By Maria Glenna 

The suspension of Tunisia’s National Constituent Assembly on Aug. 7 once again prompted comparisons between Tunisia and Egypt both by political analysts and the media. These observers asked whether the situation in Tunisia would break down into the violence that we have recently seen in Egypt. It is true that there are similarities between Egypt and Tunisia. Both countries are experiencing political unrest; the dominant political parties that won elections in the two countries have little experience governing; and both countries are struggling to balance the influence of Islam within their fledgling democratic systems.

 

However, a closer look at Egypt and Tunisia reveals some key differences between the two, which suggest comparisons between them might be misleading.

 

If we were to view the transitioning countries in the Middle East and North Africa region as monolithic, the international community would risk creating a self-fulfilling prophecy based on worst-case scenarios that miss the nuances in each country. Instead, we should recognize the unique situations prevailing in each country and promote solutions that are adapted to the local contexts.

 

In Egypt, the military has maintained a position of power in the country for decades. Although a civilian government took power therein the past year, after the removal of President Hosni Mubarak’s regime, the army has continued to play a major political and economic role in society as this was best demonstrated in early July by their arrest of former President Mohammad Morsi.

 

In Tunisia, the army didn’t assume power during the revolution. Fearing a coup d'état, the first Tunisian president, Habib Bourguiba, prohibited military participation in politics by law. Instead, Bourguiba, and later President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, built their power base around the police and internal security forces. After the 2011 revolution a civilian government replaced the Ben Ali government in Tunisia and the army continues to play a minimal role in Tunisian politics.

 

The differences between the security sectors in Tunisia and Egypt are of key importance; today, the Tunisian army is subordinate to a democratically elected leadership while the Egyptian military has the power to intervene, and has done so.

 

The difference in political dynamics at work in Tunisia and Egypt is also crucial. Egypt’s post-revolution regime was characterized by the presence of a single party, the Freedom and Justice Party, with strong ties to the Brotherhood, while Tunisia has been governed by a union between the Islamic Ennahda Party and two secular parties, Ettakatol and the Congress for the Republic.

 

The government faces increasing opposition because of frustration over the lack of political progress. The assassinations of two opposition politicians this year triggered demonstrations and the government’s failure to bring the perpetrators to justice fueled the anger of the Tunisian people. But, at the same time, the government has managed to resolve disputes through political concessions and compromises. Ennahda has, for example, ceded key ministries to secular parties and independents, and limited the references to Islam in the draft of the constitution.

 

In the latest protests in Tunisia there has been very limited violence between protesters and security forces, or between pro-government and anti-government protesters. Only one protester has died since the protests started on July 25, and the cause of death was head trauma after being hit by a tear gas canister.

 

The protests show that Tunisians are still unhappy with the progress of political change and critics may be very pessimistic about democratic development in Tunisia. However, the largely peaceful nature of the demonstrations and the measured response from security forces indicate a positive development toward more democratic practices and respect for human rights that we should appreciate and encourage.

 

We should remember that the transition to democracy is a difficult and complex process that takes time – decades at best. And successful democratic transitions depend on a whole array of different factors that include history, culture, economic development, political leadership and the characteristics of civil society.

 

Despite their cultural similarities and geographical proximity, the transitioning countries in the Mideast and North Africa face different challenges and their transitions will depend on the distinct nuances that differentiate each country.