ABSTRACT
Since the states of the Maghreb gained independence, democracy has been depicted as a possible horizon by the political leaders of those countries. Nevertheless, following independence, those post-colonial states had other challenges to face, such as underdevelopment, state-building and the recovery of a lost identity, and therefore democracy was relegated to the back burner. Authoritarian regimes seemed to be a necessary step for the development of societies considered as not yet civilised. Charismatic leaders such as Boumediène, Hassan II, Bourguiba and Qadhafi embodied young states working toward change. Those figures masked, though, the great upheavals that were taking place within those societies: the demographic revolution, the legitimacy deficit of political institutions and the economic failure of development schemes. As those emblematic figures disappeared one by one – with the exception of Qadhafi – it finally became clear how fragile those regimes were, confronted with social struggles before and Islamist social movements and political parties afterwards. Acknowledgement of the disastrous trajectory of post-colonial states in North Africa (civil war in Algeria, international embargo on Libya, police regime in Tunisia and overwhelming social injustices in Morocco) should have led to an in-depth critical account of North Africa’s governance (Albrecht and Schlumberger 2004). However, it seems clear that such badly performing economic and political systems suit the governing elites and that the European Union supports those regimes within the framework of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. After the failure of democratic transition in Algeria (1989-1991) and exportation of democracy to Iraq, there is little room left for hope in a broad-sweeping democratic moment taking hold in the Arab world in general and in the Maghreb in particular. And yet, North Africa continues to have its gaze strongly trained on Europe.
