When the organizations of the quartet proposed its initiative for finding a way out of the country’s deep political crisis following the assassination of Mohamed Brahmi in July 2013 by forming an independent government through new elections, many from within the ruling troika, particularly Ennahda and the Congress for the Republic Party (CPR) accused the initiative of attempting to oust the Islamists through a soft coup.

When the organizations of the quartet proposed its initiative for finding a way out of the country’s deep political crisis following the assassination of Mohamed Brahmi in July 2013 by forming an independent government through new elections, many from within the ruling troika, particularly Ennahda and the Congress for the Republic Party (CPR) accused the initiative of attempting to oust the Islamists through a soft coup.

After tough marathon discussions and negotiations and a large division among Tunisians, Ennahda approved the road map and the resignation of the government headed by the Ennahda’s current Secretary General, Ali Laarayedh. The initiative was signed by 20 other parties, but the CPR declined and withdrew from the dialogue on the pretext that it was a means to abolish electoral legitimacy.

These adversary attitudes were the result of a conflict between the troika parties – mainly the Ennahda and the CPR – and the Tunisian General Labour Union (UGTT) which they considered to be representing their ideological enemy, the left. However, since the quartet’s winning of the Nobel Peace Prize, the positions of these political parties towards the quartet have changed at the level of their public discourse.

CPR Secretary General Imed Daïmi admits that the national dialogue launched in October 2013 changed the country’s current stage, stressing that his party’s positions, which opposed the dialogue at the time, were based on a certain political vision linked to the then situation and balances, which required withdrawing from the dialogue and abstaining from signing the road map proposed by the quartet to end the political crisis.

“Today, we should be proud that Tunisian organizations have won the Noble Peace Prize, which has made Tunisia the center of the world’s talk and an example to follow in the field of the civil society’s role in reaching political consensus,” says Daïmi.

However, the change in positions does not include all members of the CPR or Ennahda. Preferring anonymity in order perhaps not to look out of tune or spoil Tunisians’ joy, some expressed discontent with the awarding of a global prize like the Nobel Peace Prize to organizations that, they believe, were aligned with the opposition and turned against the legitimately elected troika government.

When the quartet proposed its initiative to form an independent government, supporters of Ennahda, driven by its leaders, protested to both reject the initiative which they considered to be a coup against the election results since it called for the resignation of the ruling troika, and defend electoral legitimacy.

Many observers believe that Ennahda’s agreement to take part in the dialogue and resign from the government was not whole-hearted and only came as a response to the deep transformations in the region after toppling the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the coming to power of General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

Today, all Ennahda can do is express its joy and happiness and celebrate this international prize although some of its leaders are dissatisfied with it.

Head of Ennahda’s Political Bureau Noureddine Arbawi says Ennahda’s political positions have changed as a response to local and regional transformations. “It is quite normal for our political positions towards one faction or the other to change based on our adaptive political vision,” says Arbawi. “Today, we are friends with all the quartet’s organizations, mainly the UGTT, and we are proud that they won the Nobel Peace Prize.”

Abdessattar ben Moussa, President of the Tunisian Human Rights League – one of the quartet’s components – believes that it was quite natural for Ennahda, at the time, to believe that the quartet was turning against it through its initiative and it was natural for political disagreements to happen. He says what matters most is the national dialogue’s results of political agreement and sparing the country from the vicious cycle of violence.

Moussa stresses that winning the Nobel Peace Prize by civil organizations based on their initiative to hold a political dialogue among different factions and their success in reaching agreement should be a motive for civil society organizations in conflict countries, particularly in neighboring Libya, to propose initiatives and compromises and to resort to dialogue.