Disgraced, the man went to the governor’s office and demanded to see the governor. Refused by the governor and laughed out of the municipal building, he set himself on fire — sparking the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia and setting the Arab world aflame.

Nearly a dozen men emulated his actions in the following days. Protests, which have morphed into riots, have broken out in Egypt, leaving many Arab nations uneasily looking at their own populaces.

As the world watches, many are left scratching their heads in bewilderment: No one saw this one coming.

By all accounts, Tunisia should have been a stable state. It was the kind of state the U.S. wanted to see more of in the region.

Under the now-disposed President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, Tunisia was a secular state that protected women’s rights and instituted compulsory education. Tunisia also had seen regular economic growth. Devoid of the natural resources of many other states in the region, Tunisia began to market itself as a tourist destination for Europeans.

The state was stable, an ally to the West and a deterrent of radical terrorism in the region. What more could the West want? The easy-to-omit detail is that the Tunisian state also was repressive and authoritarian.

Like many other states in the region, Tunisia suffers from rampant unemployment among young people, widespread police and government corruption and abject poverty. The state also has maintained strong control over the news and media.

Riots largely were unheard of in Tunisia before the revolution. The Jasmine Revolution is remarkable because of its ubiquity. People rose up in solidarity across the country. There are no leaders, no discussion forums, no real demands, just people. And there lies the sad reality of Tunisia. The state that has just overthrown its previous despotic ruler is ripe to revisit.

The world should rejoice at the birth of a new democratic state but not one that is prone to fail.

Tunisia lacks leaders. Populism is a great concept, but a mob cannot rule. Someone will fill the emerging power vacuum.

Many times the thugs who come into power substantially are worse than the thugs who just departed. Iraq under Saddam Hussein might have been autocratic and repressive, but there weren’t hundreds of civilians dying every month in sectarian violence.

Many times to prevent seemingly random violence from engulfing the cities, people choose a strongman to restore order. They would rather be free from worry than free to speak. Tunisia must be wary not to trade a bad leader for a terrible one. Democracy can work, but it doesn’t work well when death squads wander the streets and voter fraud is rampant.

This isn’t the state of Tunisia yet, but it is the fate it easily could suffer if the state-building process isn’t done correctly. Extremists and radicals must not be given a foothold in the government. Democracy, if that’s what the people desire, must be given a fair chance.

The people of Tunisia have accomplished an extraordinary feat — a nearly peaceful revolution. They can reclaim the nation for themselves. Now comes the most challenging part. State building, as the U.S. has learned, is a difficult affair. It must be done carefully and with great caution. Stability must be achieved but not at the price of the sanctity of the state.

The U.S. also has a role to play in this. Often times, we find the easiest nations to play ball with are the ones ruled by one person. The U.S. needs to encourage and help ensure the successful emergence of a new Tunisian state. We might yet see more regime changes in the region before the year is out.

Democracy in the Middle East is possible after all. Sometimes it just comes from unlikely sources.

Matt Manning is a State News guest columnist and an international relations and Russian senior. Reach him at mannin84@msu.edu.