostly for the purposes of... Short-term concerns the protection of those close to political power.

The result is that economic operators have become unable to comply with the law 100%, because public authorities have not sought to adapt their jurisdiction to the reality of economic practices, for fear of paying heavy fines, or even imprisonment, or being forced into exile, and the enthusiasm of civil servants -who exploit the anti-corruption and anti-rich rhetoric of the head of state and the media to exercise a little revenge against the wealthy and those who are allegedly privileged;

It is spreading more and more and contributing to reducing investment.

Meanwhile, many entrepreneurs who produce state-subsidized products are almost "extorted" by public authorities, forced to continue their activity even if they do not receive public compensation funds, for fear of finding themselves behind bars for relatively minor violations, their only option. He is fleeing the country.

It is worth noting that in the years 1990-2000, during the era of the late Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali (1987-2011), the regime was authoritarian and fear was widespread in the business community and among ordinary citizens.

However, investors were protected as long as they paid a tithe to some high-ranking person.

On the other hand, in “Saeed’s Tunisia” this no longer exists, regardless of their nationality, and no one knows where “opening the file” could come from;

Predictability is almost non-existent and confidence is collapsing.

On the other hand, there are 3 characteristics that an effective authoritarian capitalist system is supposed to generate:

Rather than leading to greater morality and discipline, fear of imprisonment and heavy fines paralyzes economic activity.

The climate of condemnation and loyalty to the head of state is strengthening, as is political apathy and lack of interest in public affairs;

This is shown by the participation rates in the recent elections, which barely exceeded 10%.

As was the case under Ben Ali, the exercise of citizenship is fraught with danger, as evidenced by the imprisonment of political opponents.

The head of state has more powers, but no authoritarian hierarchical structure is created, to be more flexible thanks to intermediaries who facilitate economic activity by protecting investors from legal insecurity;

The president uses his authority and legitimacy to support the arrest of more citizens by the security and judicial agencies, as if that would make Tunisians who are still free virtuous, productive, and patriotic.

In doing so, he fosters fear among the privileged while allowing the disenfranchised to believe that they will soon take their place when the new institutional and economic architecture he promotes with his ideological inner circle is in place.

Finally, it contributes to discouraging the desire for revenge among the most humble segments of the population against the middle class, most of whose members - over the generations - have been able to benefit from any generosity from the state and political power by allowing them access to it.

 Towards polarization of society

Such a mechanism represents great risks to the stability of the country, as it polarizes society in the context of the scarcity of various resources that the state can allocate, and this would enhance the possibility that one part of society will attempt to directly seize the privileges enjoyed by another part, even if the trend is - At the present time - it is moving towards social and political stagnation and demobilization.

Pointing out that supporters of Kais Saied will be the special people who can tomorrow replace those who grew up with the “Black Decade” (2011-2021), an expression that refers to the “democratic transformation in the language of the regime” against the backdrop of corruption;

The president pits one side of the population against another.

The nationalist and anti-Western rhetoric of Kais Saied and his supporters works to politicize the mechanism described.

According to this discourse, the rich, corrupt, pro-Western, pro-Israel confront the poor, dispossessed, patriotic, and virtuous, pro-Palestinian, anti-Western.

In other words, Kais Saied is becoming more popular at the same time that economic activity is slowing.

As growth approaches zero, this rhetoric becomes stronger.

Which leads to more arrests, fear and economic stagnation.

In fact, his aggressive slogans give greater meaning to popular frustrations.

Likewise, it legitimizes in advance potential outbreaks of violence from its heterogeneous social and political base, ranging from former shock activists in the party in power at the end of the 1980s who were marginalized by Ben Ali, to Arab nationalists and leftists united by their hostility to political Islam and a desire to In the formation of a counter-elite whose legitimacy is no longer based on lineage, competence, and specialization, but rather on dedication to a cause.

This large base, especially in the interior regions of the country, threatens - if the economic situation continues to deteriorate - to form self-defense groups, transform its loyalty into fanaticism towards the head of state, and target political opponents, “corrupt” Zionists, and supporters of the West on all sides.

In other words, the climate of violence against sub-Saharan migrants, which was targeted after the public intervention of Kais Saied in February 2023, will serve as a prelude to this scenario, if it comes true.

The head of state also claimed that "hordes of illegal immigrants" were the source of "violence and unacceptable actions," adding that the "ultimate goal" of migration from sub-Saharan countries to Tunisia lies in "transforming the demographics" and "striping it of its Arab-Islamic identity."

Meanwhile, small self-defense groups formed in response;

In major cities and suburbs, they attacked sub-Saharan migrants or reported them to the police and the National Guard.

Some of these groups helped security forces evacuate hundreds of migrants from their homes or entered migrants' homes themselves to vandalize and loot them.

Therefore, countries friendly to Tunisia - Western and Arab - must realize that the regime being formed carries within it a great potential for violence that should already be expected;

Therefore, international donors should continue to encourage reforms in governance and human rights protection, while clearly condemning hostile rhetoric, which - in the short or medium term - could turn into acts of violence if appropriate conditions are present and the Tunisian state decides to do so.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.