His Excellency Mehdi Jomaa served as Prime Minister of Tunisia from January 2014 to February 2015. After two jarring political assassinations and months of conflict between secular and Islamist parties, both sides chose Mr. Jomaa to lead an independent government and oversee democratic elections under the new constitution. Prior to assuming this position, he served as the Minister of Industry in Tunisia’s second transitional government.
Harvard Political Review: Tunisia has been widely praised as the only successful democratic transition that occurred during the Arab Spring. What do you think is the single greatest challenge facing Tunisia’s nascent democracy?
Mehdi Jomaa: I think the first one is the economic challenge. Having succeeded in the political transition, we must also succeed in making an economic transition as well. We have to make many reforms, and it’s not simple to make economic reforms. And it’s less simple when you know that we are again in a period of transition, but we have to find enough courage to do it. It is mandatory for us to do this because the revolution in Tunisia was for freedom, for more jobs, for more opportunities, and for more balanced [regional] development. We have a big difference [in development] between the inland and coastal areas of the country, and we must address that. We can’t address these social and development imbalances and other issues without making fundamental economic reforms.
HPR: Many countries look to Tunisia as a model for democracies in the Middle East, but what country do you see as a model for your democracy?
MJ: I don’t think we are a model for anyone, actually. Maybe we are an example, but we don’t like to say “model” because we have our specificities, and certain things cannot be replicated anywhere. But ours is an experience in creating hope, and that could inspire other countries. And it’s especially good for the young people. Similarly, we don’t have a single model to follow; every country has its own specificities. But with other countries we share many of the fundamental values that are included in our constitution, like freedom of expression, freedom of belief, and many other universal values. These do not come from one specific country but are common values.
HPR: Politics in the United States is very polarized, and compromise is difficult to achieve. But you came to the prime ministership as the result of a remarkable compromise. Why do you think compromise has been successful in Tunisia, and what will help make it successful in the future?
MJ: I think it’s the history of Tunisia. It’s a country with 3,000 years of history based on tolerance and compromise, really. And when you see the history of Tunisia you see that every time we have had a big crisis, the exit was compromise. So it’s inherent and inherited from our history and tradition. That’s the first point.
Second, we have a good civil society, which exerted a lot of pressure on political parties to push them to find an agreement and compromise. It was very important, and we have a very active civil society, and women in the civil society are more active than men. If you know Tunisia, you know how present women are, and that’s one of the key factors of Tunisia’s success.
HPR: During your year in office, what do you think was the most important decision you made, given the political crisis that was the backdrop of how you came to office?
MJ: The first thing was how we managed the political crisis and security situation in order to bring about stability and allow for free and fair elections in a safe environment. We also prioritized the fight against terrorism. We put a lot of energy into this struggle and achieved great success. Tunisia is now safer, and we have more protected boundaries from all the threats coming from outside or inside.
HPR: Was there a particularly important decision for enforcing security?
MJ: Yes, there were many that we made. We laid out the concept of a “crisis cell,” and I consulted on these decisions around the table with leaders in the different ministries: Interior, police departments, et cetera. It’s an organization that helped us make decisions quickly but also with a strong base of the right inputs and information. We call this our “crisis cell,” but it’s really a crisis management committee. It allowed us to face the decisions we needed to make in a quick and efficient manner, and we now see that some other countries are also doing this.
HPR: Tunisia is the largest source of foreign fighters for ISIS, and some suggest that new democratic freedoms are fueling the problem. Do you think the move to democracy has contributed to this problem, and what do you think is necessary to solve it?
MJ: I don’t think the move to democracy produced combatants. This [radicalization] happened just after the revolution, when the state was weak. As you know, the aim of the revolution was to shake the state throughout the regime. The police at that time was seen as the tool of the repression of the regime [of then-President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali]. And so they [terrorist groups] took advantage of that, and some [of these fighters] immigrated to other countries in the Middle East.
Since that time, things have changed a lot. We now control our land, we control our country, we control our boundaries, and we cut the flow. So it wasn’t democracy but the lack of the state that was the challenge caused by the revolution. I think things are better now, but the problem now is how to deal with the people coming back from Syria and Iraq. But it’s not a question that we have to face on our own. Many other countries, even in Europe now and throughout the world, are facing this question, and we are working in collaboration with these other countries to address this issue.
HPR: The final question is with regards to your personal plans now that you have just left office. You came to office in an apolitical, technocratic government, but over the last year you have become a very popular public figure. Even though you don’t have a history in traditional politics and political parties, do you think this is something you might do in the future?
MJ: In the near future, I think I will first recover and resume having a civil, normal life. In the future, it depends on whether the country has any need for me and my team. If so, we will serve in any position, either political or not, where we have the qualifications to help support this country and continue to contribute. Anyhow, I will not set up a political party today, and we will see for the future. I can’t forecast, really.
This interview has been edited and condensed.
Update (11/25/15): This article has been updated to reflect minor changes made in the HPR print edition.
Image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Arbimestro
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.