by Wayne White
The withdrawal of American and most other foreign missions from Libya has left its people more alone than ever before. Legitimate political authority and much of the economy has been seriously damaged. Despite temporary successes, none of the militias or Libyan army units flailing away at each other have [...]]]>
by Wayne White
The withdrawal of American and most other foreign missions from Libya has left its people more alone than ever before. Legitimate political authority and much of the economy has been seriously damaged. Despite temporary successes, none of the militias or Libyan army units flailing away at each other have scored enough gains to alter the overall situation. The international community should attempt to coax the leading players in this mess to assemble at a foreign venue where enough differences might be hashed out to dampen the raging violence and chaos.
The July 26 American withdrawal from Tripoli was part of a bunch of countries pulling out their embassy staffs, foreign workers, and other nationals. France followed suit on July 30 extracting its ambassador, several dozen French expatriates, and some British nationals. Spain abandoned its embassy on the 31st, and China evacuated hundreds of its workers to Egypt. The Greek Navy pulled out its diplomats and over 100 other foreigners today.
The escalation in clashes involving militia, renegade, and government forces is not the only driver. Doing any sort of work or business in Libya has become too risky. Kidnappings, murders, or combat-related deaths of foreigners spiked in 2014. On July 26, 23 Egyptian workers died when a militia rocket destroyed their Tripoli quarters. Unknown gunmen attacked and attempted to hijack a British convoy heading for the Tunisian border with some embassy staff on the 27th. Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario rushed to Libya on July 31 to organize the departure of 13,000 Philippine workers after one worker was beheaded and a nurse gang-raped.
Over 100 Libyans have been killed and 400 wounded in Tripoli in recent weeks, most in the vicinity of the embattled airport where Libyan airliners are smoking hulks, the main terminal is shattered, and fuel tanks continued to burn through the 31st because of fighting involving artillery and rockets. Fighters have closed off approaches to southern Tripoli with earthen barricades. The main adversaries are the Islamist “Central Shield” militia from Libya’s 3rd largest city, Misrata (supporting Islamists in parliament), and the rugged nationalist militias from the mountainous Zintan area south of Tripoli (backing parliamentary secularists and renegade anti-extremist General Hiftar).
Had Tripoli not descended into such intense violence recently, the focus would have stayed on Benghazi where General Khalifa Hiftar (or Haftar) has continued his “Operation Dignity” against extremist Muslim militias, especially Ansar al-Sharia in Libya (ASL). Hiftar has the support of more moderate militias, the Libyan Army’s Special Forces, the Libyan Air Force, and many police. Although suspect in some quarters because of his past CIA and distant Qadhafi regime connections, Hiftar was hailed by many Libyans as a potential savior from Islamic militancy.
More recently, however, Operation Dignity has run into trouble. Just in the past few days, ASL, with allied militants from the Benghazi Shura Council, downed a Libyan Air Force fighter jet, overran a Special Forces base, and today blew up Benghazi’s police headquarters seizing stocks of weapons at several facilities as they pushed back Hiftar’s forces.
With less protection than diplomats or other foreigners from fighting in their midst, and other violent crimes against Libyans now more common, Tunisia announced that up to 6,000 Libyans have been crossing the border per day this week to escape Libya’s dangerous lawlessness. Mustafa Abushagur, briefly Libya’s first post-Qadhafi prime minister and newly elected member of parliament, was kidnapped on July 29.
Typically, Libyans targeted for crimes are more affluent, skilled, politically active, or relatively Western-oriented. These people comprise most of Libya’s professionals and highly trained workers. As they flee, the country’s ability to function in terms of medical services, education, technical services, etc. erodes.
Governance Vacuum
Acting Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni, who has recently been in eastern Libya, has been trying (unsuccessfully) to separate various warring parties. Meanwhile, in order to elect a new prime minister, Libya’s General National Congress (GNC), discredited and with its mandate expired, is set to pass the torch to the recently elected House of Representatives (HOR) on August 4. This was supposed to be a notable step toward a permanent legislature.
Islamists narrowly held the upper hand in the GNC, but not in the new HOR. With Tripoli in turmoil, the formal handover had shifted to Benghazi. But with fighting also raging there, it may have to be moved to the smaller city of Tobruk between Benghazi and the Egyptian border. Little has been heard of a commission appointed a couple of months ago to draft a final constitution.
Clearly, efforts to establish a measure of enduring central authority have all but foundered. Earlier this year, the GNC gamely set about to move the ball forward with elections (which came off with some difficulty) and a schedule for transition, despite considerable strife at that time. Now goals challenging enough a few months ago could be put on hold or become irrelevant in the face of more conflict, even societal implosion. In addition to previous indicators of collapse like crippled oil exports and iffy governance with alternative nodes of power often in confrontation, even shipping currency to the country’s banks is now crippled, strangling commerce, trade, and over normality.
Can New Diplomatic Ground Be Broken?
On the scene, foreign missions could achieve very little while hunkered down with violence flaring all round them. However, their departure, although symbolic of Libya’s failures, need not halt international efforts to assist.
In fact, outside engagement might make a difference. That would mean summoning under the aegis of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as many major Libyan players as possible. Under the circumstances, this should be daringly comprehensive, involving not only recognized officials, but also militia leaders, eastern federalist leader Ibrahim al-Jathran, and General Hiftar.
A few of the non-official actors in particular may never have come face to face before. Several extremist militias probably would not show up, especially ASL. However, that could make such an exercise more likely to succeed. With Islamist extremists already a common enemy among most of the rest (including quite a few relatively more moderate Islamists), putting aside or resolving differences in order to face such a dangerous foe more successfully could emerge as such a conference’s most compelling incentive for progress.
]]>by Wayne White
A robust new military challenge to what passes for the Libyan central government has further destabilized the country and placed Western and other diplomatic missions there in greater danger. Although definitions for “failed states” vary, there should be no doubt now that Libya has crossed that line — one [...]]]>
by Wayne White
A robust new military challenge to what passes for the Libyan central government has further destabilized the country and placed Western and other diplomatic missions there in greater danger. Although definitions for “failed states” vary, there should be no doubt now that Libya has crossed that line — one it has been flirting with for quite a while. Under the circumstances, it is now time for the US, and other governments with diplomatic and civilian missions in Libya, to give serious, prompt consideration to evacuating their personnel.
Libya’s lacking security fundaments
The Libyan situation has been tenuous, violent, and jolting from crisis to crisis particularly since last year. Most militias of various local, tribal, and ideological affiliations that fought against Muammar Qadhafi’s regime remain under arms, in part because of Libya’s failure to establish a sizeable, fully trained national army or police force. They clash with each other and assert local autonomous rights, with some backing factions in the Libyan parliament, the General National Congress (GNC). Without other means of maintaining security, the government keeps a number of militias on its payroll for just that reason.
The conflicting militias have caused discord on the streets of Tripoli and the large eastern city of Benghazi; they control neighborhoods and other key pieces of real estate — even sometimes menacing the government for which they supposedly work.
The two dominant militias affecting government affairs in Tripoli have been the Islamist “Central Shield,” based in Libya’s third largest city, Misrata, and a group of secular-oriented militias based in the mountain region centered upon Zintan. They are aligned, respectively, with the Islamist and secular wings of the GNC.
This division within the GNC has significantly paralyzed that fairly elected body charged, among other things, with overseeing the drafting of a constitution as a prelude to the election of a permanent legislature.
The GNC’s original writ ran out in early February, so it extended its own mandate to finish the appointment of a constitutional drafting committee and to maintain continuity. Ever since, it has been branded by many Libyans — as well as self-appointed federalist rivals in eastern Libya — as illegitimate, with calls for it to step down.
The experiences of Libyan prime ministers reflect the dangerous instability plaguing the country. The GNC dismissed longstanding Prime Minister Ali Zeidan in March amidst a tiff over the weak Libyan navy’s failure to stop a tanker with bootleg crude from leaving a port controlled by upstart eastern Federalist and militia commander, Ibrahim Jathran. Yet Zeidan soldiered on despite being kidnapped in late 2013 by an Islamist militia. Then the GNC named Abdullah al-Thinni interim prime minister for two weeks. After gunmen attacked his family compound, al-Thinni resigned, but continues to serve pending the naming of a replacement.
In addition to its seriously flawed, erratic security and central authority, Libya’s governance at all levels is dysfunctional. To a great extent, Qadhafi is to blame. Inheriting a rather decentralized state from the late King Idris, Qadhafi played tribes and regions against each other to maintain power for 42 years. Qadhafi’s bizarre, ramshackle “Jamahiriya” concept of governance degraded rather than reinforced a sense of Libyan civil society, and important governmental and technical skills were woefully neglected. Libya is hugely dependent on foreign companies and contractors for a host of services.
The last key pillar that crumbled from underneath Libya’s waning post-Qadhafi societal stability was the implosion of the country’s oil exports from roughly 1.3 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2012 to only around 200,000 bpd since early this year. Since 2013, most export terminals and inland oilfields have been shut down by a mix of eastern federalist challengers, angry workers, disgruntled guards, or local militias.
Enter General Haftar
Libya’s latest travails stem from a robust challenge to the central government from the self-proclaimed Libyan National Army (LNA) led by former General Khalifa Haftar. Haftar denounced the central government back in February, but his appearance went almost unnoticed outside Libya.
On May 16, however, forces organized by Haftar struck extremist militias in Benghazi (especially Ansar al-Sharia) with troops, artillery and even helicopters “to cleanse the city of terrorists.” Intense, bloody fighting continued through much of the weekend resulting in over 200 casualties. On the 18th, Haftar loyalists, reinforced with pro-secular militia elements from Zintan, attacked the GNC in Tripoli, ransacking parliament, and seizing a member and two staffers for allegedly aiding extremists. Pro-Haftar Colonel Muktar Fernana declared the “freezing of the GNC.”
Since May 18, in the east, Haftar has secured the support of two Libyan Air Force (LAF) bases, and federalist renegade Jathran. Libya’s Special Forces commander even instructed his men in Benghazi to join Haftar’s effort. Then, the LAF’s most senior officer, Col. Gomaa al-Abbani, declared his support for Haftar on the 20th, quickly followed on the 21st by the Interior Ministry, Libyan UN Ambassador Ibrahim al-Dabashi (who said Haftar’s “Operation Dignity of Libya” was “not a coup…but a nationalist move”), as well as the biggest GNC political bloc, the secular National Forces Alliance (NFA). NFA leader Mahmoud Jibril said Libya had been “drowning in a swamp of terrorism.”
In addition, former Prime Minister Zeidan declared his support for Haftar from European exile, and sitting Prime Minister al-Thinni has called upon the GNC to stop working. Late on the 21st, Haftar appeared on TV, calling upon the country’s judiciary to form a “civilian presidential high council” to name a cabinet and oversee a transition toward the election of a new parliament.
Haftar’s challenge might seem refreshing to some, but the situation on the ground has deteriorated markedly. Following al-Abbani’s statement of support, various elements launched rockets against and burned offices on LAF bases in Tripoli. Libya’s Navy commander was wounded in an assassination attempt in Tripoli yesterday. On the 20th, a Chinese engineer was murdered by gunmen in Benghazi.
In Tripoli, more fighting took place May 21, with rockets falling on a residential area last night. GNC members tried to convene at another locale to elect a prime minister, but gave up without a quorum and after coming under rocket fire. That prompted GNC Speaker Nuri Abu Sahmain’s call on the 21st for Misrata’s Islamist “Central Shield” militia to take the field against Haftar to protect the remainder of the GNC and re-secure parliament’s original premises. In response to Sahmain’s call, Misrata’s notoriously tough militiamen were observed taking up positions in the capital this morning.
Foreign diplomats facing more danger
The foreign diplomatic community could hardly remain unaffected. Already, gunmen had attacked the Russian Embassy in Tripoli in October 2013, after which Zeidan reiterated his “unlimited commitment to the…security” of all diplomatic missions. Yet, as we have seen, Zeidan could not even protect himself.
The Jordanian ambassador was kidnapped by Islamic militants in March to free an extremist held in Jordan, with the ambassador released in April in exchange for the prisoner. The Jordanian Embassy was subsequently evacuated. Two kidnapped Egyptian diplomats were only freed in January when Egypt agreed to swap a hard-line Islamist militia leader detained in Cairo. Both cases set dangerous precedents.
After recent threats, Algeria sent its special forces to extract its embassy staff from Tripoli on May 16, and then evacuated all Algerian state oil personnel on the 19th. The Saudi Embassy staff also left that day. Likewise, personnel of several major oil companies and private businesses have fled overseas.
In this veritable maelstrom of violence amidst uncertainty regarding which side controls what in Tripoli, all foreign diplomatic missions and other foreigners are at considerable risk. With Islamic extremists under vigorous attack, there is also a greater danger that such elements will attempt to retaliate against foreign governments imagined to encourage or welcome what Haftar & Co. have been doing.
This makes the US a prime target. A number of Islamic militant elements (like Ansar al-Sharia, formally declared a terrorist group by Washington), militias, or gunmen could attack the US embassy in Tripoli. If so, there is no effective Libyan security to bar the way.
Last week, the Obama administration began positioning US military assets in Sicily to carry out a potential emergency extraction of embassy personnel, including 200 troops from the Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force and MV-22 Osprey helicopters. On the 20th, the Pentagon said 60 more Marines were sent plus more Ospreys (now totaling 8). To avoid flying into an already “hot” situation in which a facility is already under attack or surrounded (like the one that wounded 4 US Navy SEALS aboard Ospreys in an aborted attempt to rescue US civilians in South Sudan last December), it would be prudent to execute that contingency plan as soon as possible.
During my State Department career, I participated several times in final deliberations over such decisions. There were always those who opposed withdrawing (regardless of the risk of staying), arguing that leaving the countries in question would reduce the US’ ability to influence events on the ground. Of course, in this case, for quite some time now the US and other Western diplomatic missions have had precious little impact on what has been unfolding in Libya.
Photo: The French embassy in Tripoli, Libya was bombed on April 23, 2013. It was the first attack on the French embassy in the capital.
]]>by Wayne White
In just the past five days, stability in Libya has suffered further setbacks. Yet chronic civil disorder and unrest may seem secondary as many outside observers focus too narrowly, for example, on the status of Libyan oil exports. Then there are human rights and judicial organizations [...]]]>
by Wayne White
In just the past five days, stability in Libya has suffered further setbacks. Yet chronic civil disorder and unrest may seem secondary as many outside observers focus too narrowly, for example, on the status of Libyan oil exports. Then there are human rights and judicial organizations typically focusing on high profile cases while justice is meted out to millions of Libyans through the barrel of a gun amidst degrading central authority. This complex crisis demands more consistently broad-based coverage.
Libya’s parliament, the General National Congress (GNC), ordered interim Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni on April 8 to form another government, ignoring his request for greater powers sorely needed to govern more effectively. Instead, on April 13 al-Thinni resigned “his temporary position,” citing an attack against his family residence that had been a “near miss.”
Al-Thinni was appointed interim prime minister only last month after the GNC dismissed veteran Prime Minister Ali Zeidan. The cause for Zeidan’s removal was, essentially, a GNC temper tantrum over his inability to stop a tanker with unauthorized crude from escaping an eastern oil port controlled by the defiant federalist eastern warlord Ibrahim Jathran. The tanker later would be snared by the US Navy and delivered to a port under central government control. Zeidan, however, a resilient figure who had stayed on despite being kidnapped by a militia last year, was gone. Now, with al-Thinni pulling out, Libya’s shaky central government is more rudderless than ever.
In the latest Libyan violence, gunmen kidnapped Jordanian Ambassador Fawaz al-Itan in Tripoli on April 14, shooting his driver. Kidnappers are demanding that Jordan release Libyan extremist Mohammed Dersi, sentenced to life imprisonment in 2007 for plotting to bomb Amman International Airport. This is just the most recent example of an ongoing wave of kidnappings (and killings).
So far this year, 5 Egyptian diplomats, a Tunisian diplomat, and a South Korean trade official have been seized. Ongoing assassinations of officials, individual Libyans, and foreigners also continue. Last December an American teacher was murdered in Benghazi; in January, a British man and New Zealand woman were shot execution style in western Libya; in February, 7 Egyptian Christians were shot in the east. Meanwhile, a number of Libyan security officials, soldiers, and other government personnel continue to be killed in ambushes.
Nonetheless, organizations like the International Criminal Court and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have zeroed in on the trial of two sons of Muammar Qadhafi, notorious Qadhafi regime intelligence chief Abdullah al-Sanussi, and a few dozen other Qadhafi cronies. These organizations are concerned about the fairness of Libyan justice toward such unpopular figures. Libyan Justice Minister Saleh al-Meghani said the trial would not be a “Mickey Mouse” show trial, and declared: “I will not allow any crazy stuff; I will make sure it meets international standards…; that is why we are having open trials.”
With quite a few defendants still without legal counsel, HRW’s Richard Dicker declared, “This…has been riddled with procedural flaws…,” making it “grossly unfair to the defendants.” The trial adjourned to finish preparations and address shortcomings only hours after it opened on April 14. There are legitimate concerns at this stage, but the government knows the vast majority of Libyans expect a measure of closure regarding the leading figures of such a loathsome regime.
Meanwhile there is a complete absence of functioning courts across much of Libya, with various militias having far more influence than Tripoli upon how local affairs are run. But this yawning legal vacuum, with extra-judicial kidnappings and shootings of many innocents frightfully common, apparently only warrants mention in occasional oversight reports.
The most concentrated of general media coverage involves careful reporting on Libyan hydrocarbon exports — some featuring, say, 2 or 3 reports on Libyan oil and gas reaching markets for every piece on the internal situation writ large. On April 15 the first tanker since last year was lifting crude from one of the two smaller of Libya’s four eastern oil terminals under Jathran’s control. The other small terminal Jathran promised to reopen back on April 6 has not yet been returned to National Oil Corporation (NOC) control. The status of the two largest ones depend on progress in further talks between the central government, the NOC, and Jathran over his various demands.
Indeed, the overall Libyan oil situation remains iffy. With all Western Libyan oil outlets also closed (save for the export and refinery complex at Zawiya including Libya’s 2nd largest refinery), plus the two largest in the east, matters still look grim. Late last week, protestors closed the Zawiya facility too, preventing two tankers from loading. The Zawiya complex reopened on April 13 after NOC officials reportedly resolved most of the issues involved. With some closed facilities in disrepair, and most oil fields still outside NOC control, some terminals can export only what previously had accumulated in their storage tanks.
As the Ukraine crisis has escalated, Europe’s need for energy exports from Libya has grown and so, of course, has legitimate interest. The majority of Libyan gas and oil exports have been down steeply for quite some time. Italy, with its government-affiliated National Hydrocarbons Entity (ENI) geared to Libyan crude and immensely dependent on Russian, Algerian and Libyan natural gas, is especially hopeful Libya will come back online in all respects.
Libyan gas and oil exports, however, will remain unreliable, and proper justice for most Libyans, whether prominent or not, will be illusive until fundamental issues of national unity, governance, and security can be addressed effectively. Perhaps the rising criticality of Libyan energy exports amidst the Ukraine crisis can motivate the US, NATO and EU governments to work with leading Libyan powerbrokers to initiate far more serious engagement aimed at breaking new ground toward grappling meaningfully with the most debilitating sources of internal discord.
]]>by Wayne White
Oil markets received seemingly good news earlier this week: several closed Libyan export terminals would reopen. Yet not only is Libya still beset by a host of crippling problems, even opening the oil taps a bit more remains somewhat iffy. In fact, developments only within the past 2 weeks [...]]]>
by Wayne White
Oil markets received seemingly good news earlier this week: several closed Libyan export terminals would reopen. Yet not only is Libya still beset by a host of crippling problems, even opening the oil taps a bit more remains somewhat iffy. In fact, developments only within the past 2 weeks showcase critical failings that continue to block most aspects of restoring some sense of stability and normalcy. This is a situation crying out for high-level international attention.
Back on April 6, central authorities negotiated with the rival federalist regional government in the east — led by former anti-Qadhafi rebel leader Ibrahim Jathran — the reopening of the smaller two of four oil export terminals under Jathran’s control (and perhaps the other two in about a month). In exchange, Tripoli agreed to drop charges against some of Jathran’s people, pay back salaries to public sector oil employees in the east siding with Jathran, and form a committee to investigate central government corruption. Separately, the government inserted in its new budget a 67% pay increase for oil workers, hoping to secure greater loyalty.
In reality the situation on the ground is more dicey. The cash-strapped Jathran’s cooperation increased only after his effort to export bootleg crude collapsed because of the interception of the first renegade tanker by the US Navy. Since April 6 the government-affiliated Libyan National Oil Corporation (NOC) has also refused to reopen the two eastern Libyan terminals until Jathran’s militiamen turn over the terminals completely to Libya’s official “Petroleum Facilities Guard” (PFG) force.
This has transpired while in western Libya only offshore export terminals remain open because of an ongoing feud between the government and militias controlling both the coastal terminals and the inland oil fields. A recent government-militia agreement to reopen all western Libyan terminals collapsed, with the militias involved falling out with each other over the accord. This makes renewed negotiations by Tripoli with multiple conflicting militia factions that much more difficult.
Meanwhile what passes for the Libyan central government has been struggling to make ends meet since the beginning of the year with a paltry 100,000-150,000 barrels per day (bpd) of oil out of a potential 1.3 million bpd. Worse still, with most border crossings outside official control, customs revenue is also fraction of what it once was.
Nonetheless, authorities are still saddled with Qadhafi-era payments of immense subsidies, such as one that keeps bread at 2 cents a loaf. Then there is the massive, but incredibly dysfunctional, civil service that includes a significant percentage of Libya’s adult population who were placed on the payroll by Muammar Qadhafi to minimize opposition.
This financial crunch has compelled the government to drop most infrastructure projects aimed at run-down roads, schools, hospitals and the like. Still, to balance this year’s budget, the Central Bank had to devalue the Libyan dinar up to 2.00 per US dollar from the previous rate of 1.25. And in this unsettled environment (both politically and financially), investors have fled or remain on the sidelines; Tripoli recently cancelled two conferences, one on oil and gas investment and the other on banking.
Libya’s difficulties are there for all to see. The staff at all 146 branches of one of Libya’s largest banks, the state-owned Jumhuriya, went on strike for two days beginning April 2 after another one of its employees was gunned down while on the job. On the 6th, all public and private sector workers in Benghazi also went on strike over worsening violence there, demanding the Libyan parliament, the General National Congress (GNC), to step down. The strike closed Benghazi International Airport, and on April 7 Lufthansa and Austrian Airlines cancelled flights to Tripoli International because of the explosion of a large bomb on the main runway last month; British Airways and Italy’s Alitalia did so immediately after the bombing.
Amidst all this trouble is an ongoing government crisis in Tripoli. It was rumored that the cabinet of caretaker Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni had resigned because the GNC refused its appeals for more power and a longer mandate (it has to be renewed every two weeks) to address Libya’s pressing problems. Word of the request was true, but not the resignation. The GNC simply responded by ordering al-Thinni on April 8 to form a new caretaker government within a week or resign.
Illustrating the GNC’s lack of credibility and militia power was a video released to all Libyan TV stations earlier this month showing the clearly fearful Islamist head of parliament, Nuri Ali Sahmein, begging a militia commander, Haitham al-Tajouri, to understand why he was caught in his residence with two women. Al-Tajouri is the leader of the “Reinforcement Front” militia (supposedly in government service) that kidnapped briefly then Prime Minister Ali Zeidan last October. In response to the resulting public outcry, Libya’s prosecutor general has summoned both to determine whether al-Tajouri engaged in blackmail or Sahmein broke any Libyan moral laws.
What is supposed to be the nascent Libyan national army numbers only 8,000 — far fewer than the militias potentially arrayed against it. The preparation of even that small force with US, UK, Italian and Turkish assistance has also been delayed by ongoing unrest. Ousted Prime Minster Ali Zeidan commented from his refuge in Germany: “Really there is no army. I thought there was one, but then I realized there really isn’t any.” So the government conducts ongoing negotiations with a welter of semi-official, government-paid, but unruly militias over all manner of issues (with the militias’ dominant loyalty to their own localities, tribes, charismatic commanders, or even certain factions within the GNC).
Desperation among Libyan government leaders was reflected in Foreign Minister Mohammed Abdelaziz’s stunning statement last month calling for the establishment of a “constitutional monarchy;” he even contacted the son of Libya’s late King Idris I. Idris, more than a constitutional monarch, was overthrown by Muammar Qadhafi in 1969. While today his rule could appear idyllic to many Libyans in retrospect, Idris anchored his rule on a mainly eastern tribal and religious base — hardly a model for Libyan national unity.
In this atmosphere, the drafting of a new constitution by the Libyan Constitutional Assembly (elected by a paltry turnout in February) does not offer much hope for real change. Indeed, a referendum in a few months to approve whatever the drafters put forward could be a very messy and contentious affair. As Libya staggers from one crisis to another, it’s becoming ever clearer that it needs outside help.
Although it is not part of the planned political process, the US, UN, EU, and Arab League should urgently offer to host a meeting of all parties (including not only government leaders, but also the most powerful militia commanders, tribal leaders, and Jathran) in a neutral venue outside Libya. The authorities in Tripoli might reject such a conference as undermining their sovereignty (although their current sway is minimal). There is little to lose, however, by offering to bring the players together under one tent in an effort to focus on how so many of them lose amidst chaos and to showcase the benefits of greater national cooperation.
]]>by Wayne White
The Libyan Parliament’s abrupt dismissal last week of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan takes Libya another step closer to even greater confusion and instability. With an oil-starved central government also drifting closer to bankruptcy, Libya’s options going forward have become more daunting. If the international community continues to focus elsewhere [...]]]>
by Wayne White
The Libyan Parliament’s abrupt dismissal last week of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan takes Libya another step closer to even greater confusion and instability. With an oil-starved central government also drifting closer to bankruptcy, Libya’s options going forward have become more daunting. If the international community continues to focus elsewhere in the region while Libya merits high-level diplomatic attention, the prospects for finding a way to halt Libya’s decline will worsen.
The latest disruptive snit was triggered by the escape last week of a North Korean-linked tanker from the federalist rebel-controlled eastern Libyan oil terminal of Es-Sider with a cargo of unauthorized crude. Zeidan ordered the government’s puny navy to intercept it and bring it to a government-controlled port. The tanker was hit by Libyan naval gunfire, but eventually escaped amidst poor weather.
Eastern rebels claimed the cargo had reached its destination on March 14, but a Libyan government official said it was still in the Mediterranean on the 15th. Finally, late yesterday, US Special Forces, acting on the request of the Libyan and Cypriot governments, seized the tanker (the “Morning Glory”) from the few armed rebels guarding it just south of Cyprus.
Earlier, however, an angry parliament (despite the government’s weak navy), chose to blame Zeidan, and voted him out of office on March 11 — ordering him to remain in Libya pending charges. On the 12th, Zeidan fled to Europe. Zeidan was replaced by temporary Prime Minster and Defense Minister Abdullah al-Thinni, but only for two weeks while parliament, the General National Council (GNC), casts about for a more permanent figure. Al-Thinni had only been in his defense post since August 2013.
The tanker’s escape triggered such a flap because Tripoli has been trying to isolate and squeeze the shadow eastern government of former anti-Qadhafi rebel leader Ibrahim Jathran. Jathran has been facing rising discontent because the eastern government has been without enough cash to pay government officials, police, and even disaffected Libyan National Oil Corporations (NOC) workers stationed in the east and assisting in the terminal closures. If the illegally lifted crude had generated payments to new accounts established by Jathran & Co. instead of those of NOC in Tripoli, the funds would have reinforced Jathran’s position.
Meanwhile, on GNC orders, a small contingent of Libyan army troops and a larger force of battle-hardened, notoriously formidable pro-government militiamen from Misrata, Libya’s 3rd largest city, moved east to “liberate” rebellious oil ports and block further illicit shipments. This force compelled Jathran’s troops to fall back from the city of Sirte on the way to Jathran’s area of control on March 11th.
Nonetheless, on the 12th, GNC President Nouri Abu Sahmain, who still wields most of the authority over the military in Libya despite al-Thinni’s appointment, ordered a halt to the advance, giving the eastern rebels “two weeks at most” to restore normal operations at the oil ports before resuming the government’s military advance. The reasons for this reverse were unclear, but the GNC could be skeptical of a successful offensive 200 miles from Sirte to the nearest rebel terminal.
The halt, however, also probably relates to a rivalry between the two powerful militias typically called upon as the government’s military “firemen” (and the GNC factions with which they identify). In addition to the Misrata force, there is the powerful militia from the town of Zintan, south of Tripoli. The Zintani militia has been associated with the parliament’s secular parties. So far, the two militias have not squared off against each other. But that could change if Misrata’s fighters make major gains in the east that boost the power of the GNC’s Islamist wing that the Misrata militia generally supports.
Added to the central government’s own Islamic-secular rivalries that all too often have paralyzed parliament is the threat of going broke. With oil exports down to around 300,000 barrels per day (out of a normal 1.3 million), the government is running low on cash, losing $8 billion in oil revenues last year alone. Al-Thinni declared last week that the government needs an “emergency budget” to deal with its security challenges. Nonetheless, a GNC already unpopular for extending its own mandate last month and gridlocked over lesser matters might not respond despite the gravity of the situation.
Of concern to the international community is that as long as so much of the country remains beyond central authority, a large amount of arms from Qadhafi’s former arsenals will continue flowing across Libya’s borders. A panel of UN experts recently submitted a 97-page report to the Security Council stating that Libya has “become a primary source of illicit weapons.” The panel is investigating alleged shipments to 14 countries. A number of its findings relate to attempts to transfer particularly dangerous shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles. One such shipment, stopped by Lebanon, was bound for Syrian rebels.
Moreover, especially lawless portions of Libya like the desert southwest and some areas in the east adjacent to Egypt serve as safe havens for Islamic extremist elements staging from Libyan territory into neighboring states or assisting foreign jihadists. This has been true of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (IQIM) elements lunging into Algeria and Mali, other groups supplying munitions to militant elements in Egypt following the suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood, and shipments into Tunisia aiding terrorist cells there.
In American minds especially, Libya is firmly associated with Muslim extremism, the result of the Benghazi attack of Sept. 2012. Despite the existence of such groups (like eastern Libya’s dangerous Ansar al-Islam), however, in the defining GNC July 2012 elections, the secular National Forces Alliance, a collection of likeminded smaller parties, and dozens of independents dominated, with Islamists coming in second. In fact, the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya secured only 10% of the vote.
So, unlike the Brotherhood’s decisive electoral victory in Egypt, a majority of Libyans, at least the first time around, voted against an Islamist-dominated future (and, naturally, were horrified by the Benghazi attack and its adverse implications for ties with the US and the West).
With the GNC’s standing shaky because of its self-extended mandate and legislative paralysis, constitutional drafting to be completed in June, and votes on approving the constitution and a permanent parliament to occur this year, the next six months seems to be a make or break period for what is to become of Libya. There already has been a disturbing indicator. Turnout last month for the election of the constitutional drafting body was dismal, reflecting widespread cynicism toward the entire political process.
A conclave of mostly Western and Arab Gulf foreign ministers to discuss Libya did take place in Rome on March 6. Instability and arms smuggling topped the agenda. US Secretary of State John Kerry confirmed that “Libya is at a pivotal moment,” adding that “Libyans did not risk their lives in the 2011 revolution just to slip backward into thuggery and violence.” Yet, little in terms of concrete measures aimed at stepping up the pace — and urgency — of foreign diplomatic engagement came out of the meeting.
Clearly, the international community is far more focused, in the Middle East at least, on halting the fighting in Syria, pursuing the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and trying to push the Iran-nuclear negotiations to the finish line. Sadly, however, the prospects for real progress on the first two of those issues are exceedingly poor. In fact, with Western-Russian relations taking such a beating over the Ukraine crisis, the Russian-US led effort aimed at brokering a Syrian ceasefire — already pretty iffy — might collapse.
In any case, it’s time for Western and Arab governments that came together to support Muammar Qadhafi’s overthrow so robustly to make a strenuous effort to help salvage the mess that has developed since. Under the circumstances, without, say, bringing the various key players in Libya together at a neutral venue like Geneva, there is little reason to believe Libya’s domestic agenda in the coming months will play out as planned.
The interception of the “Morning Glory” could provide an important opportunity for such an initiative. Jathran’s so-called Prime Minister Ab-Rabbo al-Barassi said on the 15th that Jathran was ready to negotiate an end to the oil terminal blockade if the government would end its military threat. Now, with the prospect of his own illicit oil exports gone, an already financially desperate Jathran might be ready for serious talks.
]]>by Wayne White
Instability and danger drove the international community to leave Libya to its own devices back in 2012, but Libya’s internal woes have only worsened.
NATO and its regional allies hoped spillover from Libyan strife could be kept to a minimum. Yet containment, not much of a coherent strategy in [...]]]>
by Wayne White
Instability and danger drove the international community to leave Libya to its own devices back in 2012, but Libya’s internal woes have only worsened.
NATO and its regional allies hoped spillover from Libyan strife could be kept to a minimum. Yet containment, not much of a coherent strategy in any case, has produced only limited success. Since there is no end in sight to Libya’s travails, the coalition that did so much heavy lifting to oust Muammar Qadhafi should explore whether external mediation can help his successors.
While seemingly endless rehashing of the September 2012 Benghazi attack continues to consume American political and media attention, Libya itself staggers from crisis to crisis, all woefully unreported. For weeks, Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan and self-proclaimed eastern regional government chief Ibrahim al-Jathran have been involved in a face-off. Three key export terminals (west of the large eastern city of Benghazi) seized by Jathran last August have remained closed, cutting oil exports by more than a third. This has been compounded by closures elsewhere, reducing exports by about half, starving the shaky central government of much needed revenue.
Talks between the two sides continue, but so far without closure. Jathran, a former anti-Qadhafi rebel hero, has demanded a return to a regional oil revenue sharing ratio more favorable to the east that was in place during the pre-Qadhafi era, greater federalism to boost regional power, an inquiry into oil corruption, and an independent committee to oversee exports.
Meanwhile, parallel maneuvering continues. Several weeks ago Jathran tried to initiate exports directly to foreign markets bypassing Tripoli, but that was aborted when the government’s small navy fired warning shots toward a Maltese tanker seeking to load. For his part, Zeidan late last year negotiated the reopening of a major western Libyan oil field — closed by protesters — increasing Libyan oil that is getting out. In recent days, Zeidan also has been negotiating with a faction east of Jathran’s main area of control near Benghazi, hoping to reopen the Marsa al-Hariga terminal closer to the Egyptian border.
Both Zeidan and Jathran have their own separate problems. Some tribes previously supportive of Jathran’s eastern federalist cause have been grumbling that he is little more than a power hungry warlord, his shadow “cabinet” barely functions, and an Islamist leader within Jathran’s leadership quit at the end of 2013. Just today a Benghazi school was bombed, presumably by Ansar al-Sharia fanatics who remain at large in the city.
Unable to export oil independently because of the government’s naval presence and jitters among foreign buyers, Jathran’s regional government remains unfunded. Since late last month, formerly pro-Jathran Petroleum Facilities Guards at the closed terminals have been protesting his failure to replace their lost government pay.
Zeidan, from a small liberal party, has been beset with problems on various fronts. The two leading factions in Libya’s parliament, the General National Council (GNC), want to replace him, but these nationalists on the one hand and Islamists on the other cannot agree on a candidate. Last week four Islamists resigned from Zeidan’s cabinet. Last Wednesday unknown assailants attempted to assassinate Zeidan’s Deputy Prime Minister in Tripoli, which remains the scene of frequent gunfights.
The extreme weakness of the government’s small army in training was underscored last month. To wrest control of a strategic airfield at Sebha in Libya’s Saharan southwest from various local armed factions, Zeidan had to persuade a battle-hardened northern militia controlling the port city of Misrata to go down and restore the situation for him.
The GNC announced last week that elections for a 60-member constitutional assembly will be held on Feb. 20. That body would have 120 days to draft a constitution for submission to a national referendum. If approved, elections for Libya’s first post-transitional parliament will be held later this year. With a backdrop of division, disarray and violence, it hardly seems likely that this process will unfold without a host of problems.
Meanwhile, a Libya in turmoil continues to export violence. French military intervention thwarted a jihadist attempt to overrun Mali last year. With France drawing down its troop presence, attacks against government targets continue there with most munitions coming across the border from southwestern Libya (largely beyond Tripoli’s control). In addition to militants and associated smugglers, Qadhafi supporters also reportedly play a role in cross-border activity. To the north in Tunisia, the one “Arab Spring” bright spot, a shoot-out took place on the 3rd in which 8 died when Tunisian National Guard cadres stormed a hideout of Tunisia’s own Ansar al-Sharia group filled with explosives, small arms, and RPGs (materiel probably smuggled in from Libya).
Egypt, however, may face the most serious Libyan overspill. The jihadist Ansar Beit al-Maqdis group, based in Sinai but generating a number of attacks in Egypt proper, appears to be receiving much of its arms and explosives from Libya. Some believe the group may have secured some surface-to-air missiles via the Libyan black market, posing a potential threat to both Egyptian and Israeli commercial airliners.
Cracking down on this flow is difficult. The latest attempt involved the arrest by Egyptian authorities of a Libyan militia leader involved in arms trafficking. In response, gunmen promptly kidnapped five Egyptian diplomats in Tripoli. Cairo was forced to release the militia kingpin in order to secure the release of its diplomats.
Aside from nuclear negotiations with Iran, UN, US and broader regional diplomacy has focused on Syria or the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Yet, progress on Syria has been minimal and so long as the Netanyahu government remains in power and Palestinian divisions remain, there is only an extremely remote possibility that Secretary Kerry can break the impasse over core issues.
With such great difficulties facing Syrian and Israeli-Palestinian efforts, extending to Tripoli the opportunity to utilize the good offices of the UN with the backing of members of the international community seems reasonable. Ali Zeidan might shun such external involvement out of fear it would accord his rivals too much legitimacy. He might instead prefer to keep waiting out Jathran, hoping the latter will succumb to dissention within his own camp.
Nonetheless, even if Jathran caves, with Libya fast approaching a demanding political agenda related to elections and a permanent constitution (stacked alongside Zeidan’s own myriad problems), diplomacy could be useful in other respects. So, with Libyan-associated regional collateral damage considerable, little seems to be lost in offering an alternative, including the possibility of an overseas venue like Geneva for domestic dialogue.
]]>by Wayne White
An ominous deterioration in the situation in Libya recently has been overshadowed by media stories about the Oct. 27 “60 Minutes” report on the Benghazi tragedy featuring a witness now known to have given conflicting evidence to the FBI. Meanwhile, developments in Libya reflect a sharp decline [...]]]>
by Wayne White
An ominous deterioration in the situation in Libya recently has been overshadowed by media stories about the Oct. 27 “60 Minutes” report on the Benghazi tragedy featuring a witness now known to have given conflicting evidence to the FBI. Meanwhile, developments in Libya reflect a sharp decline in the already tenuous authority of the central government, heightened violence, clashes between militias, as well as new demands for regional autonomy and minority rights already impacting seriously on Libyan oil and gas exports. Libya now could be drifting closer to what might be called a “failed state” scenario in terms of governance.
Continued, rising lawlessness over the past month has been evident across the country. Illustrating how little authority the police and army have in eastern Libya, the former rebel “Benghazi Brigade” announced on Oct. 22 its arrest of several men allegedly behind weekly car bombings in the city, including three Chadians. A Libyan military source called the detention a “theatrical act” in which armed groups like the one involved in this action “are trying to show…they can replace the army.”
Also in the east, militiamen from the al-Zawiya tribe seized up to 200 Egyptian drivers and demanded the release of associates being held in Egypt for weapons smuggling. On Oct. 18, gunmen murdered the head of the military police’s investigative division outside his vacation home in Benghazi, the day before the same happened to a local army commander in the eastern city of Derna, and two Libyan soldiers were stabbed to death during a militia attack on their base nearby.
The security situation in the capital of Tripoli also has skidded downward in the wake of the brief kidnapping of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan on Oct. 10 by supposedly government-supported militiamen. Last week there were two outbreaks of heavy fighting (including the use of truck mounted anti-aircraft guns) between rival militias. The Nov. 7 battle began when fighters from a powerful militia in nearby Misrata entered Tripoli to avenge the death two days before of a militia leader from that militia-dominated city (Libya’s 3rd largest) still not under central government authority. With militias on the rampage, many Tripoli residents have armed themselves, and some have erected street barricades to block militiamen from entering their neighborhoods.
Triggers of militia violence are varied and unpredictable: personal vendettas, territory, stolen vehicles, and disputes over smuggled goods including drugs. Although the government tried to harness militias to function as security forces subject to the authorities, most report mainly to their own leaders. On Nov. 10, Zeidan called for a popular effort to compel the militias to disarm peacefully, something unlikely to succeed. And perhaps setting in place a trigger for a future outbreak of violence, Zeidan stated that government payments to militias operating beyond police and army authority would end on Dec. 31.
It comes as no surprise that Libya’s critical oil sector also has been in crisis for several months now, with 2 million barrels per day of normal exports falling to only a few hundred thousand. In the east, militias charged with protecting terminals and fields, joined by oil workers, for several months have squeezed or even blocked exports to pressure the government for various political and work-related concessions. Over the weekend they instituted a de-facto export blockade.
Off in the west, Berber protesters demanding minority rights seized Libya’s large Mellitah natural gas and oil complex on the coast 50 miles west of Tripoli last month. Mellitah is the terminus of the vital Greenstream pipeline operated jointly by Libya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) and the Italian Eni. Yesterday, the Berbers shut it down, cutting off the flow of natural gas to Italy.
Back east, militia-associated elements seeking eastern autonomy, a fair regional share of oil revenues, and holding all key export terminals in the region announced on Nov. 3 the unilateral formation of an eastern regional “Government of Barqa.” On the 10th, this shadowy government established a companion oil company based temporarily in Tobruk to market Libyan crude independent of Libya’s NOC. Under the more relaxed pre-Qadhafi rule of King Idris, Barqa was a semi-autonomous eastern region. Quite a few eastern Libyans reportedly are skeptical of this move, however, because they believe the “autonomy” effort is meant merely to serve the narrower agendas of particular militias.
Nonetheless, the militias have the power, and the central government in Tripoli has had to implore foreign companies not to purchase oil from entities or militias instead of NOC. Prime Minister Zeidan also announced on the 10th that with hydrocarbon exports imperiled, the Libyan government could be unable to cover its expenditures beginning in either December or January if export problems cannot be resolved (especially those in the east).
Not surprisingly, foreign confidence in Libya’s hydrocarbon sector is fading fast. ExxonMobil already has greatly reduced its activity in Libya, with Marathon considering the sale of its portion of a joint venture with the Libyans. And BP has begun talks to relinquish its stake in a large joint natural gas explorations project with NOC. Separate entities holding major terminals turning away foreign tankers in recent days will only frighten foreign investors that much more.
Libyan instability overall also has adverse implications for neighboring countries. In addition to the gun-running into Egypt noted earlier, the remote and lawless Libyan southeast provides a convenient haven for elements linked to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and similar extremist groups that have raided into Mali and Algeria. Farther north on Oct. 30, a suicide bomber struck in the Tunisian resort city of Sousse. Another bomber was apprehended in a nearby seaside town along with five more plotters nabbed in Sousse that Tunisia’s Islamist government said were members of the radical Ansar al-Sharia movement. All those caught were Tunisians, but they reportedly sortied from Libya, where Tunisian extremists evidently have exploited disorder even in the north not far from Tripoli to obtain training, explosives and arms.
The iffy authority of the Libyan government and the power of the militias have hurt prospects for Western assistance aimed at stabilization because the central government in Tripoli is not a viable partner. Several NATO countries, including the US and the UK, want to train at least some legitimate security and military personnel, but there is concern that even these could end up behaving like militias or strengthen in a destabilizing manner only the security side of the government. In any case, British training will not begin until early next year, and Washington has not made a final decision on plans to train Libyan cadres outside Libya.
With war-weariness dominating Western thinking concerning regional intervention, no government is seriously pondering direct military involvement. As a result, the prospects for Libya seem grim. No real progress — instead quite the opposite — has come from purely domestic attempts to sort out Libya’s many problems since Muammar Qadhafi’s fall two years ago, so Libyan efforts to address this deteriorating situation do not seem likely to gain meaningful traction.
One of Libya’s Berber militiamen blocking the gas and crude oil complex in Nalut. Credit: Karlos Zurutuza/IPS
]]>by Wayne White
Nearly a year after the Benghazi attack and almost two since Muammar al-Qadhafi’s fall, Libya remains a governmental basket case. Political assassinations and militia violence are commonplace amidst the continued absence of effective central governance across much of the country. Recent labor unrest threatens what had been Libya’s one [...]]]>
by Wayne White
Nearly a year after the Benghazi attack and almost two since Muammar al-Qadhafi’s fall, Libya remains a governmental basket case. Political assassinations and militia violence are commonplace amidst the continued absence of effective central governance across much of the country. Recent labor unrest threatens what had been Libya’s one area of notable recovery: oil exports. As an experiment in post-authoritarian nationhood, the Libyan situation may be more troubling than at any time since the end of the struggle against the Qadhafi regime.
The central government recently has been in a state of flux. Beleaguered Prime Minister Ali Zeidan announced at the end of July he will decrease the number of cabinet positions or try to govern more effectively by meeting with a smaller group of core ministers. So far, however, the only notable result has been Deputy Prime Minister Awad al-Barasi’s resignation on August 3, blaming “a dysfunctional government where my powers are lost.” Meanwhile, despite the passage of time since the former regime’s demise, central authority has stagnated and instability has been on the rise.
Symptomatic of this problem is the continuation of various autonomous local governing entities centered on armed groups left over from the struggle against Qadhafi. They dominate various regions, one major city, many urban neighborhoods and frequently defy or hound portions of the central government even in the capital of Tripoli.
One salient ongoing dispute revolves around the status of literally thousands of political prisoners often languishing in miserable, improvised local holding pens outside government control. The most notorious case is that of Saif al-Qadhafi, the deceased dictator’s most important son and senior lieutenant. Despite repeated demands for custody on the part of the central government and the International Criminal Court (ICC), Saif remains in Zintan in Libya’s arid central mountains, a prisoner of the local Berber militia that originally captured him. The only outside contact he has had was a meeting last year with his Australian ICC-appointed defense attorney, who was then also detained for three weeks. Since then, new charges have been brought against Saif by authorities in Zintan: allegedly giving his ICC attorney “national security information.”
Justice Minister Salah al-Marghani recently declared that the central government would not allow “Mickey Mouse trials.” However, militias holding the real power in many locales claim the national judiciary remains dominated by officials from the former regime; they have stormed Marghani’s office in anger over delays and enforced their own justice in areas they control. To wit, the autonomous militia controlling Libya’s third largest city, Misrata, sentenced Qadhafi’s former Education Minister, Ahmad Ibrahim, to death on July 31. Technically, the Libyan Supreme Court must confirm such a sentence before he faces a firing squad, but whether that will happen is questionable.
It seems encouraging to many Americans that Washington finally handed down an indictment against some of those responsible for the Benghazi consulate attack last year, most notably local Benghazi militia chief Ahmad Abu Khattala. Yet, US authorities involved in the investigation such as the FBI have been hampered seriously by the woeful law enforcement situation across Libya — also the reason it took this long to bring charges against at least some of those involved in that infamous assault.
Such difficulties should come as no surprise. In a country flush with competing local and regional identities as well as all manner of weaponry in the hands of various armed groups, Benghazi alone has been hit with a wave of political killings over the past couple of weeks. Those murdered include judicial officials, lawyers, political activists, a senior police official and other members of the Libyan security services. Most recently, on August 9, the anchor of a popular Benghazi TV show was assassinated. Many of the victims spoke out against or sought to curb the power of local militias. At the end of July, there also were two bombings — one near a courthouse and the other close to a Justice Ministry office. Some of these incidents have triggered demonstrations or attacks by angry mobs against sites associated with Benghazi-based armed groups presumed responsible, in one case, the Muslim Brotherhood.
Another glaring example of central government weakness came shortly after the attack on the offices of the Muslim Brotherhood: a riot inside and around Benghazi’s al-Kwafiya Prison that resulted in the breakout of roughly 1,200 prisoners. Most escaped inmates were accused of serious crimes or had been associated with the Qadhafi Regime; intervention to contain the situation by government special forces apparently had relatively little effect. The mass escape most likely reinforced the determination of autonomous local authorities and militias not to turn over their prisoners to the government.
Despite the unrest, the unexpectedly rapid rebound of Libya’s oil export capabilities had been one major success. Yet, since July, a wave of protests and strikes by oil workers and guards has shut down two key oil export terminals, Libya’s largest refinery, and threatened to reduce production at inland oil fields. Oil exports for July were down 20 percent; so far August exports are down a staggering 50 percent. Workers are reacting to management and pay issues.
A resolution to this crisis does not yet seem imminent, in part because Oil Minister Abelbari al-Arusa initially took a defiant stance. Now, however, Prime Minister Zeidan has warned that Libya’s national budget is imperiled, and there are talks. In fact, the two terminals re-opened over the weekend, only to close only hours later today without any oil being lifted. Meanwhile, foreign investors already reluctant to inject money into an unstable Libya have been further shaken.
The overriding question at this point may not be how a way out of this maelstrom can be charted, but whether any truly game-changing progress can be made in the near-term. Most all Libya’s challenges today are deeply enmeshed in the complex fractured politics of a country with the least developed sense of national identity and civil society among the five key Arab North African states. So the ability of the international community to help is limited (compounded by drawdowns in diplomatic personnel and curtailed travel inside Libya in view of the dangers now posed by serving there).
Consequently, there is the very real possibility Libya could remain unstable for quite a while. Such a situation would, of course, continue to provide havens for extremist elements both foreign and domestic stemming from exceedingly weak, insufficiently coherent and geographically constrained national governance (as with the recent al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb intrusions into southeast Libya and last year’s Benghazi consulate assault).
]]>Last Sunday former President Bill Clinton asked the CEO of Walmart if he would open a store in Libya.
Surely Libya needs more jobs and needs to get its economy going, but I am not sure how a Walmart would do that. A large proportion of the goods that [...]]]>
Last Sunday former President Bill Clinton asked the CEO of Walmart if he would open a store in Libya.
Surely Libya needs more jobs and needs to get its economy going, but I am not sure how a Walmart would do that. A large proportion of the goods that Walmart sells in the United States are imported into the United States, not made there. Seventy-five percent of the foodstuffs in Libya are imported from elsewhere. Libya has no real manufacturing base. Libya’s supply chains are hardly up to the task for feeding into a group of Walmarts. Most of the managers and even greeters may have to be foreigners initially. The people setting up the supply chains would also likely be non-Libyans given the complexity of what needs to be done and the lack of applicable training for most Libyans.
The finance for the setting up of the Walmart(s) would have to be via foreign direct investments likely from the United States. Those investments would need some insurance from the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. There would also need to be lots of cooperation and aid from the US government and the Libyan government regarding security for the initial buildings and the entire supply chain within Libya. Maybe the World Bank, the International Finance Corporation and others could be involved in developing the basic infrastructure and connections needed. Effort would also be required for improving the capacity of the Libyan government to handle economic development and the development of businesses.
Physical as well as financial security would be keys to the success of a Walmart in Libya. It would not take much for some trucks or even a store to have problems. Walmart is definitely an American brand and there are lots of Salafis and others who would want to do damage to anything representing an American brand. Consider what happened to the French Carrefour markets in Tunisia during its revolution. Think of what happened to outlets of major American food chains like KFC during the recent riots against that repulsive anti-Islam film. Think of the increasing anti-Americanism amongst some groups in the region and you can see that there could be some physical security issues.
Financial security may require that the payrolls, insurances, cash flows for inventory, maintenance, upkeep and more be kept offshore in part for a while. As the security and banking capacity situations in Libya change this could change. There could also be some significant foreign exchange risk involved, especially if the new Libya becomes more unstable and cannot get its economic act together. However, a good risk management team could hedge this if they knew the country well.
There are also some inherent financial and physical risks by simply being in North Africa and near Egypt and Tunisia, two countries that are still in the midst of trying to find their ways. Their revolutions are likely far from over. There is also a problem with Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and other AQ-like groups floating around the region. The instabilities to the south of Libya are hardly comforting.
Even so, my sense is that President Clinton’s heart was in the right place even if his logic needed a bit more work.
Libya needs foreign investment. There is a lot that American companies can do in Libya.
There are many people in Libya who are pro-American given that we helped their country gain some independence from the wretched regime of Qhaddafi. Many of the expatriate leadership of Libya of the older generations spent some time in the United States. We could gain a lot by helping some of the younger people, appropriately vetted, to get scholarships to visit and study in the United States. Sometimes the best way to make friends and future allies is to give them a good experience in the United States and provide high-quality education and training. There are great opportunities even within the massive and volatile risks of Libya.
That said there are many people in Libya including some militias, extremist groups, pro-Ghaddafi remnants and more who do not like the United States, to put it mildly.
It will be vital to understand the overall environment on the ground of who is who and where they stand before moving forward. It may be a big mistake to write off Libya because of the vicious and evil behavior of a few when the majority of the country could benefit. But we need to be sure.
However, dropping Libya as a place to help may end up delivering it to the extremists and that is a very bad idea.
There is another side to the Walmart story. What about all of the small mom and pop stores, green grocers, kiosks and others in Libya who may be put out of business due to the Walmart. Many of these have been put out of business here. How would Libyans react to being put out of business by a massive American company?
On the other hand, if Walmart and other US companies take the leap into the new North Africa they could help develop countries and their people while at the same time making serious profit. However, the Walmart model may not be the best one to start out with.
Indeed, there are risks. Normally in such situations the only companies that come in are the oil and gas companies or other major energy companies that have vast experience working in conflict and post-conflict zones.
Maybe President Clinton was trying to get a discussion and debate going in US business communities as well as in the government about how the US could help the economies of these hurting countries in a (hopefully) post-conflict environment. This is an important thing to consider even if the situation looks dismal from afar.
Developing the economies of these countries will be far from easy and there are likely to be many bumps along the road – some of them very steep and risky. However, with the right incentives and the right risk management, it may be possible to make a difference and to do well by doing good.
Perhaps there could be some tax breaks and free land to build on in return for training and educating Libyans and increasing the percentage of Libyans working at the Walmart or other such stores. There will need to be some give and take. I know that the tax breaks and free land (for a limited time of perhaps 10 to 20 years and then the lease fees kick in) are contentious. But Libya needs to move forward and get its people — especially its young people — employed. Maybe the United States could improve its reputation in the region by doing just that.
You make more friends by creating jobs than dropping bombs. Developing a better security situation in a region via real strategic thinking can involve a lot more than just the military and the State Department. Sometimes businesses can make a big difference.
However, many businesses need to be sure that they are not going to walk into mine fields before they move forward with serious investments.
There is a certain menace attached to Libya now. Violent extremists created that. Should we give up on the rest of the Libya because of the people who want to destroy it rather than build it up?
]]>