On July 19, 2023, the “Arab World for Research and Advanced Studies” Center in Cairo convened a session titled “The Intricacies of the Transitional Phase in Libya and the Paths with which to solve them “. The session was attended by a prominent academic from Libya who was the main speaker at the session, Professor Gebriel Al-Obeidi, as well as a group of experts and researchers specializing in various disciplines. These individuals included Dr. Mohamed Ezz Al-Arab, Dr. Mohamed Abbas Naji, Professor Ahmed Aliba, Professor Amr Abdel-Aty, Professor Hussein Maaloum, Professor Mohamed Al-Fiqi, Dr. Hamdi Bashir, Professor Karam Saeed, Dr. Haitham Omran, Professor Ali Atef, and Professor Nadine Al Mahdi.
The complexities of the scenario.
Al-Obeidi asserts that the overall situation in Libya is experiencing significant challenges and encompasses a multitude of intricate factors, particularly concerning the accurate depiction of the crisis. This study delves into the key determinants of the crisis, which can be summarized as follows:
1- The current situation in Libya presents a complex and intertwined crisis. It is essential to determine whether this crisis is solely confined to Libya or if it has international implications within the country. The underlying reason behind this inquiry is the presence of a diagnostic crisis in Libya. The Libyan crisis encompasses both a political crisis among domestic factions and an international crisis involving various parties and international forces operating within Libya.
The presence of various Libyan factions vying for political representation is indicative of the international crisis surrounding the country. This is exemplified by the exclusion of Libyan parties from the Berlin Conference 1, which brought together international stakeholders, particularly those involved in the oil industry such as Italy and France, while the stance of the US and Britain remains uncertain. Hence, it is incorrect to perceive the crisis in Libya as solely an internal matter revolving around the disagreement between Aguila Saleh and Khaled Al-Mashri.
2- The absence of a state-building endeavor is a significant aspect that should not be overlooked when analyzing the crisis in Libya. Despite the existence of a prior initiative aimed at dismantling the state, evidenced by the extensive air strikes conducted in 2011 with the objective of toppling the existing political system, the fundamental framework of the state was ultimately destroyed. It is crucial to note, however, that the overthrow of the regime does not necessarily entail the complete dismantlement of the state.
There was a lack of a coherent plan to restore stability in Libya after the downfall of the state, despite the chaotic nature of the forces involved. This was particularly evident in the failure to properly secure and collect the vast number of weapons that were present in the country, considering that the Gaddafi regime had a staggering 42 million weapons. The intentional dissemination of these weapons in the Middle East was part of a larger scheme to create chaos, with Libya serving as the focal point. This scheme aimed to reconfigure the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, as originally devised in 2006.
3- External actors impeding stability: Libya has endured a prolonged period of political impasse spanning over a decade. Regrettably, efforts to conclude any of the five transitional phases have been consistently hindered by external parties. These parties include Libyan factions who have transformed into foreign proxies, actively sabotaging any initiatives aimed at reinstating stability.
The December elections of the previous year were disrupted by an external entity rather than internal factions. It is evident that the populace desired these elections, as a significant number of candidates expressed their interest in vying for the 20 parliamentary seats in Benghazi alone. However, despite the meticulous formulation of election regulations, the elections were ultimately derailed. The primary cause for this setback was the objection raised against certain presidential candidates, with supporting evidence found in the speech delivered by the US ambassador, explicitly expressing disapproval towards specific individuals.
4- The inadequacy of the political party framework: Discussing the resolution of the Libyan crisis solely through internal party dynamics is erroneous. Such a proposition is unattainable without the involvement of external parties, given that a significant portion of the incumbent political forces are reluctant to relinquish power. Moreover, there exist opportunistic factions within the Libyan landscape that are resistant to disengaging from the political arena.
Political forces of various types and their diverse compositions lack the requisite political acumen, comparable to the political and partisan experiences observed in neighboring countries of Libya. Moreover, Libya has not witnessed a substantial legacy of political or partisan engagement due to the 42-year prohibition on political parties during the reign of Gaddafi, as well as the suppression of King Idris al-Senussi’s parties.
5- The evolving stance of Russia on the Libyan crisis: Officially, Russia refrained from declaring its support or direct involvement in Libya, instead maintaining a passive role. However, a covert agreement existed between the Russian and Libyan armies. Russia consistently leveraged the Libyan situation to advance its interests in external domains, notably its conflict with Turkey in Syria. Consequently, Russia displayed a willingness to compromise its position in Libya in exchange for favorable understandings in other regions.
Russia previously showed little interest in Libya, but it has now adopted a resolute stance towards the country. This shift can be attributed to Russia’s ongoing rivalry with the United States for influence in Africa. Consequently, Libya has gained significance in Russia’s strategic considerations, and it is plausible to assume that Russia will remain engaged in the region without abandoning its involvement in Libya.
Multiple moves
Al-Obeidi highlights several crucial factors for effectively addressing the unresolved Libyan crisis, considering its intricate nature. These factors include:
1- The compatibility among the nations in the geographical vicinity: the significance of the regional countries’ involvement in the Libyan context necessitates consideration, along with the imperative of attaining mutual agreements among them to resolve the crisis. This also has implications for Egyptian national security, and Egypt is commended for adopting an impartial position towards the various political factions.
However, conversely, the stance taken by Algeria was unfavorable, consistently aligning itself against any efforts towards reconciliation between the factions taking place in Egypt or Morocco. This is particularly astonishing considering that any instability in Libya would inevitably impact Algeria. As for Tunisia, given its unique circumstances, it aimed to avoid entanglement in complications and thus adopted a diplomatic approach aimed at appeasing both sides.
Turkey’s pursuit of Libyan gas, despite the geographical separation between the two nations imposed by Greece, was justified by asserting a non-existent shared geography. The agreement between Ankara and the Tripoli government was primarily aimed at enabling Turkey to access Libyan gas resources, implying a historical connection with Libya.
2- Avoiding the inactive internal parties: The political parties in Libya fail to provide political solutions, yet the United Nations persists in seeking their assistance. However, these parties are merely symbolic and lack a substantial popular following, with only approximately 5% of the population being represented by them. This is particularly problematic as the Libyan people are not politically engaged. Consequently, we are confronted with an ineffective approach to resolving the crisis, relying on parties that the Libyan people do not perceive as their representatives and that lack efficacy. Furthermore, there is a tendency to engage with external entities, such as political Islam groups led by the Brotherhood, which are perceived by the international community as active in the Libyan context. However, these groups do not genuinely represent the Libyan people but rather possess organizational capabilities based on their geographical proximity to Libya.
3- The Significance of Attaining Global Consensus on a Resolution: Ultimately, the resolution of the Libyan crisis hinges upon reaching a consensus with the involved international stakeholders. Given Libya’s imperative for an international agreement, it is crucial to include the nations that played a role in the overthrow of the Libyan government. This agreement should emphasize the necessity of undertaking measures to restore stability and facilitate a political transition in Libya.
The resolution of the current crisis necessitates a genuine international commitment to impose sanctions on the identified brigade and militia leaders who frequently cross borders. It is imperative to address their intentions of replicating the Lebanese situation in Libya. Without resorting to a mere containment strategy and refraining from exacerbating the crisis, a comprehensive resolution will remain unattainable.
4- The US’s renunciation of the security perspective: Turkey’s intervention in Libya, in response to the Russian intervention, remains an unspoken truth. Although The US is at the forefront, the political landscape involves distinct actors. Consequently, the Governor of the Central Bank of Libya has been summoned to the US multiple times, indicating a significant level of interference.
The speaker discussed the US approach to the Libyan crisis, emphasizing the focus on security rather than politics. They highlight the absence of the US ambassadors with a non-security background in Libya, including the current ambassador. The author suggests that if the United States genuinely aimed to address the Libyan crisis, they would appoint an ambassador with a political background from within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
5- Addressing the predicament of foreign forces and local militias: The issue at hand in Libya extends beyond the presence of militias, encompassing the challenge posed by mercenaries who have entered the country. We are specifically referring to foreign forces within Libya, irrespective of their regular or irregular status, including Syrian mercenaries and Wagener elements. These complex matters continue to impede the resolution of the crisis, persisting as obstacles up until the present moment.
An agreement was reached to expel the mercenaries; however, progress on this matter has been hindered, and its resolution may require a decision from the Security Council. Conversely, the issue of militias can be addressed through their integration, dissolution of the brigades, and their incorporation into the existing army and police forces.
6- The Imperative of Achieving Transitional Justice: Activating transitional justice is imperative to address the Libyan crisis. Despite the implementation of the political isolation law following a period of societal conflict, genuine national reconciliation has yet to occur. It is essential for all individuals to actively engage in the reconstruction of the unstable state, as without such efforts, Libya will continue to be plagued by chaos.
Libya was characterized by a lack of political structure, as it operated under a tent-based governance system led by individuals who held varying degrees of control over the nation. Due to the ongoing revolution, Libya continues to experience a state of instability and lacks a cohesive governing body. Although there has been a qualitative shift from a state of chaos to a more stable environment with the assistance of the Libyan army, the country has not yet accomplished the subsequent stages necessary for establishing a fully functional state. This progression remains unattainable due to the prevailing division within Libya.
Necessary agreement
The Libyan academic asserts that relying solely on internal parties to resolve the Libyan crisis is a significant misconception. Despite 12 years having passed during which 7 governments were formed, there was no tangible progress . The existence of conflicting institutions between the Eastern and Western regions necessitates the establishment of a popular consensus regarding the approach to state formation. This can be achieved either through the construction of a unified state encompassing the three territories or through a communal agreement on the possibility of a confederation.