Tunisia: Understanding Conflict 2012 - Johns Hopkins School of ...

Bourguiba,” Bellin points out, “the Tunisian elite has recognized the political value of
nourishing civisme and civility in one’s citizenry—for the energy and talent it mobilizes,
for the power it creates, for the control it affords,” a strategy she calls “controlled
civisme” (Bellin 1995, 126). This control ranged from a weakening of opposition by coopting
the leadership of active civil society groups to harsh forms of repression such as
harassment and political imprisonment.
While Bourguiba encouraged an active civil society, he was vigilant and skillful
in recognizing and moving against perceived threats. “Bourguiba’s strategy for
consolidating and holding power,” Christopher Alexander pointed out, “created new
opportunities for protest, and workers, students, Islamists and others tried to use them to
their own advantage” (Alexander 1997, 37). One early threat to Bourguiba’s power came
from the Tunisian General Labor Union (UGTT) and its leaders, Ahmed Ben Salah and
Ahmed Tlilli, whom Bourguiba saw as potentially dangerous opposition. Bourguiba
employed a divide and conquer strategy—encouraging a breakaway labor union, the
Tunisian Labor Union (UTT) and then overseeing a merger which reduced the UGTT’s
political potency and enticed its leadership with top posts in the Neo-Destourian political
bureau. This strategy became one of Bourguiba’s trademarks for dealing with challenges
from powerful civil society organizations:
Encouraging schism and reunification on his terms became one of
[Bourguiba’s] standard methods for weakening organizations and
eliminating leaders he could not control. It made more sense to
personalize conflicts and manipulate people rather than kill or exile
them…Part of Bourguiba’s genius lay in his ability to play competing
factions and personalities off against one another and to use
promotions to pull people under his thumb. (Alexander 2010, 40)
Control over civil society, however, was not just a matter of elite politics. The effective
submission of civil society to complete state control was legalized through the
constitution of 1959, which preserved rights of press, assembly and organization, but
would be exercised only “according to the dispositions of the law.” Furthermore, the Law
117