|
|
ca barde en tunisie ......
Envoyé par elsa
|
Re: ca barde en Tunisie ...... 24 janvier 2011, 07:36 |
Pour ceux qui comprennent l'anglais, je signale cet article du New York Times qui explique la situation actuelle de la Tunisie à partir de son passé depuis la puissante Carthage. L'auteur, ROBERT D. KAPLAN, compare la Tunisie aux autres pays arabes de l'Afrique du Nord et du Proche-Orient. Il montre en quoi les conditions de la Tunisie sont différentes.
January 22, 2011
One Small Revolution By ROBERT D. KAPLAN
THE West stands captivated by Tunisia, where a month of peaceful protests by secular working- and middle-class Arabs has toppled a dictator, raising hopes that this North African country of 10 million will set off democracy movements throughout a region of calcified dictatorships. But before we envision a new Middle East remade in the manner of Europe 1989, it is worth cataloguing the pivotal ways in which Tunisia is unique.
Start with a map of classical antiquity, which shows a concentration of settlements where Tunisia is today, juxtaposed with the relative emptiness that characterizes modern-day Algeria and Libya. Jutting out into the Mediterranean close to Sicily, Tunisia has been the hub of North Africa not only under the Carthaginians and Romans, but under the Vandals, Byzantines, medieval Arabs and Turks. Whereas Algeria and Libya were but vague geographical expressions until the coming of European colonial map makers, Tunisia is an age-old cluster of civilization.
Even today, many of the roads in the country, particularly in the north, were originally Roman ones. For 2,000 years, the closer to Carthage (roughly the site of Tunis, the capital, today), the greater the level of development. Because urbanization in Tunisia started two millenniums ago, tribal identity based on nomadism — which, as the medieval historian Ibn Khaldun says, has always disrupted political stability — is correspondingly weak.
After the Roman general Scipio defeated Hannibal in 202 B.C. outside modern-day Tunis, he dug a demarcation ditch, or fossa regia, that marked the extent of civilized territory. The fossa regia remains relevant. Still visible in places, it runs from Tabarka on Tunisia’s northwestern coast southward, and then turns directly eastward to Sfax, another Mediterranean port. The towns beyond that line have fewer Roman remains, and today tend to be poorer and less developed, with historically higher rates of unemployment.
The town of Sidi Bouzid, where the recent revolt started when a vendor of fruit and vegetables set himself on fire, lies just beyond Scipio’s line. Tunisia is less part of the connective tissue of Arab North Africa than a demographic and cultural island bordered by sea and desert, with upwardly mobile European aspirations.
Tunisia has a relatively large middle class because of something so obvious it goes unremarked upon: it is a real state, with historical and geographical legitimacy, where political arguments are about budgets and food subsidies, not the extremist ideologies that have plagued its neighbors, Algeria and Libya. It is a state not only because of the legacy of Rome and other empires, but because of human agency, in the person of Habib Bourguiba, one of the lesser-known great men of the 20th century.
Bourguiba was the Arab Ataturk, who ruled Tunisia in a fiercely secular style for its first three decades after independence from France in the mid-1950s. Rather than envision grandiose building projects or a mighty army, Bourguiba devoted generous financing to birth control programs, rural women’s literacy and primary-school education. He cracked down on the wearing of the veil, actually tried to do away with Ramadan, and advocated normalizing relations with Israel more than a decade before Anwar Sadat of Egypt went to Jerusalem. Yes, he was an authoritarian, but the result of his rule was that Tunisia, with moderate political tendencies and no serious ethnic or sectarian splits, has been poised since the 1980s for a democratic experiment.
In 1987, while faced by an Islamic rising, Bourguiba became too infirm to rule, and was replaced by his former interior minister, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, essentially a security boss with little vision, much like the Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak. Mr. Ben Ali’s strategy was to keep order, which largely meant killing and torturing Islamists and other dissidents.
But before we dismiss Mr. Ben Ali entirely, we should keep in mind that for many years he presided over a growing economy and middle class, with progress penetrating to the areas beyond the fossa regia. What happened was classic development theory: rising expectations along with uneven economic growth that led to political upheaval. Unlike Bourguiba, who was always revered as the man who led the country to independence, Mr. Ben Ali had no particular cachet to save him, despite an outrageous personality cult, and his extended family was famously corrupt.
Because Bourguiba insisted that the army remain small and apolitical, it is now the most trusted institution in the country. Indeed, the Tunisian Army is a benign Leviathan that may well ensure public order and thus allow for the tumult of democracy.
Nevertheless, despite all these advantages of history, prosperity and stability, Tunisia’s path forward is treacherous. As for other benighted countries in the Arab world — the ones that many observers hope will be shaken to the core by Tunisia’s revolt — they are in far worse shape.
Egypt has been effectively governed by military emergency law since 1952, with Islamic militants waiting in the wings for any kind of opportunity, even as the country is rent by tensions between its majority Muslims and Coptic Christian minority. Algeria and Libya have neither the effective institutions nor the venerable tradition of statehood that Tunisia has. Libya, should Muammar el-Qaddafi fall, would likely be much more of a mess than Tunisia post-Ben Ali.
Then there is Lebanon, with its vicious communalisms, and Syria, which has the potential to break up the way Yugoslavia did in the 1990s, given its regionally defined sectarian divisions. Syria held three free elections from 1947 to 1954 that all broke down along sectarian and regional lines, and the military regimes that have followed in Damascus did nothing to prepare their people for another bout of democracy.
As for Iraq, once the dictator was removed, tens of thousands — and perhaps hundreds of thousands — died in sectarian and ethnic violence. Often, the worse the dictator, the worse the mess after he is toppled. There have been many comparisons between Tunisia 2011 and Europe 1989, but the idea that the coming of democracy in the Middle East won’t have far more disruptions than occurred in Eastern Europe following the collapse of Communism seems naïve.
And there are plenty of reasons to think we are not on the cusp of a democratic avalanche. The Iranian Revolution of 1979 began as a revolt against the tyranny of the shah, but ended with a theocratic regime that was even worse. The seizure of the Grand Mosque at Mecca the same year by Islamic radicals might have brought a tyranny far worse than that of monarchial Saudi Arabia. In any event, it was put down and so remained a localized revolt. The Cedar Revolution in 2005 in Lebanon was stillborn.
There are some promising factors. For one, Arabic-language cable television makes the Middle East a virtual community, so that an event in one part of the region can more easily affect another part. It’s worth hoping that Tunisia’s secular Jasmine Revolution can seed similar uprisings in a restive Middle East that has undergone vast economic and social change, but suffers under the same sterile national security regimes that arose half a century ago.
Still, as the situation evolves in Tunis, and as we watch other Arab capitals expectantly, we would do well to focus less on what unites these places than on what divides them. Just as Tunisia’s circumstances are unique, so are those in all the other countries. The more we focus on the particularities of each place, the less surprised we will be by political developments.
Another thing to keep in mind: in terms of American interests and regional peace, there is plenty of peril in democracy. It was not democrats, but Arab autocrats, Anwar Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan, who made peace with Israel. An autocrat firmly in charge can make concessions more easily than can a weak, elected leader — just witness the fragility of Mahmoud Abbas’s West Bank government. And it was democracy that brought the extremists of Hamas to power in Gaza. In fact, do we really want a relatively enlightened leader like King Abdullah in Jordan undermined by widespread street demonstrations? We should be careful what we wish for in the Middle East.
Robert D. Kaplan, the author of “Mediterranean Winter: The Pleasures of History and Landscape in Tunisia, Sicily, Dalmatia and the Peloponnese,” is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a correspondent for The Atlantic.
[www.nytimes.com]
Pièces jointes:
January 22, 2011
THE West stands captivated by Tunisia, where a month of peaceful protests by secular working- and middle-class Arabs has toppled a dictator, raising hopes that this North African country of 10 million will set off democracy movements throughout a region of calcified dictatorships. But before we envision a new Middle East remade in the manner of Europe 1989, it is worth cataloguing the pivotal ways in which Tunisia is unique.
Start with a map of classical antiquity, which shows a concentration of settlements where Tunisia is today, juxtaposed with the relative emptiness that characterizes modern-day Algeria and Libya. Jutting out into the Mediterranean close to Sicily, Tunisia has been the hub of North Africa not only under the Carthaginians and Romans, but under the Vandals, Byzantines, medieval Arabs and Turks. Whereas Algeria and Libya were but vague geographical expressions until the coming of European colonial map makers, Tunisia is an age-old cluster of civilization.
Even today, many of the roads in the country, particularly in the north, were originally Roman ones. For 2,000 years, the closer to Carthage (roughly the site of Tunis, the capital, today), the greater the level of development. Because urbanization in Tunisia started two millenniums ago, tribal identity based on nomadism — which, as the medieval historian Ibn Khaldun says, has always disrupted political stability — is correspondingly weak.
After the Roman general Scipio defeated Hannibal in 202 B.C. outside modern-day Tunis, he dug a demarcation ditch, or fossa regia, that marked the extent of civilized territory. The fossa regia remains relevant. Still visible in places, it runs from Tabarka on Tunisia’s northwestern coast southward, and then turns directly eastward to Sfax, another Mediterranean port. The towns beyond that line have fewer Roman remains, and today tend to be poorer and less developed, with historically higher rates of unemployment.
The town of Sidi Bouzid, where the recent revolt started when a vendor of fruit and vegetables set himself on fire, lies just beyond Scipio’s line. Tunisia is less part of the connective tissue of Arab North Africa than a demographic and cultural island bordered by sea and desert, with upwardly mobile European aspirations.
Tunisia has a relatively large middle class because of something so obvious it goes unremarked upon: it is a real state, with historical and geographical legitimacy, where political arguments are about budgets and food subsidies, not the extremist ideologies that have plagued its neighbors, Algeria and Libya. It is a state not only because of the legacy of Rome and other empires, but because of human agency, in the person of Habib Bourguiba, one of the lesser-known great men of the 20th century.
Bourguiba was the Arab Ataturk, who ruled Tunisia in a fiercely secular style for its first three decades after independence from France in the mid-1950s. Rather than envision grandiose building projects or a mighty army, Bourguiba devoted generous financing to birth control programs, rural women’s literacy and primary-school education. He cracked down on the wearing of the veil, actually tried to do away with Ramadan, and advocated normalizing relations with Israel more than a decade before Anwar Sadat of Egypt went to Jerusalem. Yes, he was an authoritarian, but the result of his rule was that Tunisia, with moderate political tendencies and no serious ethnic or sectarian splits, has been poised since the 1980s for a democratic experiment.
In 1987, while faced by an Islamic rising, Bourguiba became too infirm to rule, and was replaced by his former interior minister, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, essentially a security boss with little vision, much like the Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak. Mr. Ben Ali’s strategy was to keep order, which largely meant killing and torturing Islamists and other dissidents.
But before we dismiss Mr. Ben Ali entirely, we should keep in mind that for many years he presided over a growing economy and middle class, with progress penetrating to the areas beyond the fossa regia. What happened was classic development theory: rising expectations along with uneven economic growth that led to political upheaval. Unlike Bourguiba, who was always revered as the man who led the country to independence, Mr. Ben Ali had no particular cachet to save him, despite an outrageous personality cult, and his extended family was famously corrupt.
Because Bourguiba insisted that the army remain small and apolitical, it is now the most trusted institution in the country. Indeed, the Tunisian Army is a benign Leviathan that may well ensure public order and thus allow for the tumult of democracy.
Nevertheless, despite all these advantages of history, prosperity and stability, Tunisia’s path forward is treacherous. As for other benighted countries in the Arab world — the ones that many observers hope will be shaken to the core by Tunisia’s revolt — they are in far worse shape.
Egypt has been effectively governed by military emergency law since 1952, with Islamic militants waiting in the wings for any kind of opportunity, even as the country is rent by tensions between its majority Muslims and Coptic Christian minority. Algeria and Libya have neither the effective institutions nor the venerable tradition of statehood that Tunisia has. Libya, should Muammar el-Qaddafi fall, would likely be much more of a mess than Tunisia post-Ben Ali.
Then there is Lebanon, with its vicious communalisms, and Syria, which has the potential to break up the way Yugoslavia did in the 1990s, given its regionally defined sectarian divisions. Syria held three free elections from 1947 to 1954 that all broke down along sectarian and regional lines, and the military regimes that have followed in Damascus did nothing to prepare their people for another bout of democracy.
As for Iraq, once the dictator was removed, tens of thousands — and perhaps hundreds of thousands — died in sectarian and ethnic violence. Often, the worse the dictator, the worse the mess after he is toppled. There have been many comparisons between Tunisia 2011 and Europe 1989, but the idea that the coming of democracy in the Middle East won’t have far more disruptions than occurred in Eastern Europe following the collapse of Communism seems naïve.
And there are plenty of reasons to think we are not on the cusp of a democratic avalanche. The Iranian Revolution of 1979 began as a revolt against the tyranny of the shah, but ended with a theocratic regime that was even worse. The seizure of the Grand Mosque at Mecca the same year by Islamic radicals might have brought a tyranny far worse than that of monarchial Saudi Arabia. In any event, it was put down and so remained a localized revolt. The Cedar Revolution in 2005 in Lebanon was stillborn.
There are some promising factors. For one, Arabic-language cable television makes the Middle East a virtual community, so that an event in one part of the region can more easily affect another part. It’s worth hoping that Tunisia’s secular Jasmine Revolution can seed similar uprisings in a restive Middle East that has undergone vast economic and social change, but suffers under the same sterile national security regimes that arose half a century ago.
Still, as the situation evolves in Tunis, and as we watch other Arab capitals expectantly, we would do well to focus less on what unites these places than on what divides them. Just as Tunisia’s circumstances are unique, so are those in all the other countries. The more we focus on the particularities of each place, the less surprised we will be by political developments.
Another thing to keep in mind: in terms of American interests and regional peace, there is plenty of peril in democracy. It was not democrats, but Arab autocrats, Anwar Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan, who made peace with Israel. An autocrat firmly in charge can make concessions more easily than can a weak, elected leader — just witness the fragility of Mahmoud Abbas’s West Bank government. And it was democracy that brought the extremists of Hamas to power in Gaza. In fact, do we really want a relatively enlightened leader like King Abdullah in Jordan undermined by widespread street demonstrations? We should be careful what we wish for in the Middle East.
Robert D. Kaplan, the author of “Mediterranean Winter: The Pleasures of History and Landscape in Tunisia, Sicily, Dalmatia and the Peloponnese,” is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a correspondent for The Atlantic.
[www.nytimes.com]
Pièces jointes:
|
Re: ca barde en tunisie ...... 28 janvier 2011, 04:14 |
Ces Tunisiens effacés de l’HistoireLa liberté, c’est aussi pour les juifs !
Publié le 26 janvier 2011 à 08h39 •
Depuis le déclenchement de la révolution en Tunisie, les réactions enthousiastes et les innombrables vœux de réussite prolifèrent sur la toile de la part de juifs tunisiens, notamment sur Facebook. Ils émanent essentiellement de ceux et celles de ma génération, les bientôt -ou déjà- soixantenaires qui ont quitté la Tunisie dans l’enfance ou à la fin de l’adolescence.
L’émotion de mes coreligionnaires nés comme moi dans ce pays a atteint son apogée avec les larmes de Michel Boujenah sur Canal +, repassées en boucle sur le zapping. Soit. Je ne suis pas allée jusqu’au lacrymal mais je fais partie des contents. Un peuple qui choisit la liberté mérite un total respect, comme on dit dans les cités.
Comme beaucoup ici, j’ai partagé cette joie avec quelques amis de Tunis par mail et par téléphone. Et comme beaucoup, je suis les événements jour après jour. J’écoute, je lis, je regarde les images. Les rues, les sons, la langue arabe tunisienne, cet accent si caractéristique en français, jusqu’à cet hymne national qui nous émeut, provoquent en nous une avalanche de madeleines inattendues. La révolution de jasmin ! Même son nom nous enivre. Le jasmin, c’est notre odeur.
Mais à part quelques familles juives qui y possèdent encore leur maison et leur travail, depuis 50 ans la Tunisie n’est plus notre pays et ne se souvient pas de nous. Bien sûr, d’actives associations de mémoire du patrimoine juif entretiennent la flamme et quelques personnalités tunisiennes participent à cette mémoire, mais cela ne suffit pas.
Le pays ne nous est pas interdit, loin de là. Nous y séjournons avec joie. Comme de simples touristes. Nous y avons des amis chaleureux. Le tampon d’Israël sur le passeport n’a jamais posé de problèmes. Ben Ali avait même tenté de faire revenir les juifs tunisiens, affirmant qu’ils étaient des citoyens à part entière et qu’ils pouvaient revenir dans leur pays librement. Certains y avaient vu un appel aux investisseurs, d’autres une volonté de valoriser une identité tunisienne propre, loin des clivages religieux. Qui sait. Il faut dire que face à lui l’islamiste Rached Gannouchi, dont on entend parler en ce moment éructait sur « la honteuse poignée de mains entre le ministre des Affaires étrangères de l’entité sioniste et raciste et de son homologue tunisien… » en insistant sur le risque de « saper les fondements de l’identité arabo-musulmane ».
Aujourd’hui faisons le rêve d’une Tunisie nouvelle et libre de tout diktat. Bourguiba en son temps avait su imposer une identité propre à son pays, quitte à « adapter le Coran », comme il le revendiquait fièrement, notamment concernant le droit des femmes et l’avortement, envers et contre tous.
Pour fabriquer un avenir libre, un pays doit réintégrer son passé dans l’enseignement prodigué aux générations présentes et à venir. Or, L’histoire et la présence des juifs en Tunisie sont ignorées par les jeunes là-bas. (Combien de serveurs s’étonnent que vous parliez arabe dans un café quand vous affirmez être juive et tunisienne.)
L’histoire de la Tunisie est imprégnée par la présence bimillénaire de la communauté juive dans tous les domaines. Cette Histoire s’est achevée il y a 50 ans, sous le règne du Combattant suprême.
L’avenir du pays, qui s’écrit aujourd’hui, devra mettre fin au silence sur la présence incontournable de nos ancêtres juifs depuis la nuit des temps ainsi que leur départ.
Cet acte de reconnaissance ne sera que justice.
Et ce jour-là, nous acclamerons les révoltés avec une fraternité encore plus confiante.
Maya Nahum est auteur.
[www.causeur.fr]
Pièces jointes:
Publié le 26 janvier 2011 à 08h39 •
Depuis le déclenchement de la révolution en Tunisie, les réactions enthousiastes et les innombrables vœux de réussite prolifèrent sur la toile de la part de juifs tunisiens, notamment sur Facebook. Ils émanent essentiellement de ceux et celles de ma génération, les bientôt -ou déjà- soixantenaires qui ont quitté la Tunisie dans l’enfance ou à la fin de l’adolescence.
L’émotion de mes coreligionnaires nés comme moi dans ce pays a atteint son apogée avec les larmes de Michel Boujenah sur Canal +, repassées en boucle sur le zapping. Soit. Je ne suis pas allée jusqu’au lacrymal mais je fais partie des contents. Un peuple qui choisit la liberté mérite un total respect, comme on dit dans les cités.
Comme beaucoup ici, j’ai partagé cette joie avec quelques amis de Tunis par mail et par téléphone. Et comme beaucoup, je suis les événements jour après jour. J’écoute, je lis, je regarde les images. Les rues, les sons, la langue arabe tunisienne, cet accent si caractéristique en français, jusqu’à cet hymne national qui nous émeut, provoquent en nous une avalanche de madeleines inattendues. La révolution de jasmin ! Même son nom nous enivre. Le jasmin, c’est notre odeur.
Mais à part quelques familles juives qui y possèdent encore leur maison et leur travail, depuis 50 ans la Tunisie n’est plus notre pays et ne se souvient pas de nous. Bien sûr, d’actives associations de mémoire du patrimoine juif entretiennent la flamme et quelques personnalités tunisiennes participent à cette mémoire, mais cela ne suffit pas.
Le pays ne nous est pas interdit, loin de là. Nous y séjournons avec joie. Comme de simples touristes. Nous y avons des amis chaleureux. Le tampon d’Israël sur le passeport n’a jamais posé de problèmes. Ben Ali avait même tenté de faire revenir les juifs tunisiens, affirmant qu’ils étaient des citoyens à part entière et qu’ils pouvaient revenir dans leur pays librement. Certains y avaient vu un appel aux investisseurs, d’autres une volonté de valoriser une identité tunisienne propre, loin des clivages religieux. Qui sait. Il faut dire que face à lui l’islamiste Rached Gannouchi, dont on entend parler en ce moment éructait sur « la honteuse poignée de mains entre le ministre des Affaires étrangères de l’entité sioniste et raciste et de son homologue tunisien… » en insistant sur le risque de « saper les fondements de l’identité arabo-musulmane ».
Aujourd’hui faisons le rêve d’une Tunisie nouvelle et libre de tout diktat. Bourguiba en son temps avait su imposer une identité propre à son pays, quitte à « adapter le Coran », comme il le revendiquait fièrement, notamment concernant le droit des femmes et l’avortement, envers et contre tous.
Pour fabriquer un avenir libre, un pays doit réintégrer son passé dans l’enseignement prodigué aux générations présentes et à venir. Or, L’histoire et la présence des juifs en Tunisie sont ignorées par les jeunes là-bas. (Combien de serveurs s’étonnent que vous parliez arabe dans un café quand vous affirmez être juive et tunisienne.)
L’histoire de la Tunisie est imprégnée par la présence bimillénaire de la communauté juive dans tous les domaines. Cette Histoire s’est achevée il y a 50 ans, sous le règne du Combattant suprême.
L’avenir du pays, qui s’écrit aujourd’hui, devra mettre fin au silence sur la présence incontournable de nos ancêtres juifs depuis la nuit des temps ainsi que leur départ.
Cet acte de reconnaissance ne sera que justice.
Et ce jour-là, nous acclamerons les révoltés avec une fraternité encore plus confiante.
Maya Nahum est auteur.
[www.causeur.fr]
Pièces jointes:
Seuls les utilisateurs enregistrés peuvent poster des messages dans ce forum.
