The international press corps has a favorite script for North Africa, and they are reading it word for word in Tunis.
Open any major legacy outlet today and you will read about hundreds of protesters marching down Avenue Habib Bourguiba, chanting under the slogan "the people are hungry and prisons are full." You will see hand-wringing over President Kais Saied's consolidation of power, the arrest of opposition figures like Rached Ghannouchi and Abir Moussi, and the standard lamentations over the "death of the Arab Spring's sole success story."
It is a neat, tidy narrative. It is also completely blind to economic reality.
The Western media is obsessed with the mechanics of Tunisian democracy, ignoring the fact that the democracy they are mourning was built on a foundation of structural bankruptcy, unpayable sovereign debt, and an absolute refusal to confront economic mathematics. The lazy consensus states that Tunisia’s economic pain is a direct consequence of Saied’s authoritarian turn.
The truth is precisely the opposite. Tunisia’s democratic decade was a macroeconomic hallucination, funded by reckless foreign lenders who used cheap credit to paper over structural rot. What we are witnessing today is not a crisis manufactured by a strongman; it is the inevitable, mathematical collapse of a rentier state that ran out of other people's money.
The Democratic Delusion and the Bill Due
I have watched international institutions pump billions into developing economies under the guise of "democratic transition assistance." It is a movie that always ends the same way.
Between 2011 and 2019, successive Tunisian coalition governments achieved something truly remarkable: they managed to buy social peace by expanding the public sector payroll to catastrophic proportions. Instead of building competitive industries, scaling up phosphate production, or modernizing agricultural supply chains, the post-revolution political class used state funds to distribute patronage. Public sector salaries exploded, consuming over 15% of GDP—one of the highest ratios in the world.
To fund this bureaucratic expansion, Tunisia took on massive external debt. Sovereign debt rocketed past 90% of GDP. The country did not invest this capital into infrastructure or energy independence; it spent it on keeping a bloated civil service quiet.
Imagine a business that funds its daily operating expenses and executive bonuses entirely through credit cards, while its core product line becomes obsolete. That was Tunisia's celebrated democracy. The system was functionally dead long before Saied suspended parliament in 2021. The pandemic merely turned off the life support, exposing a hollowed-out economy suffering from a $40 billion debt mountain.
Why the IMF Loan is a Trapping Mechanism
The standard critique from global financial analysts is that Saied committed economic suicide by walking away from a $1.9 billion IMF bailout package. They argue that rejecting the fund's conditions—which required cutting food and fuel subsidies alongside restructuring state-owned enterprises—worsened the current shortages of bread, sugar, and vital medicines.
This view lacks basic mathematical rigor.
The IMF framework operates on a flawed premise: that sharp fiscal austerity combined with currency devaluation will magically stimulate private sector investment in a rigged market. Had Tunisia accepted the deal, the immediate elimination of subsidies would have triggered catastrophic inflation in a country where real wages have been stagnant for a decade. The resulting social explosion would have dismantled the economy far faster than the current creeping shortages.
Furthermore, a $1.9 billion injection is a drop in the ocean for a country facing multi-billion-dollar annual debt-servicing costs. It was not a rescue package; it was a restructuring mechanism designed to ensure Western commercial banks and international lenders got paid first, while the Tunisian working class bore the brunt of the pain through slashed safety nets. Saied’s refusal to sign the deal was not mere populist stubbornness; it was a rational recognition that the political cost of IMF shock therapy is lethal.
The Flawed Premise of the Opposition
The protesters demanding the release of political prisoners are operating under the assumption that restoring the pre-2021 political order would solve the economic crisis. This is pure fantasy.
The political opposition in Tunisia is deeply fragmented, split between the Islamist Ennahda movement and old-regime nostalgics like the Free Destourian Party. When these factions held power, they proved completely incapable of implementing governance reforms. Corruption did not vanish after Zine El Abidine Ben Ali fell in 2011; it simply decentralized. Monopolies over key import sectors remained locked behind a wall of bureaucratic red tape and cronyism, preventing young Tunisian entrepreneurs from accessing capital or trading globally.
The current shortages of basic commodities are not caused by political arrests. They are caused by a hard currency crunch. Because Tunisia cannot borrow on international capital markets due to credit downgrades, the central bank cannot guarantee letters of credit for state importers.
If the opposition took power tomorrow, they would face the exact same math. They would still have no foreign reserves, they would still face a severe multi-year drought crippling agriculture, and they would still be locked out of global bond markets. Changing the occupant of the Carthage Palace does not magically conjure US dollars into the central bank's vaults.
The Reality of Direct Central Bank Financing
To survive without foreign loans, the Tunisian state did something that makes orthodox economists shudder: parliament amended legislation to allow the central bank to finance the treasury directly. The immediate reaction from international analysts was a warning of hyperinflation and the total collapse of the Tunisian Dinar.
Let us look at the data rather than the textbook theories. While inflation remains high, the predicted Venezuelan-style hyperinflationary spiral has not occurred. Why? Because the central bank’s interventions have been strictly rationed to cover immediate sovereign debt repayments and essential state imports, rather than fueling an uncontrolled domestic credit expansion.
It is a dangerous, defensive survival strategy, yes. It degrades the long-term independence of the monetary authority. But when a state is faced with the choice between technical default and monetary pragmatism, survival wins every time. Western analysts critique this from comfortable offices in Washington and London, completely detached from the reality of governing a country where a sovereign default means the immediate halt of grain ships at the port of Tunis.
The Actionable Pivot
Stop asking when Tunisia will return to the democratic fold or sign an IMF agreement. Those are the wrong questions. The real focus must be on structural survival and regional realignment.
Tunisia cannot consume its way out of this crisis, nor can it borrow its way out. The only viable path forward requires an aggressive, unilateral overhaul of its domestic market regulations and an explicit pivot toward alternative capital pools.
- Dismantle the Rentier Licensing System: The state must immediately abolish the archaic system of "authorization licenses" that protects elite-backed monopolies in agriculture, banking, and distribution. If the government wants to combat shortages, it must allow anyone to import and distribute goods, breaking the stranglehold of the families that have controlled the economy since independence.
- Monetize Green Energy Infrastructure: Tunisia’s proximity to Europe makes it a prime candidate for massive solar and green hydrogen production. Political instability has stalled foreign investment here. The state must create ring-fenced, legally protected special economic zones specifically for renewable export infrastructure, completely insulated from domestic bureaucratic interference.
- Leverage Geopolitical Neutrality for Capital: Since Western capital comes tied to toxic political conditionalities, Tunisia must aggressively pursue bilateral funding from the Gulf states and China for infrastructure development. This is not about ideology; it is about securing non-IMF liquidity to upgrade crumbling phosphate transport lines and water desalination plants.
The tragedy of Tunisia is not that its democratic experiment failed. The tragedy is that its leaders spent ten years believing that holding elections was a substitute for balancing a budget. No amount of street protests, judicial strikes, or human rights reports will change the balance of payments. The math does not care about democracy.
_Biopsy.png?branch=uat_release_3)
