Kaplan on Tunisia, or, defending autocratic stability

Robert D. Kaplan, author of many books including one dealing with Tunisia, has written a controversial piece on that country in the New York Times. Brian Whitaker has rightly taken issue with many of its claims some of which will be addressed in this post. Many Arab readers have expressed displeasure with it on Twitter and to this blogger by email and in conversation. It thus warrants comment.

As Whitaker points out, the thrust of the piece is that Arab autocracy is in many ways quite good for western security and for Israel. Kaplan’s piece argues additionally that the Tunisian uprising is likely to stay local for “pivotal reasons,” such as Tunisia not being an Arab country after all. This argument is bogus for reasons to be discussed below. For the purposes of this blog, it is the most problematic contention of all. Kaplan utterly misinterprets or misrepresents the remote history of Tunisia, ignoring its importance as the administrative and political capital of the Arab west during conquests and the importance of the Ottoman period in establishing continuity in the legitimacy of the state’s present boundaries. Previously this blogger wrote: “Be wary of bad ideas leveraged by the Tunisian example for political points in the US.” Kaplan uses the Tunisian example much this way though he is merely re-enforcing the conventional wisdom.

Kaplan’s argument about Tunisia’s particularities is summarized something like this: Tunisia’s cosmopolitan and settled past set it apart from other Arab polities. There is some truth in this but Kaplan’s way of writing makes it difficult to see how this is relevant today. Furthermore he jumbles the way any of this actually relates to modern Tunisia. It reminds the reader of Christopher Hitchens’s article on Tunisia from 2007.  

Second thoughts on the overthrow of Ben Ali

The Tunisian uprising has been called the Jasmine Revolution, the Tunisian Revolution as well as a number of other things. The Tunisians did not accomplish a “true” revolution in an academic sense, at least not yet; what took place in the last month resembled a “color revolution” more than anything else, displacing a dictator while leaving his regime largely in place though sapped of its political and moral legitimacy. Though the state remains in the hands of the old regime, by and large, its leadership has been at the mercy of the population, reshuffling its membership and resigning RCD membership as the crowds shout. Popular forces have gained power unseen in an Arab polity before. Yet the uprising has been remarkably civil and Tunisian authorities, though conspicuously brutal in the course of the revolt, showed a lack of resolve that one might not expect to see repeated in other Arab states. A journalist emailed this blogger with question: What are your thoughts on the Tunisian revolution, where is it headed and what kind of democratic developments do you think are possible? The answer is: Too soon to tell (regardless of how much is written here or elsewhere).

This blogger has thus avoided extensive commentary on the events until further reflection is possible. A few secondary thoughts since the first post, though: