The effective independence of a country is its ability to meet its needs on its own, especially ensuring food security for its population. Just as the country achieved independence through the tremendous sacrifices of its people, reaching food independence is a war or battle for which we must make sacrifices to achieve the desired goal. Cereals are considered the most essential food in Tunisia, as the country consumes about 3.6 million tons of cereals, distributed as follows: 1.2 million tons of durum wheat, soft wheat, and barley. The state also monopolizes the purchase and distribution of durum wheat and soft wheat from farmers and sets prices yearly based on production costs and global prices for these products.

What is striking is the state's intervention in the cereal system by subsidizing prices in the first and second transformation stages and providing its products (flour, bread, semolina, pasta, couscous, etc.) at subsidized prices for consumers through a support fund, with a budget estimated at one billion dinars annually. This budget fluctuates with changes in cereal prices in global markets.

While cereal prices were once low and the dinar's value was high, allowing for effective control of the support fund's intervention, circumstances have changed in recent years. The importation of these products has become a burden on the trade balance, the state budget, and the balance of payments, with the country now importing all its needs for soft wheat and barley, equivalent to 1.2 million tons annually, and half its needs for durum wheat, or 0.6 million tons according to local production.

This is where the crucial point lies: local cereal production enables us to avoid imports, thus preventing the worsening of the trade balance deficit and the balance of payments. Furthermore, local production provides food security against price increase risks while helping to create wealth and stimulate the economy, ensuring invaluable food sovereignty in times of crisis.

The importation of cereals is seen as a necessity for the state to feed its population. Since all products are subsidized, the state supports foreign agriculture by importing and subsidizing cereals at the expense of Tunisian farmers. As we all know today, most countries support their farmers in various ways to maintain their food sovereignty. For instance, European farmers receive support per cultivated hectare to sustain the viability of their production. Food sovereignty is a strategic issue for countries, and they may sacrifice part of their budgets to support production. Thus, they protect themselves against disasters and crises, and export the surplus to countries like ours.

Moreover, agricultural production is linked to several factors: water, soil quality, mechanization, scientific research, financing, fertilizers, medications, seeds, return on investments, state support for the sector, market conditions, storage capacity, processing industries, and distribution and export circuits.

Marginalization of the Tunisian State Towards the Agricultural Sector

In Tunisia, the state generally marginalizes the agricultural sector, where farmers are seen as the weakest link, even though they are the cornerstone of farming and food wealth creation. For example, the state prices cereals and buys them, leaving farmers with few options other than to accept their fate. Previously, the state contributed to providing financial support to farmers and offered financing deals, seed and medication supplies, agricultural advice, training, and scientific research.

However, today’s farmers in Tunisia face many difficulties due to the state's withdrawal from support and the pressures it exerts by imposing low and rigid prices for durum wheat, soft wheat, and barley, disregarding critical strategic dimensions like food sovereignty and food security in the event of crises and disasters. Moreover, the state ignores that the production costs of large crops in Tunisia cannot be competitive compared to production costs in Europe or North America. Therefore, basing the price of Tunisian wheat on global references is profoundly unjust for Tunisian farmers.

It is also evident that the climate changes we have experienced, the effects of which will continue in the coming years, compel us to seriously rethink our future agricultural and food policies, especially as cereal prices have reached excessive levels, whether for soft wheat, durum wheat, or barley. This could exacerbate the trade deficit and the balance of payments and impact the budget and loans in hard currency, even if we manage to secure them at any price and interest rate. Here, it is necessary to account for the loan interest to finance all deficits.

Should We Raise Cereal Prices?

It seems that today, the only solution is to increase cereal prices at the production level so that farmers can regain profitability, focus on wealth creation, and innovate solutions for water scarcity. This requires investment in soil and seeds and increased productivity across all regions.

Today, we also have no choice but to accept paying the price for food security and sovereignty, as well as insurance against the risks of natural disasters and global crises, and to bear the burden of the non-competitiveness of Tunisian agriculture compared to advanced global agriculture by supporting its production costs, while also directing subsidies towards the production of Tunisian farmers instead of supporting foreign agricultural production. It is imperative to facilitate the work of Tunisian farmers, encourage them to focus intelligently on production, and promote collective work by providing all necessary inputs for production, particularly scientific research, fertilizers, seeds, and financing. Additionally, the state must ease the land regularization process for agricultural holdings and protect them from fragmentation or status changes.

I also believe it is time to break away from old policies by encouraging production through investment in agriculture and making it a profitable investment, even with initial state intervention. I am convinced that adopting an agricultural investment policy in hydraulic infrastructure could enhance the profitability of this sector. The country would benefit from improved overall production, achieve food sovereignty, and advance work, investment, and wealth creation in agriculture and processing industries. Why not? Haven't we once been the granary of Rome?