Public Acceptance Is Not Optional

Each year, substantial resources are allocated by donors to support countries that host migrants in transit. However, without securing public acceptance and trust, these efforts often fall short. While community engagement is widely recognized as a key pillar of humanitarian action, it remains one of the most overlooked and underutilized components in transit contexts such as Libya and Tunisia.

Since 2023, aid organizations (local and international) operating in Libya and Tunisia have come under increasing scrutiny from both state authorities and some of the public. While scepticism toward foreign aid is not unprecedented in the region, it remains an underexamined issue within the operational strategies of humanitarian actors and donor institutions, particularly those focused on migrant and refugee assistance. In Tunisia, allegations against foreign-funded local aid organizations started in 2023, leading to the detention and interrogation of members of at least 12 NGOs, on accusations of financial crimes and of supporting irregular migrants. Later in 2024, President Saied accused national organizations of using foreign funds to illegally settle migrants in Tunisia. This rhetoric builds on his consistent anti-migrant messaging that has incited xenophobic violence.

A parallel trend has emerged in Libya, where anti-migrant campaigns and hostility toward international aid actors escalated significantly in March 2025. Initially fuelled by social media narratives advocating for the expulsion of sub-Saharan African migrants, the movement created an opening that political actors used to suspend ten international non-governmental organizations and arbitrarily interrogate several local staff members. These actions demonstrated how authorities have capitalized on public sentiment to justify restrictive measures against humanitarian organizations, highlighting the need for more effective community engagement.

Understanding the current challenges

Mistrust and hostilities against aid organizations are on the rise, driven by unfounded accusations against them and unsubstantiated claims about their ties to European agendas - particularly in relation to migration control. While these characterizations lack credible evidence, their impact is undeniable: humanitarian workers now operate in more hostile, politically charged environments with declining access and reduced safety and operational capacity.

This lack of public trust is further exacerbated by widespread misinformation and a lack of awareness regarding the positive contributions of international aid to the recovery and development of the country. Despite the substantial annual investments made to support national development, economic resilience, youth empowerment, and recovery initiatives in both Libya and Tunisia, these efforts are often invisible to the local population. While agencies do produce reports and publish data on their work, there is a striking absence of a coherent, accessible public communication strategy capable of transforming these outputs into narratives that resonate with the broader public. As a result, misinformation thrives, and valuable contributions go unnoticed.

Who controls the narrative?

 In both Libya and Tunisia, national political leaders have played a pivotal role in shaping—and often distorting—the public discourse on migration and foreign aid. These actors have strategically leveraged migration and aid policies to secure political and financial capital in negotiations with European counterparts, while simultaneously attacking these same arrangements when they no longer serve their purposes. When foreign aid ceases to benefit them, political elites frequently reframe it as detrimental, thereby reshaping public opinion to portray aid organizations and migrants as threats to national sovereignty.

This was seen in Tunisia in 2023 when statements by the president Kais Said fueled anti-migrant and anti-NGO sentiment, leading to violence and unrest. Similarly in Libya, when the suspension of ten international organizations in March 2025 was applauded by the Libyan public. These events highlight how political leaders shape public narratives to strengthen their grip on power, shift attention away from internal challenges, and place blame on already vulnerable groups—often at great human cost.

The Role of Aid Organizations in Shaping Public Perception

Aid organizations have, in part, contributed to the growing disconnect between their operations and how they are perceived by the public. While external constraints such as limited funding and security concerns can hinder their outreach efforts, many continue to rely on donor-centric or passive communication strategies, using social media primarily as a platform for reporting rather than fostering dialogue or public engagement. While frameworks such as “Accountability to Affected Populations” (AAP) that address these challenges have been formally adopted, their implementation on the ground remains limited—often leaving communities without meaningful access to these organizations, thus increasing frustrations and mistrust.

Several critical gaps persist:

• Limited use of localized messaging and storytelling to foster broader public acceptance and humanize aid efforts;
• Inadequate responses to public hostility or misinformation online, despite clear indicators of frustration and discontent in online comment sections;
• The absence of community-level information channels, such as local radio, podcasts, or television programs designed to inform and engage the wider public;
• Over-reliance on one-way social media communication, which fails to facilitate meaningful dialogue or accountability;
• Restricting active engagement primarily to aid recipients, rather than addressing the concerns and perceptions of the broader host community.

In essence, many organizations speak, but few truly listen. Their achievements are documented and shared, but rarely translated into compelling narratives that connect with local audiences or reshape public understanding. Without deliberate efforts to bridge this divide, mistrust and misinformation are likely to deepen. Therefore, community engagement is no longer optional—it is the only viable strategy to continue providing aid for migrants and refugees in politically charged environments.