Steeped in a culture of seeking consensus even when it looks unlikely, the soft-spoken former U.N. secretary-general is again at the point where his diplomatic efforts are being overtaken by mass killings rather than being seen as a step to peace.

Although as mediator for the United Nations and the Arab League he has sounded the alarm in Syria with as much moral force as anyone could muster, Annan has failed to get divided world powers or President Bashar al-Assad to stop the bloodshed.

His qualifications as a star statesman who could make mediation work in Syria – if anyone could – were strengthened by his success in halting a spiraling conflict in Kenya four years ago. But Syria is proving a far tougher task.

“He’s driven by the idea of ‘don’t think no’, always looking for the best outcome,” Fred Eckhard, who worked as Annan’s spokesman during his time as secretary-general, told Reuters. “We’ll just see if that’s enough.”

In little over a week since Annan called on Assad to take “bold steps” to make his peace plan work, loyalist forces have been accused of more massacres, opposition strongholds have been shelled and U.N. monitors have been shot at.

With sectarian violence worsening, Annan could do little this week but express concern and demand access for U.N. monitors to investigate killings.

On Tuesday, his spokesman said Annan hoped to convene a meeting of an international contact group on Syria soon, but no venue or list of participants had yet been set.

Asked late last month what had to happen before his peace plan was declared dead, Annan said only the U.N. Security Council could decide.

“When you are dealing with these sorts of issues, it is not a simple issue of drawing up red lines,” he said.

MAN OF COMPROMISE

Annan, 74, was shaped by an upbringing in an ethnically divided culture in his native Ghana, but one where dialogue was prized and outright conflict rare. It was a time of optimism and confidence as Ghana headed for independence from Britain.

“He was born and bred in an environment of looking for compromise,” said economist Kwame Pianim, a childhood friend.

That seemed to work after Kenya’s 2007 presidential election, when rival candidates from different tribes claimed victory and some of their followers engaged in ethnic massacres, killing more than 1,200 people.

With the country seeming headed towards the brink of civil war, Annan put the two candidates in a room and announced: “There is only one Kenya”. He helped persuade one of the rivals to accept the post of prime minister in a joint government. The violence ended and his role was praised.

“He is a very skilful negotiator. We came to see that he was offering us the best possible that was available,” said Salim Lone, from the Kenyan opposition camp that had felt cheated of victory. “The alternative was the continuation of mass killings,” said Lone, himself a former U.N. official.

But earlier in his career, Annan’s record was less successful. He was head of U.N. peacekeeping in 1994, when he acknowledges he should have done more to help prevent the slaughter of 800,000 Rwandan Tutsis and moderate Hutus. Critics say he chose the route of procedure and diplomacy instead.

“He becomes quite wedded to the processes, but ultimately you don’t serve the processes by following the processes to the point of absurdity,” said David Bosco of American University in Washington.

The greatest reproach was that Annan failed to act on a telegram from the then U.N. peacekeeper commander, General Romeo Dallaire, urging a move against arms caches being built up by Hutu extremists as they prepared mass murder.

“I believed at that time that I was doing my best,” Annan said years later. “But I realized after the genocide that there was more that I could and should have done to sound the alarm and rally support.”

In a later book that was scathing about the world’s failure to act, Dallaire had only good things to say of Annan the man – describing him as projecting a rare “humanism and dedication to the plight of others”.

Rwanda was far from the only stain. Annan was at the top of peacekeeping at the time of the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia, where insufficient U.N. forces again failed to stop the killing, and during a fiasco in Somalia that preceded Rwanda.

Annan’s defenders say he tried to get enough troops and the big power support to make a difference in Bosnia and Rwanda. Critics argue that he was held back by respect for the limits he had learned in decades as a U.N. functionary.

Annan’s later decade as secretary-general was tarnished by allegations of mismanagement of the oil-for-food program for Iraq. Although Annan was cleared of wrongdoing, his son Kojo was found to have used U.N. contacts to his improper advantage.

Even his mediation in Kenya, while mainly seen as a success for helping to halt violence, is not unchallenged. Some believe his compromise papered over a flawed election too elegantly, allowing the possible loser to keep power and failing to do enough to prevent potential future conflict.

“The Kofi Annan peace architecture was sloppy in the extreme,” said Mutahi Ngunyi of The Consulting House thinktank, which gave security advice to negotiators. “His role helped only to the extent that he calmed the temperatures.”

Crucially, in Kenya Annan had the advantages of the backing of regional leaders and of Security Council powers with no particular axe to grind.

DIVISION

Syria is very different: Western countries are pushing for an ending that leads to the departure of Assad. Russia and China still appear ready to veto such steps in the Security Council.

“Without the political backing of governments and the right governments in the right configuration you can’t do anything,” said Eckhard.

Annan, who annoyed the United States by branding the 2003 invasion of Iraq illegal, had the credentials to get a foot in the door in Damascus as more than a Western stooge.

But critics say his determination to keep up the consensus seeking diplomacy is more likely to fuel than quell an increasingly sectarian conflict as Syrian forces step up efforts to crush opponents who are themselves launching more attacks.

“I think he’s fallen victim to the curse of the mediator, that all other options are inferior,” Bosco said.

“He has gone out of his way to attempt to discredit other options and I think that’s a mistake,” Bosco said, while pointing out the lack of apparent appetite for options such as armed intervention.

Last month’s massacre at Houla of 108 people, mostly women and children, showed the advantage of having U.N. observers on the ground to at least bear witness despite Annan’s failed April 12 ceasefire. The U.N. monitors said they suspected army shelling and pro-Assad militia were behind the Houla killings.

But those deaths and the many since then – including nearly 80 people reported massacred in another village – have also demonstrated the impotence of the monitors, who have struggled to even get access to sites of suspected slaughter.

Annan described Houla as a tipping point for the conflict. That could also apply to any chance of negotiating an end to it.

“Does he see a way out? Maybe not. But I don’t think that would have stopped him,” Eckhard said.

(Editing by Peter Graff)

Steeped in a culture of seeking consensus even when it looks unlikely, the soft-spoken former U.N. secretary-general is again at the point where his diplomatic efforts are being overtaken by mass killings rather than being seen as a step to peace.

Although as mediator for the United Nations and the Arab League he has sounded the alarm in Syria with as much moral force as anyone could muster, Annan has failed to get divided world powers or President Bashar al-Assad to stop the bloodshed.

His qualifications as a star statesman who could make mediation work in Syria – if anyone could – were strengthened by his success in halting a spiraling conflict in Kenya four years ago. But Syria is proving a far tougher task.

“He’s driven by the idea of ‘don’t think no’, always looking for the best outcome,” Fred Eckhard, who worked as Annan’s spokesman during his time as secretary-general, told Reuters. “We’ll just see if that’s enough.”

In little over a week since Annan called on Assad to take “bold steps” to make his peace plan work, loyalist forces have been accused of more massacres, opposition strongholds have been shelled and U.N. monitors have been shot at.

With sectarian violence worsening, Annan could do little this week but express concern and demand access for U.N. monitors to investigate killings.

On Tuesday, his spokesman said Annan hoped to convene a meeting of an international contact group on Syria soon, but no venue or list of participants had yet been set.

Asked late last month what had to happen before his peace plan was declared dead, Annan said only the U.N. Security Council could decide.

“When you are dealing with these sorts of issues, it is not a simple issue of drawing up red lines,” he said.

MAN OF COMPROMISE

Annan, 74, was shaped by an upbringing in an ethnically divided culture in his native Ghana, but one where dialogue was prized and outright conflict rare. It was a time of optimism and confidence as Ghana headed for independence from Britain.

“He was born and bred in an environment of looking for compromise,” said economist Kwame Pianim, a childhood friend.

That seemed to work after Kenya’s 2007 presidential election, when rival candidates from different tribes claimed victory and some of their followers engaged in ethnic massacres, killing more than 1,200 people.

With the country seeming headed towards the brink of civil war, Annan put the two candidates in a room and announced: “There is only one Kenya”. He helped persuade one of the rivals to accept the post of prime minister in a joint government. The violence ended and his role was praised.

“He is a very skilful negotiator. We came to see that he was offering us the best possible that was available,” said Salim Lone, from the Kenyan opposition camp that had felt cheated of victory. “The alternative was the continuation of mass killings,” said Lone, himself a former U.N. official.

But earlier in his career, Annan’s record was less successful. He was head of U.N. peacekeeping in 1994, when he acknowledges he should have done more to help prevent the slaughter of 800,000 Rwandan Tutsis and moderate Hutus. Critics say he chose the route of procedure and diplomacy instead.

“He becomes quite wedded to the processes, but ultimately you don’t serve the processes by following the processes to the point of absurdity,” said David Bosco of American University in Washington.

The greatest reproach was that Annan failed to act on a telegram from the then U.N. peacekeeper commander, General Romeo Dallaire, urging a move against arms caches being built up by Hutu extremists as they prepared mass murder.

“I believed at that time that I was doing my best,” Annan said years later. “But I realized after the genocide that there was more that I could and should have done to sound the alarm and rally support.”

In a later book that was scathing about the world’s failure to act, Dallaire had only good things to say of Annan the man – describing him as projecting a rare “humanism and dedication to the plight of others”.

Rwanda was far from the only stain. Annan was at the top of peacekeeping at the time of the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia, where insufficient U.N. forces again failed to stop the killing, and during a fiasco in Somalia that preceded Rwanda.

Annan’s defenders say he tried to get enough troops and the big power support to make a difference in Bosnia and Rwanda. Critics argue that he was held back by respect for the limits he had learned in decades as a U.N. functionary.

Annan’s later decade as secretary-general was tarnished by allegations of mismanagement of the oil-for-food program for Iraq. Although Annan was cleared of wrongdoing, his son Kojo was found to have used U.N. contacts to his improper advantage.

Even his mediation in Kenya, while mainly seen as a success for helping to halt violence, is not unchallenged. Some believe his compromise papered over a flawed election too elegantly, allowing the possible loser to keep power and failing to do enough to prevent potential future conflict.

“The Kofi Annan peace architecture was sloppy in the extreme,” said Mutahi Ngunyi of The Consulting House thinktank, which gave security advice to negotiators. “His role helped only to the extent that he calmed the temperatures.”

Crucially, in Kenya Annan had the advantages of the backing of regional leaders and of Security Council powers with no particular axe to grind.

DIVISION

Syria is very different: Western countries are pushing for an ending that leads to the departure of Assad. Russia and China still appear ready to veto such steps in the Security Council.

“Without the political backing of governments and the right governments in the right configuration you can’t do anything,” said Eckhard.

Annan, who annoyed the United States by branding the 2003 invasion of Iraq illegal, had the credentials to get a foot in the door in Damascus as more than a Western stooge.

But critics say his determination to keep up the consensus seeking diplomacy is more likely to fuel than quell an increasingly sectarian conflict as Syrian forces step up efforts to crush opponents who are themselves launching more attacks.

“I think he’s fallen victim to the curse of the mediator, that all other options are inferior,” Bosco said.

“He has gone out of his way to attempt to discredit other options and I think that’s a mistake,” Bosco said, while pointing out the lack of apparent appetite for options such as armed intervention.

Last month’s massacre at Houla of 108 people, mostly women and children, showed the advantage of having U.N. observers on the ground to at least bear witness despite Annan’s failed April 12 ceasefire. The U.N. monitors said they suspected army shelling and pro-Assad militia were behind the Houla killings.

But those deaths and the many since then – including nearly 80 people reported massacred in another village – have also demonstrated the impotence of the monitors, who have struggled to even get access to sites of suspected slaughter.

Annan described Houla as a tipping point for the conflict. That could also apply to any chance of negotiating an end to it.

“Does he see a way out? Maybe not. But I don’t think that would have stopped him,” Eckhard said.

(Editing by Peter Graff)

The biggest story in Africa south of the Sahara over the past few years hasn’t been plague, famine or war but the emergence of the world’s poorest continent as one of its fastest growing – thanks to factors that include fresh investment, economic reform, the spread of new technology, higher prices for commodity exports and generally greater political stability.

Nigeria and Kenya, the most important economies in West and East Africa respectively, are pillars of the change in Africa as well as having the largest and most easily accessible markets for foreigners.

Both now face growing battles with Islamist groups; Kenya throwing troops into neighbouring Somalia in pursuit of al Shabaab fighters, Nigeria struggling with bombings and shootings by its homegrown Boko Haram sect.

Kenyan forces have pushed into southern Somalia to drive back al Qaeda-linked militants blamed by Nairobi for a string of border incursions and kidnappings, including the abductions of foreign tourists from coastal resorts which have damaged one of Kenya’s most important industries.

Shabaab has in return called for all out war on Kenya and “huge blasts” by its unknown number of supporters there. Grenade attacks this week have killed one person, wounded more than 20 and jangled nerves in Nairobi, where more than 200 people died in an al Qaeda bombing of the U.S. embassy in 1998.

Killings by Nigeria’s Boko Haram sect (whose name means Western education is sinful) had been largely confined to a remote corner of the semi-desert northeast and ignored by much of the country until bombings struck the capital Abuja a few months back. A suicide car bombing on the U.N. headquarters in August killed 24 people.

Boko Haram is now by far the biggest security headache for President Goodluck Jonathan in Africa’s most populous nation – which, if estimates of population and the Muslim-Christian balance are to be believed, might have more Muslims than any country in the Middle East.

While Islam in Africa has traditionally co-existed comfortably with other religions, more heavily Muslim regions are often relatively marginalised economically and politically and that leaves plenty of ground for radicalism to sprout.

Nigerian elections this year showed how starkly the largely Muslim north; arid, poor, less well educated, lacking in resources and facing the decline of its few industries was divided from the more prosperous and dynamic south, home to Africa’s biggest energy reserves and booming factories.

Changing that is a huge task for President Jonathan and could be complicated still further by a heavy security response to Boko Haram.

Getting sucked into a foreign war against a Somali enemy which drove out Ethiopia’s far more experienced army in 2009 is just what Kenya doesn’t need at a time it is already in the doldrums due to drought, soaring inflation and a plummeting currency. Although the growth outlook of 4 percent may still sound healthy by Western standards, that has been cut from earlier expectations.

It is not only the cost in lives and money that count.

Counter insurgency wars – even in regions distant from the main centres of business – can do nothing for foreign investor sentiment starting to warm to Africa. They drain resources that might better be used improving infrastructure or education and lead to a greater role for security establishments at the heart of power and policy making, rarely a recipe for success in post-independence Africa.

Beyond the biggest countries, poorer neighbours may be at greater risk. A flood of weapons across the Sahara desert from Libya’s civil war – as well as hundreds of thousands of now unemployed former migrant workers – could further destabilise West Africa’s Sahel countries, already prey to kidnappings and attacks by al Qaeda’s regional offshoot.

Overall, optimism for Africa remains strong. Businesses draw comparisons with China and India in past decades and eye a market of a billion consumers with money to spend on more than just basic survival.

Whether or not the threat of Islamist militant groups can be contained to the margins, the extra strain could certainly be felt in a continent where many have only recently seen good reason to believe in a better future.

But is the African Union wrong to treat the anti-Gaddafi forces with more caution than their Western allies and the Arab world has done even if the former rebels seem to have widespread support for ending an autocrat’s rule?

There are plenty of reasons why the African Union would be reluctant to recognise the rebels who overthrew a man who did as much as anyone to found the African Union in place of the ineffectual club called the Organisation of African Unity.

Many individuals African rulers benefited from Gaddafi’s largesse – particularly when they were in trouble – allowing them to get over any queasiness at his comic theatre at African summits and his coronation as Africa’s “King of Kings” as well as to humour his quest for a “United States of Africa”.

For South Africa’s ruling ANC, Gaddafi was a friend during the struggle against apartheid. For Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe, who expelled the Libyan ambassador after he switched sides this week, help has been much more recent. Some autocrats may also fear that the example set by the overthrow of Gaddafi could inspire opponents in their own countries.

For the African Union – and South Africa in particular – there was the embarrassment of seeing peace efforts (no matter how well intended) dismissed internationally while the rebels fought towards Tripoli under the NATO air cover which made their war possible.

It’s not that there is a fully united front in Africa. Increasingly assertive giant Nigeria, striving to set itself out as a champion of democracy, was quick to recognise Libya’s new rulers. West Africans have not forgotten the hundreds of thousands who perished in Gaddafi-fuelled wars in Liberia, Sierra Leone and elsewhere either.

But might there be sound reasons less tied to history and emotional links for African countries to be wary of leaping to recognise the rebels?

First may be the treatment of black Libyans and Africans from south of the Sahara, reported by Amnesty International this week, but evident since the start of the rebellion. While there certainly seems to be truth that some African mercenaries fought for Gaddafi, there have been plenty of reports of black Africans being killed or tortured when it wasn’t really clear whether they were fighters or just part of the army of hundreds of thousands of Africans who made their way to Libya to do hard jobs that Libyans didn’t want.

For some, as explained in this Reuters report on Algeria, there is the suspicion of Islamist links among the anti-Gaddafi forces.

The African Union’s Democracy Charter is also clear that those who takes power by force should be sanctioned not welcomed (although it could be interpreted that this applies to democratically elected governments, which Gaddafi’s certainly wasn’t). Hypocritical it may be for those African leaders who first took power by force to now insist that others should not do so, but the African Union has condemned coups and rebellions elsewhere and suspended countries until they held elections. That has undoubtedly helped make clear that taking power by force should not be the workaday means of changing government that it once was in Africa.

Should the African Union treat the Libyans differently to forces that took power elsewhere even if they appear to have popular support and promise democracy? The African Union will probably recognise Libya’s new leadership in the end, if only because it would be impractical to do otherwise, but is the caution justified? Is it just holding off because of wounded pride over failed peace efforts and ties to old friend Gaddafi?

This offers a scholarship for a promising, young (under 30) African journalist or aspirant journalist to do a post graduate BA hons degree at the University of The Witwatersrand ’s Journalism Programme in Johannesburg, starting in early 2012, and to join Reuters thereafter for a period of work experience.

Candidates must have an undergraduate degree or at least 3 years professional experience in journalism and must be nominated by a senior journalist, publisher or academic.  They must be fluent in English. The scholarship will cover fees, accommodation and a modest living allowance.

Previous winners have come from Malawi, Nigeria and Kenya, chosen from among extremely strong candidates.

Candidates should submit a motivation letter, a CV, writing samples and at least 2 letters of nomination/reference by July 31, 2011  to fitzgeraldprize@thomsonreuters.com. Candidates will have to make themselves available for a written test and interview.

Of course Reuters has reporters on both sides of the front line, but from Tunis I have been keeping an eye on Libyan television too – partly because it has scrolling headlines in English about the latest crusader, colonial and al Qaeda atrocities which might carry some news but also, I have to admit, from a fascination with the procession of people voicing their support for the Brother Leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

Not being an Arabic speaker, I can only gather a few words, but the raised voices make clear the emotion, often from Gaddafi’s Bab al Aziziyah compound itself.

Who are these Libyans and what do they really feel? Who are the people who bring young children on their shoulders to this repeatedly bombed compound, dressing them in bright green patriotic suits like little elves and hoisting them high while they thrust fists in the air?

Through the day the voices change – at one point a talk show host with improbably red hair discusses with participants sat in armchairs in the sunshine of the Mediterranean spring.

A succession of people take the microphone to voice their opinion – pretty much the same opinion. Sometimes they are teenagers, sometimes workers, sometimes in uniform, sometimes old men in sunglasses – always speaking quickly, loudly and angrily.

Do people get paid for their appearances or is it worth it for the few minutes of fame? Do they volunteer? Are they forced to do this?

Then  the crowds build, waving pictures of Gaddafi from various eras – the young colonel in the years after he seized power more than four decades ago, the guide in the dress of a desert nomad, the leader in ‘King of Pop’-style uniforms covered in braid. Fists are thrust skyward again.

Sometimes there are gunshots of celebration in the air. Once, some spectators appeared on horseback. Another day, a group seemed to burst spontaneously into the streets around the compound, sweeping their green flags in joy as though taking an early day off from school.

At night the lights might come out for a pop concert, the crowd swaying to the rhythm and patriotic lyrics.

Is attendance obligatory or is it the best entertainment on offer in Tripoli? Once you are there, do you get overtaken by the mood of solidarity and patriotism? When you go home to do you feel energised? Do you feel relieved to have escaped unscathed? Uneasy at your part in what even the most charitable would have to call propaganda? Is it all just in a day’s work?

Even being in Tripoli wouldn’t necessarily help to answer these questions. As my colleague Lin Noueihed wrote from there, the fear is palpable and getting an honest opinion from anyone is almost impossible.

It would seem insulting to brand all the people appearing on television as mere sycophants. Tripoli has been bombed repeatedly. The very compound has been targeted – according to Libyan officials killing several members of Gaddafi’s family plus security guards and office workers. There is reason to be angry, but also plenty of reason to be afraid.

Unfortunately, while we don’t know those people have the freedom to say what they believe, we also have to question whether we can believe anything they say. One day, I hope to find out.

The North African country has struggled to restore stability since leader Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali was ousted earlier this year in a revolution which inspired uprisings across the Arab world.

Chanting protesters called for the departure of the government and Prime Minister Beji Caid Sebsi, whistling at black-clad riot police in central Tunis and throwing stones.

Police fired teargas to push the protesters into streets off the central Avenue Bourguiba.

“We only intervene when they throw stones, not when they insult us,” said one plain clothes officer, holding out a broken padlock he said the protesters had thrown.

“The police have to adapt to the new environment as well. Four months is not long enough to change everyone’s mentality,” he said.

Tension is growing in Tunisia in the countdown to a July election for an assembly that will draw up a new constitution.

MODERATE ISLAMIST GROUP

A moderate Islamist group banned under Ben Ali is expected to do well, unsettling many in the country’s secular establishment.

The spark for the violent protests over the past few days was a warning from a former interior minister that there would be a coup d’etat if the Islamist group, Ennahda, won the vote.

“The police reaction is too extreme against the people,” said Chaqib, a civil servant who did not want to give his family name. “It’s true there are criminals among the protesters, but the reaction is still too cruel. It is a return to the days of Ben Ali.”

Sunday’s protest was smaller than those on the previous three days.

Protesters fear the interim administration will renege on its commitment to guide Tunisia toward democracy after decades of autocratic rule under Ben Ali.

The authorities — who reject any suggestion there will be a coup — responded to the protests by imposing an overnight curfew starting on Saturday. They said it was to ensure the safety of citizens.

Some Tunisians condemn the renewed demonstrations and want to see a return to normality in the country of 10 million, where the turmoil and war in neighboring Libya are expected to cut economic growth to little over one percent this year.

“Those who are demonstrating are those from the lowest level who have nothing to lose,” complained businessman Moez Hlcheri. “You can’t have everything immediately. You have to work for it.”

(Writing by Christian Lowe)

The new troubles in the North African country, where the Arab world’s tide of unrest began, are rooted in fears the interim administration will renege on its commitment to democracy after the ousting of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in January.

“We now need a revolution to follow the revolution,” said Abdoulrahim Jalouli, holding up his mobile phone to show pictures of police chasing down youths in the streets near the centre of Tunis.

“You see. The police are the same as before. There is no change,” he said.

Protesters threw stones at police and set cars ablaze in streets near the centre of Tunis. Security forces responded with shots in the air and teargas. Residents said thieves and looters were taking advantage of the chaos in parts of the city.

Defence and interior ministries announced a curfew from 9 p.m. (2000 GMT) to 5 a.m. “in order to ensure the safety of citizens and property”, said a statement quoted by the Tunisian Press Agency.

In another sign the government was trying to quell anger, former interior minister Farhat Rajhi was fired from his post as head of the state-sponsored High Commission on Human Rights and Fundamental Liberties, the agency said.

Demonstrations broke out on Thursday after Rajhi warned that Ben Ali loyalists might seize power in a coup if Islamists won elections scheduled in July to draw up a new constitution.

ISLAMISTS

Just as in other parts of the Middle East and North Africa where popular protests are bringing change, many secularists — and Western countries — fear greater freedom could also allow Islamists to take power.

Tunisia’s main Islamist group Ennahda, led by moderate Muslim scholar Rachid Ghannouchi and banned under Ben Ali, says it will contest the elections and does not fear a coup.

It is expected to do well in some parts of the country of 10 million people, particularly the conservative south, where deep frustration over poverty and unemployment helped inspire the revolution.

Tunisia’s interim rulers condemned the suggestion that there could be a coup if Islamists won the election, but it was not enough to calm protesters — further angered by the tough police tactics.

“Things are far from returning to normal,” said cafe owner Hassan Ali as businesses in the city centre hurriedly pulled down metal shutters, losing another day of trade in an economy where the turmoil is set to trim growth to only 1-1.5 percent this year.

Some Tunisians also oppose letting the Islamists take part in the elections.

“Our constitution does not allow religious parties and Ennahda is outside the law,” said Haifa ben Adballah, at an anti-Islamist demonstration by a few dozen people a few blocks from the confrontations in the city centre.

Tunisia’s rulers have banned Ben Ali’s aides and top members of the former ruling party from contesting elections. He fled to Saudi Arabia, but some of his entourage are being pursued for crimes during his 23-year rule.

Imed Trabelsi, the nephew of Ben Ali’s influential wife, has been sentenced to two years in prison and a fine of 2,000 dinars ($1,500) for taking drugs.

(Editing by Matthew Jones)

The new protests in the North African country, where the Arab world’s tide of unrest began, are rooted in fears an interim administration will renege on its commitment to democracy after the ousting of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in January.

“We now need a revolution to follow the revolution,” said Abdoulrahim Jalouli, holding up his mobile phone to show pictures of police chasing down other youths in the streets near the center of Tunis.

“You see. The police are the same as before. There is no change,” he said.

Tensions rose this week after a former interior minister warned that Ben Ali loyalists might seize power in a coup if Islamists won elections scheduled in July to draw up a new constitution.

Just as in other parts of the Middle East and North Africa where popular protests are bringing change, many secularists — and Western countries — fear greater freedom could also allow Islamists to take power.

Tunisia’s main Islamist group Ennahda, led by moderate Muslim scholar Rachid Ghannouchi and banned under Ben Ali, says it will contest the elections and does not fear a coup.

It is expected to do well in some parts of the country of 10 million people, particularly the conservative south, where deep frustration over poverty and unemployment helped inspire the revolution.

Tunisia’s interim rulers have condemned the statement by former interior minister Farhat Rajhi that there could be a coup if Islamists won the election, but it has not been enough to calm protesters — further angered by the tough police tactics.

“Things are far from returning to normal,” said cafe owner Hassan Ali as businesses in the city center hurriedly pulled down metal shutters, losing another day of trade in an economy where the turmoil is set to trim growth to only 1-1.5 percent this year.

Tunisia’s rulers have banned Ben Ali’s aides and top members of the former ruling party from contesting elections. He fled to Saudi Arabia, but some of his entourage are being pursued for crimes during his 23-year rule.

Imed Trabelsi, the nephew of Ben Ali’s influential wife, has been sentenced to two years in prison and a fine of 2,000 dinars ($1,500) for taking drugs, the Tunisian Press Agency reported on Saturday.

(Editing by Andrew Heavens)

The bank is a key lender to Tunisia and the $500 million (304 million pounds) it is giving in emergency budget support matches help from the World Bank. About another $200 million is coming from Europe, nearly half of that from former colonial power France.

Jacob Kolster, responsible for Tunisia, Libya and Egypt at the AfDB, said Europe should be doing more to back the country where the spreading revolt in the Arab world began with the toppling of Tunisia’s authoritarian ruler in January.

“I’m frankly a little bit disappointed with the outpour of real financial support,” he told Reuters. “Here is a golden opportunity to try and help North Africa to bring itself closer to what the occidental world believes is good governance.”

In addition to the emergency support, Tunisia estimates it needs about $4 billion in foreign loans to get through the turmoil after the revolution, which has knocked an economy that lacks the oil and gas resources of its neighbours.

Libya’s war has been an additional blow; Tunisian workers are no longer sending remittances from there, wealthy Libyans have stopped visits for cheap medical care and tens of thousands of Libyan refugees have crossed the border.

Economic growth this year is seen at 1-1.5 percent.

Kolster said Western countries as a whole needed to do more for Tunisia, but it was especially important for Europe given Tunisia’s proximity, historical ties and the tide of jobless Tunisians trying to seek work in Europe.

Tunisia’s fragility was underlined on Thursday by protests which sprang up after a former minister warned that loyalists of ousted President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali could mount a coup if Islamists won an election in July.

Kolster said Europe should extend the kind of economic benefits it does to Balkan states seen as potential EU members even if Tunisia is never considered as a possible member itself.

“I would have expected massive grant support,” said Kolster, for helping to build political institutions and civil society that would “cement the gains of what came out from the blood, sweat and tears of young people taking to the streets.”

Europe has pledged to step up support for North Africa.

But it also faces demands elsewhere with Libya at war and Egypt needing assistance after the fall of its authoritarian regime. Egypt is a much more important regional player than Tunisia when Western countries are considering where to spend.

“If they fail, I think Tunisia will pull through, but they may pull through in a different way,” said Kolster.

“Maybe slower, more risky, maybe where there are more risks of reversals than if there were a real firm helping hand across the pond.”