Forced migration governance in Tunisia: Balancing risks and assets for state-making during independence and democratization

What explains the variation in states’ governance of forced migration? Why are some groups of forced migrants welcomed and others not? We argue that this depends on whether accommodating a particular group of forced migrants is perceived as an asset or risk to broader political developments at play. Drawing on qualitative material from Tunisia between 1950 and 2020, the paper analyses how the Tunisian state has dealt differently with the large-scale arrival of forced migrants from neighbouring countries after its independence in 1956 and throughout its democratic opening since 2011. We show that during the Algerian War of Independence, perceptions of displaced Algerians as international assets outweighed perceptions of domestic economic and political risks. This resulted in Tunisia’s supportive-open approach towards the nearly 200,000 Algerians who were welcomed as prima facie refugees and provided humanitarian assistance. In contrast, the estimated 500,000 Libyans who arrived after 2011 have been perceived both as domestic economic and ideological assets and as important political risks – domestically and internationally. This explains Tunisia’s largely laissez-faire approach, whereby state authorities initially welcomed Libyans but refrained from providing humanitarian assistance and residence permits. In both cases, Tunisian authorities had to carefully balance national sovereignty and international obligations in their forced migration governance.