Beyond the “Black Decade”: Deconstructing a Narrative of Exclusion and Envisioning Tunisia’s Future

Since the announcement of extraordinary measures on July 25, 2021, the term “The Black Decade” has been forcefully imposed upon Tunisia’s political and media discourse. It is used to describe the period from the fall of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s regime in 2011 to President Kais Saied’s assumption of exceptional powers. This phrase is primarily employed to characterize the perceived failures of the entire political class, with a particular focus on the Ennahdha movement, in fulfilling the revolution’s promises of development, justice, and dignity.

However, this label raises fundamental questions: Is it fair to brand an entire decade as “black,” as if it were devoid of any achievement or gain? Or are we facing a contingent political narrative, constructed for the moment and in need of rational deconstruction, free from emotionalism and exclusionary rhetoric?

There is an urgent need today to build a balanced national narrative—one that restores the significance of the democratic transition experience. This is not to paint it as flawless, but to recognize it as a foundational phase in the long and arduous journey of building a state based on freedoms and rights. This narrative reconstruction is not an exercise in whitewashing; it is a political and moral necessity to help reshape the political process and establish new national common ground, which Tunisia desperately needs to overcome its current impasse.

Deconstructing the “Black Decade” Narrative

In the prevailing discourse, the “Black Decade” refers to the era when diverse political coalitions governed, led in part or through alliances by Ennahdha. Proponents of this narrative hold these parties collectively responsible for the economic stagnation, the degradation of public services, rampant unemployment, the entrenchment of corruption, and the bitter political polarization that stymied major reforms.

This narrative has been amplified by politicians, some now in power, academics, and media figures. It seeks to cement the idea that this period was among the worst since independence in terms of governance and administration, alleging that it witnessed systematic “breaches” in the state that weakened its institutional immunity and credibility.

Context and Political Instrumentalization

It is crucial to recognize that the term “Black Decade” is rarely a neutral historical descriptor. Instead, it is a narrative construct with a clear political agenda, often instrumentalized to justify political exclusion, suppress dissent, and create an alternative legitimacy based solely on condemning the past rather than presenting a coherent vision for the future.

This framing is also used to rationalize extraordinary measures and to hang current failures on the “accumulations of the past,” a deliberate process of shifting responsibility from the present to a vilified yesterday. Consequently, this discourse transcends mere criticism; it transforms into a symbolic tool to negate the democratic experiment itself, discredit its architects, and promote a monolithic narrative that monopolizes truth and excludes all others.

Most perilously, this narrative was not solely propagated by the opponents of Islamists. Various actors from within the democratic family itself contributed to its entrenchment, wielding it as a weapon in their political struggle against Ennahdha. While perhaps tactically justified in the short term, this behavior inadvertently weakened the entire democratic transition, dismantling its symbolic and ethical foundations—a strategic error of grave proportions in Tunisia’s fragile context.

A Balanced Assessment: Between Tangible Gains and Undeniable Failures

Despite the significant problems of that era, labeling it “black” does not withstand objective scrutiny that distinguishes between objective failure and bad faith, and between the natural stumbles of a transition and the total collapse of an experiment.

The Democratic Sphere: Unprecedented Openings
Tunisia witnessed a qualitative leap in public freedoms. Freedom of expression and pluralism flourished as never before. The media landscape diversified dramatically, thousands of civil society organizations emerged, and hundreds of political parties were established. Citizens could criticize any authority without fear—an unthinkable prospect before 2011.

Democratic elections and the peaceful transfer of power remained a defining feature of the period, despite all the turbulence. This earned Tunisia a recognized regional exception in an neighborhood otherwise marked by regression and upheaval.

The Socio-Economic Quagmire: A Shared Responsibility
While successive governments failed to achieve sustainable growth or significantly reduce unemployment, these failures cannot be attributed to a single party. They were the product of a fragile political composition, a recalcitrant and sclerotic bureaucracy, international economic pressures, and chronic political instability that prevented the implementation of any long-term vision.

Political responsibility was not the monopoly of Ennahdha. Power was shared by a rotating cast of parties and figures from leftist, liberal, and independent backgrounds. To place the entire burden of failure on one actor is a misleading oversimplification, a deliberate obfuscation of the complex reality presented to the public.

Who Truly Benefits from This Narrative?

The primary beneficiary of entrenching this narrative appears to be the current authority, which has found in it a justification for its exceptional measures and an escape from accountability for its current performance, through constant, yet vague, references to the “old system.”

Populist forces have also benefited, finding in the demonization of the past a convenient tool to build a visceral, if shallow, legitimacy. Paradoxically, some components of the democratic family itself participated in this instrumentalization, despite having been partners in governance or defenders of the climate of freedoms. By slipping into the logic of collective condemnation, these actors failed to distinguish between their political battle against a specific rival and the defense of a shared democratic project of which they were a part.

Challenging the Narrative’s Core Accusations

Many of the accusations leveled against that era are repetitive and often populist, but most crumble under objective examination.

• “Ennahdha Destroyed the Economy”: This ignores the profound structural imbalances plaguing the Tunisian economy long before the revolution. Successive governments inherited a nearly bankrupt state and a bureaucracy deeply resistant to reform.

• “The Political Class Betrayed the Revolution”: This is a simplification that empties politics of its meaning. Many of the activists who participated in governance were themselves icons of the revolutionary movement, who tried, with varying degrees of sincerity and success, to achieve change within the confines of a challenging reality.

• “The Era of Terrorism”: The rise of jihadist threats during this period was not primarily a product of domestic political choice, but a consequence of complex regional and international factors. In fact, Tunisia’s security and military apparatus achieved significant successes in degrading these groups, demonstrating institutional resilience rather than sheer governmental failure.

• “Suspicious Recruitments and Compensations”: Official data often reveals that the scale of such benefits was limited and that procedures, while sometimes contentious, followed established legal frameworks and encompassed a diverse range of political affiliations, not just one party.

• “Ill-Gotten Wealth of Politicians”: Accusations of vast enrichment, particularly against Ennahdha leaders, often rely on mobilizing rhetoric rather than legal proofs or official evidence. The reality for many mid-level and even senior members of various political movements, including Ennahdha, was often one of poverty, marginalization, and illness—a stark contrast to the media-propagated stereotype.

Towards an Alternative National Narrative

What is required today is not to downplay the very real failures of the past decade, nor to defend it blindly. The imperative is to break free from the logic of vilification and collective guilt, and to transition to a responsible and objective national dialogue.

This dialogue must be grounded in facts and data, not impressions and emotions. It must assign to each party its true share of responsibility, according to its role, powers, and position within the decision-making structure. It should seek to capitalize on the genuine gains of that period—primarily the hard-won space for freedoms—instead of burying them under the rubble of populist slogans.

The goal is to build an inclusive national narrative that does not exclude anyone: activists, opposition, and authorities alike. It should be a narrative that calls for assessment, construction, and correction within a framework of shared responsibility, serving as a platform for contemplating a shared future.

Conclusion: Building the Future on Solid Foundations

The insistence on labeling the post-revolution period the “Black Decade” is not merely a linguistic misstep. It is a harmful oversimplification and a dangerous deviation in the collective consciousness that reproduces the discourse of exclusion and belittles the immense sacrifices made by thousands of Tunisians from all walks of life for the sake of freedom and dignity.

A nation is not built upon the ruins of hatred, nor by selectively invoking the past to justify the present. A genuine democracy cannot be founded on demonizing one side while absolving another.

Tunisia today needs a collective awareness that understands democracy not as a stage free of stumbles, but as a long, non-linear path requiring continuous adjustment and solid collective will. The pre-July 25 period was not an absolute evil, just as the current period is not an absolute good. True progress lies in building upon the gains of the previous era, learning from its grave mistakes, and seizing the opportunities of the present moment to forge a new political and social contract—one capable of leading Tunisia out of its multifaceted crisis and toward the dignity its people demanded on December 17, 2010.