Advertisement

Rethinking Statehood in Post-Revolutionary Tunisia

  • Ruth Hanau Santini
Chapter
Part of the Reform and Transition in the Mediterranean book series (RTM)

Abstract

The chapter concentrates on the organized hypocrisy of domestic sovereignty by analyzing different shapes and formats of areas of limited statehood (ALS) in post-2011 Tunisia, both on a geographical and functional or sectoral level. In ALS, the capacity to implement and enforce central decisions is lacking and there is no monopoly on the use of force (Risse, T. Governance Without a State? Policies and Politics in Areas of Limited Statehood. New York: Columbia University Press, 2013). The restriction of statehood can be sectoral (only in some policy areas), territorial (only on some parts of the territory), temporal (only for a certain amount of time), and social (only with regard to specific parts of the population).

By ‘organised hypocrisy’, Krasner (Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999) and Lipson (European Journal of International Relations, 13(1), 5–34, 2007) refer to the inconsistency between rhetoric and action resulting from conflicting material and ideational pressures, in particular those derived from the clash between the logic of consequences and the logic of appropriateness. This chapter aims to set the stage for a dynamic reading of post-revolutionary state-society relations, in the tradition set by Migdal (Strong Societies and Weak States: State-Society Relations and State Capabilities in the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988) and others of overcoming the binary opposition between the state and societal forces and look at the state in society. By investigating how, within areas of limited statehood, dynamics of hybrid governance emerge and manifest themselves, the chapter will attempt at start illustrating the contentious and complex, both domestic and external, political dynamics observed in the post-2011 Tunisian trajectory.

Keywords

Limited statehood Sovereignty Governance Tunisia 

References

  1. Abrams, P. (1988). Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State. Journal of Historical Sociology, 1, 58–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, L. (1987). The State in the Middle East and North Africa. Comparative Politics, 20(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayoob, M. (1995). The Third World Security Predicament: State Making, Regional Conflict, and the International System. Emerging Global Issues. Boulder/London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Ayubi, N. (1995). Over-stating the Arab state: Politics and Society in the Middle East. London: IB Tauris.Google Scholar
  5. Badie, B., & Birnbaum, P. (1983). The Sociology of the State. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (2014). On the State: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1989–1992. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  7. Buzan, B. (1991). People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era. Colchester: ECPR press.Google Scholar
  8. Chandler, D. (2004). The Responsibility to Protect? Imposing the ‘Liberal Peace’. International Peacekeeping, 11(1), 59–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dawisha, A. I., & Zartman, I. W. (1988). Beyond Coercion: The Durability of the Arab State. Nation, State, and Integration in the Arab World (Vol. 3). London/New York: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  10. Entelis, J. (2004). L’héritage contradictoire de Bourguiba: modernisation et intolérance politique. In M. Camau & V. Geisser (Eds.), Habib Bourguiba La trace et l’héritage. IEP Aix-en-Provence: Khartala.Google Scholar
  11. Henri, C. M., & Springborg, R. (2010). Globalization and the Politics of Development in the Middle East (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hibou, B. (2004). From Privatizing the Economy to Privatizing the State: An Analysis of the Continual Formation of the State. In B. Hibou (Ed.), Privatizing the State (pp. 1–47). London: Hurst.Google Scholar
  13. Hinnebusch, R. (2010). Towards a Historical Sociology of State Formation in the Middle East. Middle East Critique, 19(3), 201–2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hinnebusch, R. (2015). Change and Continuity After the Arab Uprising: The Consequences of State Formation in Arab North African States. British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 42(1), 12–30.Google Scholar
  15. Hudson, M. C. (1977). Arab Politics: The Search for Legitimacy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hudson, M. C. (2015). The Crisis of the Arab State. Report, Middle East Initiative, Belfer Center. Available at: https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/files/CrisisArabState.pdf
  17. Jessop, B. (2015). The State: Past, Present and Future. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kalyvas, S. (2006). The Logic of Violence in Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kamrava, M. (2016). Fragile Politics: Weak States in the Greater Middle East. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kienle, E., & Sika, N. M. (2015). The Arab Uprisings: Transforming and Challenging State Power, Library of Modern Middle East Studies; 181. London: IB Tauris.Google Scholar
  21. Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krasner, S., & Risse, T. (2014). External Actors, State-Building, and Service Provision in Areas of Limited Statehood: Introduction. Governance, 27(4), 545–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lipson, M. (2007). Peacekpeeing: Organized Hypocrisy? European Journal of International Relations, 13(1), 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mampilly, Z. C. (2011). Rebel Rulers: Insurgent Governance and Civilian Life During War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  25. March, J., & Olsen, J. P. (1998). The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders. International Organization, 52(4), 943–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mayntz, R. (2004). Governance im Modernen Staat. In A. Benz (Ed.), Governance-Regieren im Komplexe Regelsystemen (pp. 65–76). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Migdal, J. (1988). Strong Societies and Weak States: State-Society Relations and State Capabilities in the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Migdal, J. S. (2004). Boundaries and Belonging: States and Societies in the Struggle to Shape Identities and Local Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mitchell, T. (1991). The Limits of the State: Beyond Statist Approaches and Their Critics. American Political Science Review, 85(1), 77–96.Google Scholar
  30. Mitchell, T. (2006). Society, Economy and the State Effect. In A. Sharma & A. Gupta (Eds.), The Anthropology of the State. A Reader (pp. 169–187). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Owen, R. (2004). State, Power and Politics in the Making of the Modern Middle East (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Redissi, H. (2007, Summer). Etat fort, societé faible en Tunisie. Maghreb Machrek, (192), 89–117.Google Scholar
  33. Risse, T. (2013). Governance Without a State? Policies and Politics in Areas of Limited Statehood. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rotberg, R. I. (2003). State Failure and State Weakness in a Time of Terror. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  35. Saouli, A. (2011). The Arab State: Dilemmas of State Formation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Skocpol, T. (1985). Bringing the State Back in: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research. In P. D. R. Evans & T. Skocpol (Eds.), Bringing the State Back in (pp. 118–138). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Stepan, A. C. (1978). The State and Society. Peru in Comparative Perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Tilly, C. (1985). War Making and State Making as Organised Crim. In P. B. Evans, D. Rueschmeyer, & T. Skocpol (Eds.), Bringing the State Back in (pp. 169–191). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruth Hanau Santini
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Naples - L’OrientaleNaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations