After the Events at the Embassy

On Friday the Tunisian government will pay the bill for the American school, as is customary under international law, with the additional statement: “The effects of that which the extremists perpetrated will be detrimental to lives and economy of Tunisians. It’s very hard to convince Americans to invest in an insecure country. Tunisia’s situation and its global image are not good.”

Washington was among the supporters of the democratic transition in Tunisia, as was hinted at on October 23 when Ennahda rejoiced in its win over the other parties. The U.S. confirmed its material and political support of the government of Hamadi Jebali — especially in economic terms — but after the events of the Friday before last a question remains, particularly regarding the path that American-Tunisian economic relations will take. To identify the different sides surrounding the issue, al-Sabah Weekly contacted an economic expert and political analysts.

Doctor Muʿizz al-Joudi, an economic expert and the president of the Governmental Association, said, “First of all, it is incumbent upon everyone to be very aware that the government — from January 2012 until the present — has been occupied with paying off the interest on old loans, in addition to rationing payments to public sector employees. It has done so with American assistance and funds, such as the loan which the U.S. granted to our country in the amount of $100 million at the beginning of the current year. It is a loan with very favorable conditions since this government does not possess the funds to undertake these aforementioned payments and others, keeping in mind the ongoing incapacity in the current budget year. It’s possible that these payments will reach 10 percent of government spending by the end of the year, in addition to the rise in inflation.”

“We, as experts and members of the civil society, have warned of the danger in the national economic position, but the government seems to prefer continuing on the same course since it has not burdened itself with preparing a plan for national recovery. What makes the situation worse is the abatement of Tunisia’s credit rating in the cyber stock market. This has made the margin to maneuver very small indeed in the world financial market, knowing that the current year’s budget has identified 215.4 million Tunisian Dinars (TD) as foreign funds. This is what forces us into accepting loans from abroad — where do we go from there?”

A Unique Guarantor

Our speaker adds, “To ease the process of accepting loans and taking on foreign debt, America presented itself as the guarantor for Tunisia in any financial process of this kind, offering a guarantee of $1 billion. However, after the events at the embassy wherein Washington considered, in a notice to a number of its officials, that Tunisia has become a country of risks and is economically and financially unsafe, it is possible — God forbid — that it will withdraw its guarantee and, furthermore, that our country will enter into a state of bankruptcy.

“Other sectors could be harmed in the event of the American contingent altering its assistance to us. This is represented by the possibility of withdrawing its endorsements from Tunisian offices for a number of brands such as: Microsoft, which has contributed to a great number of growth projects in our country and offered assistance; or car companies Ford and Chevrolet; or the pharmaceutical company Pfizer, which gave production rights to Tunisian companies; and other economic institutions which actively contribute to the national economy. If they left Tunisia, it would be the largest possible catastrophe. We should remind ourselves that the U.S. is an economic partner and that if businessmen withdraw their partnerships, then other European partners will act in the same manner, further debilitating our economy.”

The Solution Is Political

With Dr. Muʿizz al-Joudi’s question about economic solutions to avoid any surprise scenario, he affirmed to us that economic solutions are not present because the solution is above all political, related to offering security and stability in the country.

In turn, rights activist and political analyst Salah-Eddine Eljourchi said, “There are three political results that have come out of the events at the embassy. The first is the damage this attack has done to the image of Tunisia on the international level, which will limit its presence internationally. Second is the painful blow that America directed toward Tunisia in equating it with Sudan in regard to the absence of security. It’s a slap that will shake the image of our country abroad since investors and Western governments will become wary of the Tunisian situation and won’t deal with the state with the same trust that they did previously. Third, I believe, is that the Obama administration is still insistent on supporting democratic transition in Tunisia, but it has begun to demand tangible results from Hamadi Jebali’s government, especially the protection of its primary interests and appreciable securing of its representatives and embassy. Furthermore, how the government deals with the case of radical groups will become one of the most important subjects in Tunisian-American relations.”

Other Solutions …

For his part, the politician and former minister Hamouda ben Salama confirmed that the decision of the U.S. State Department to group Tunisia with Sudan as incapable of guaranteeing security and protecting official headquarters and diplomatic envoys is surrounded with a measure of excessiveness. Likewise, he insisted that it was merely a warning to urge the ruling powers to make good on the matter and to review their strategies from a security standpoint in dealing with manifestations of public protest.

Regarding this, he says, “It falls to the political class in its two parts — the ruling and opposition parties — to find common ground to solve all of the pending cases, the problems and the phenomena that affect the security of the country and its inviolability. Moreover, it is incumbent upon Ennahda to stick its neck out and open the door to the rest of Tunisia’s political society to participate and converse to come to the end of the transitional period peacefully, especially with all of the manifestations, protests and chaos. It is incumbent upon the government to fruitfully interact with these other constituencies in a way that makes those who follow Tunisian affairs capable of trusting that the country is able to control any irregularities that happen in its street. We don’t want this street to rebel against the state, and we want to restore Western nations’ trust — especially that of the U.S. — and so the government must make clear to all that it is capable of protecting strategic interests and all diplomatic envoys. It is also incumbent upon Islamists to demonstrate that they are power players in a modern, democratic state, and this is something that’s not clearly visible now. In general, I think that Washington has a strategic interest in the success of the experience of Tunisian Islamists and other groups, and this is what is most important.”

The Tunisian-American economic relationship after the events at the embassy remains contingent upon a political solution through which the government can cement its prestige in prudent dealings with every instance of breaking the law, no matter from what political stance; in the end, the law should be the ultimate criterion for all. This government is asked to send a message of reassurance to the heartland — i.e. the general Tunisian opinion — by way of resolving the majority of the pending cases.