THE DIRTY GAME IN LIBYA

Libyan
PM Fayez al Sarraj
The
latest developments in Libya, that range from the fighting in the
streets of Tripoli to the different militias split between their
support or opposition to PM Fayez al Sarraj and from the bellicose
arguments of Khalifa Haftar and the chaos that envelops most of
the country, show that events have turned for the worse.
Useless UN decisions
The United Nations is supposed to be the sole authority tasked
with managing global affairs. Its executive branch, the UN
Security Council, unanimously approved a Resolution that supported
the December 17, 2015 Skhirat agreement that stated that the only
legitimate authority was the government led by Sarraj.
The Resolution included sanctions for those who opposed the deal,
called for the disarmament or disbandment of the militias and a
number of other measures to favor a national accord. None of these
provisions have ever been applied. Even the Government of National
Accord that the UN supported has become powerless.
Despite the fact that this was not an easy task, that talks and
diplomatic initiatives had involved all major Libyan players, it
is striking to see those same Permanent Members that approved the
Resolution acting in the frontline to undermine its foundations.
The UN risks becoming useless if its decisions are not imposed by
everyone, let alone by its executive branch.
The second consideration points the finger against the unethical
behaviour of those that could have opposed the Resolution by
voting against it, or used their veto power, and that are now
undermining the very credibility of the institution they pretend
to represent. And they do so blatantly in Libya.
Fayez al Sarraj, the internationally acclaimed leader in Tripoli,
is left on his own; everyone talks to General Khalifa Haftar, the
man that wants to replace Sarraj; Haftar should have used his army
to support a national unity government instead of threatening it.
But he never did.
Haftar can behave the way he does because he can count on Egypt’s
unconditional support. The French also stand by his side and have
sent special forces to Cyrenaica. While the UAE provides aerial
support and the Saudis pump money. At the same time, the Russians
favor him because they are looking for new naval bases in the
Mediterranean and the US don’t really mind him. After all, the
General was on the CIA’s payroll when he was trying to oust
Muammar Gaddafi and is now an American citizen.
Politics of hypocrisy
Hence the question: if prominent members of the UN Security
Council like Khalifa Haftar so much, why didn’t they choose him as
Libya’s legitimate leader when they had the chance?
The answer lies in the ambiguous conscience of the international
community: Haftar is inconvenient, he doesn’t envisage a
democratic future for Libya and has no interest for negotiations
since he only talks war.
Choosing to side with Khalifa Haftar meant and still means
accepting the idea that after having toppled a dictator manu
militari, another dictator is set to replace him. It is by no
coincidence that Haftar was part of the 1969 coup that brought
Gaddafi to power and that he was part of that regime for a long
time before falling in disgrace. His concept of national
reconciliation is not about diplomacy and talks, but rather about
threats, scuffles and the physical elimination of opponents.
This is why, at least officially, not a single country has decided
to dirty its hands by showing its support for Khalifa Haftar. It
was better to opposed him officially and then support him under
the counter. The key word to give him an aura of legitimacy was
“reconciliation”. Yes, the General doesn’t respect the UN
Resolution, he doesn’t plan to disarm his militias dubbed “Libyan
National Army”, but the international community has to support the
“reconciliation” process. So please, Mr. Haftar, stop the
bloodshed and we’ll get you back in through the back door. It is
extravagant to think that any of this will help the negotiations.
But, by opening the doors to all actors, regardless of their
legitimacy, to the talks, Haftar has been welcomed as the key
player and main actor on stage.

Khalifa
Haftar
Local developments
The recent turn of events have shown that: Fayez al Sarraj doesn’t
have the backing of its militias, as several of them turned down
the request to intervene against the 7th Brigade from Tahruna. The
PM also lacks political support. He is a dead man walking.
On the other hand, Khalifa Haftar has an army on his side and can
count on the political and military support of the former Gaddafi
loyalists. This is why the Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Enzo Moavero, recently flew to Benghazi to meet with Haftar and
plans to hold a conference in Palermo where all major Libyan
actors will convene.
By supporting Haftar we come to terms with the fact that the Libya
of tomorrow will be much the same as the Libya of the past. It
also means accepting the language of war as the only way out of a
conflict. No more negotiations, conferences, talks, peace deals.
They are all useless. It also implies that the UN has failed, or
was betrayed, because those who run it decided to ignore the
decisions they had taken. It means that the war in 2011 was
pointless, as it’s only result has been death and destruction for
ordinary Libyans.
If this is how it was going to end, we could have stuck with
Gaddafi and his heir, Saif al Islam, the man that wanted to bring
democratic reforms in Libya.

Geddafi
and his son Saif al Islam
The
international approach
No one cares whether Libya turns into a democracy. Oil and gas.
This is what everyone is after. Gazprom, Gazpromneft and Tatneft
from Russia, Total from France, Eni from Italy and Marathon Oil
from the US are all after Libya’s rich oil and gas reserves that
are worth billions. Other businesses of interest are the railway
linking Benghazi to Sirte and arms trafficking or sales.
Stability. This is what businesses want, regardless of how it is
obtained or enforced. Stability also means making sure Islamic
extremism doesn’t find a safe haven along the coasts of the
Mediterranean. And, as far as Italy is concerned, also implies
putting a halt to the human trafficking towards its shores.
Democracy, human rights, national reconciliation are a bunch of
useless words for those advancing their own agenda in Libya. And
if Khalifa Haftar’s ambitions end up coinciding with the interests
of foreign actors, then the General is set to become the Gaddafi
of the future.
Seif and the future of the country
The historical paradox is that the only person that could contrast
the ambitions of Khalifa Haftar is Gaddafi’s son, Saif al Islam.
Following his release from the jails in Zintan, Saif has regained
the support of the old guard. Gaddafi’s loyalists have the
economic resources and still exert a great influence over their
respective tribes (those that granted Muammar Gaddafi over 40
years of reign). If properly channeled, this could benefit the
military and social support Saif needs.
Saif al Islam was chosen by his father to succeed him and he would
have done so by introducing a series of reforms to move Libya
closer to a democracy. By doing so he had found the resistance and
opposition of the Revolutionary Council that saw its power
threatened. Saif spoke about democracy, human rights,
reconciliation and a new Constitution. And when the war broke out
– him being the first son – he had to become one of his father’s
staunchest supporters and became a commander on the field despite
his lack of military experience.
After he was captured by the rebels, he was put on trial at the
International Criminal Court where he was accused of crimes
against humanity. Now that Saif is free, he tours his country and
is reviving the links with the tribes that once supported his
defunct father. Saif al Islam is possibly the most popular among
the regime’s loyalists, while Haftar was long seen as just another
traitor.
It is a paradox that the man that could introduce democracy to
Libya is the son of the ousted dictator. But Saif al Islam is a
better guess than Khalifa Haftar can ever be. The conflict has
caused more than 50 thousand victims, the civil war has
dismembered a State, while terrorist groups and human traffickers
have taken over. Anyone with a militia or a weapon became
ambitious and socially dangerous. The final nemesis is that the
future of Libya is in the hands of two men: an ambitious traitor
that also happens to be a General and the son of a dictator that
was put to death by his own people.