The situation in Libya - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

User avatar
By noemon
#15256143
This is a pretty good summary of Libya's internal power struggle.

Source wrote:Two prime ministers further destabilize Libya

FEDERICA SAINI FASANOTTI

The Libyan government is deeply split. The torn country now has two cabinets and acting prime ministers, but democratic elections remain a chimera.

Patrol of a Tripoli military militia
Tripoli, May 17, 2022: Members of a Libyan militia loyal to the Tripoli-based prime minister repelled forces supporting the Tobruk-appointed rival chief executive, who tried to take control of the government. © Getty Images
In a nutshell

Two rivals, based in Tripoli and Sirte, contend to rule Libya

Unchecked armed militias are gaining political control

Foreign actors continue to operate undisturbed in support of their clients

The country may be on the verge of widespread popular unrest

Since our March 8 description of Libya’s internal strife, little has changed on the ground, although much has changed on paper. The country continues to have two competing governments and acting prime ministers. In the winter of 2022, a coalition of parliamentarians in the Tobruk-based Libyan House of Representatives (HoR) – one of the country’s two rival centers of power – sought to exploit the stalemate created by the failed December 2021 national elections. In a session rife with irregularities, HoR nominated Fathi Bashagha, the interior minister in the former government in Tripoli, as prime minister-designate of a new Government of National Stability. The primary goal of the maneuver was to challenge Abdul Hamid Dbeibeh, appointed interim prime minister of Libya in February 2021, and prevent his internationally recognized, Tripoli-based Government of National Unity (GNU) from ruling the country.

Mr. Dbeibeh has shown no intention of stepping down, and no path forward is evident in the country’s divided polity with two parallel governments.

The contender
Challenging Mr. Dbeibeh was a big decision for Mr. Bashagha. It required him to change sides in the country’s internal conflict after years of fighting his present ally, Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar. The turnaround means forfeiting the political capital Mr. Bashagha had accrued opposing the marshal and his military force, the Tobruk-based Libyan National Army (LNA).

It is not Mr. Bashagha’s first attempt to reach power in Tripoli. He tried to seize it a few times in the past, only to be forced to back down due to the hostility from some of the capital’s most prominent militia cartels.

This time around, he secured the support of one of them. The notorious Nawasi brigade clashed on his behalf on the capital’s streets with Mr. Dbeibeh’s armed loyalists, but that proved not enough. In May, Mr. Bashagha had to flee Tripoli after the headquarters of the brigade that received him came under attack.

The armed cartels
These events show that Libyan militias are now influential enough to decide who receives the green light to rule the country. The strongest cartel selects the prime minister and his cabinet. All this happens in broad daylight and in plain view of the nearly three million disenfranchised citizens registered to vote.

The leaders of armed groups are tantalizingly close to overt political power. Increasingly, it is not the usual well-known figures on the Libyan political scene who seem to dictate the rules of the game but rather their armed backers. In recent months, the power of militias has risen still more. They are no longer merely armed groups; their role is more complex and increasingly political.

In recent years, the international community focused almost entirely on the political process in Libya, trying to achieve a peaceful and consensual transition to any form of democracy. There was no serious discussion about the disarmament of militias and their possible reintegration into civil society was left aside, primarily because the attempts to resolve the problem in the early years of the conflict all failed.

The United Nations Support Mission in Libya (or UNSMIL, a political mission created in the aftermath of the 2011 Libyan Civil War) supported the initiative of the Libyan Political Dialogue Forum to establish a shared military commission and try to unify the different military realities in Libya. More recently, on June 20, 2022, a meeting in Cairo of the 5+5 Joint Military Commission produced no breakthrough. No clear strategy exists for disarming a population that holds more than 20 million weapons and shows no intention of handing them over to institutions.

The Libyan people
However, another variable in Libyan political dynamics can come into play: the population. On July 1, 2022, several Libyan cities became the scene of violent protests. In Tobruk, usually quiet under the tight control of Marshal Haftar’s militias, protesters attacked the parliament building, using bulldozers to break through the gates, and set it on fire. They demanded the dissolution of all political bodies, first and foremost the HoR itself, and the removal of its leader, the 83-year-old Aguila Saleh Issa. The HoR is the last duly elected political institution in Libya. However, even its mandate is now questionable, partly because the representatives appointed in 2014 were chosen by only 18 percent of voters.

Another recent development concerned the leadership of the National Oil Corporation (NOC), run since May 2014 by a technocrat named Mustafa Sanalla. His relationship with Prime Minister Dbeibeh, and especially with Petroleum Minister Mohamed Oun, was never good and deteriorated considerably in recent months. On July 13, 2022, Mr. Dbeibeh appointed the former governor of the Central Bank of Libya, Farhat Bengdara, as the new head of the oil company. Mr. Sanalla protested that NOC was an independent entity protected by UN resolutions and international political agreements and refused to give up his mandate. However, the new appointee is already hard at work trying to end the oil fields blockade and resume crude production.

The case of Mr. Sanalla will soon be reviewed by a Libyan court, but his position appears to be difficult. Mr. Bengdara, who ran the Libyan Central Bank during the times of strongman Muammar Qaddafi (1969-2011), has support from the United Arab Emirates, one of the backers of Mr. Haftar.

Chimera of elections
The Libyan government has become even more fractured. As of June 1, Mr. Bashagha has established his executive in the city of Sirte, which straddles Tripolitania and Cyrenaica and sits on one of the most oil-rich areas in the entire country. Mr. Dbeibeh, for his part, repeats the mantra that he will be the one to take Libya to new elections and only then, in the face of the results of the polls, will he hand political leadership over to the winner.

Elections, however, remain a chimera since there is still no mutual decision on constitutional or electoral reform. The current Libyan political class seems to have every interest in maintaining the chaotic status quo where it can function without exertion and enrich itself on the backs of its citizens. HoR leader Saleh and Marshal Haftar are prime examples of this behavior. However, the same criticism applies to Mr. Dbeibeh. He has failed to deliver on any of his solemn promises as prime minister in more than a year – from improving the management of the constantly failing electricity grid to constructing badly needed new infrastructure.

The foreign actors
Meanwhile, foreign powers, long present and influential on the Libyan stage, continue to operate undisturbed, delivering favors for their Libyan clients. For example, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates allowed Messrs. Haftar and Saleh to restructure their “army” after the war unleashed against the Tripoli-based government (of which Mr. Bashagha was interior minister at the time). That allowed both to remain in the political game and even secure lines of succession through their sons.

Facts & figures
Foreign influence on selected military militias

Image

Similarly, the Turkish militarily supported two successive governments in Tripoli, from Fayez al-Sarraj’s Government of National Accord (2015-2021) to Mr. Dbeibeh’s GNU (formed in March 2021). However, Ankara’s forces did not wipe out Marshal Haftar after his failed attempt to take Tripoli, even though Turkey was in a position to do so, as notes distinguished Libyan-Italian scholar Karim Mezran. The decision to let the marshal off the hook could be attributed to an assumed secret Turkish-Russian plan for partitioning Libya sometime down the line, as they did in Syria.

The specter of hunger
Like many African states, Libya depends on wheat imports from Ukraine, Russia, Bulgaria and Romania because its local production is by far insufficient for national needs – primarily due to the lack of investment in agricultural facilities and programs. In 2020, the country imported $246 million worth of wheat.

Successive Libyan governments have done almost nothing to address the problem of drought and continuous power outages. That has undoubtedly weighed on the decision not to invest in this crop. However, a major crisis is approaching with the blockade of Black Sea ports; unless the ports open, the outlook is gloomy regarding food supplies and prices.

Scenarios

Regarding the coming months, forecasts for Libya are not optimistic. Mr. Bashagha plans on staging his return to the capital, further undermining the credibility of Tripoli’s unity government. The underlying causes of the July protests also remain: the lack of fuel, the food and electricity shortages, the stagnation in the labor market and lastly, the absence of any positive outlook regarding the elections. Without exception, the Libyan political actors have demonstrated their utter inability to act for the public good. Popular discontent, when added to possible reactions from militias loyal to the GNU in the face of Mr. Bashagha’s entry into Tripoli, could unleash hell in the capital. And an uprising could spread throughout the country.
#15256146
Some "countries" just aren't ready for independence, I am afraid.
#15256599
Patrickov wrote:Some "countries" just aren't ready for independence, I am afraid.


Uh-hu.

Before Hillary Clintons "no fly" zone, there was no civil war in Libya, and it was one of the most advanced african countries.
#15256709
Negotiator wrote:Before Hillary Clintons "no fly" zone, there was no civil war in Libya, and it was one of the most advanced african countries.


At the expense of immense oppression, and terror activities like Lockebe.

Also, the no-fly zone was after the civil war broke out.

Admin Edit: Rule 2 Violation
#15257454
The OP article that noemon quoted wrote:
Foreign actors continue to operate undisturbed in support of their clients


I believe that this was the primary objective of that atrocity. To get foreign actors inside Libya to loot it. In the opinion of Western shareholders, all that oil money was being "wasted" on developing Africa under "that tyrant" Ghaddafi.

Patrickov wrote:Some "countries" just aren't ready for independence, I am afraid.


That's what multinational corporations would say about any nation state. They used to say that "certain humans" weren't ready for independence either, and kept them in chains for centuries.

Question: Are multinational corporations the authority that should decide who is ready for independence?
User avatar
By noemon
#15257471
QatzelOk wrote:I believe that this was the primary objective of that atrocity. To get foreign actors inside Libya to loot it. In the opinion of Western shareholders, all that oil money was being "wasted" on developing Africa under "that tyrant" Ghaddafi.


No westerner forced Qaddaffi to fire live rounds on the crowd of Libyan protesters and throw his country into chaos thus turning the whole country into open season for everyone.

The west/US is back seat in Libya. The GNA(controlling less than 1/3 of Libya) is supported by Turkey and Qatar, the LNA(controlling 2/3 of Libya and the only duly elected Libyan parliament before the revolution) by Russia, Egypt, UAE, France & Greece.

The GNA has signed a deal with Turkey to share Greek territorial waters. The LNA has condemned it as an act of aggression against a foreign country.

The GNA has sent its deal with Turkey to the UN but the UN refused to accept it as valid.
The UN though recognizes the GNA and has attempted to condemn the LNA.

When this starts making sense to you, let me know too.
#15257501
QatzelOk wrote:That's what multinational corporations would say about any nation state. They used to say that "certain humans" weren't ready for independence either, and kept them in chains for centuries.

Question: Are multinational corporations the authority that should decide who is ready for independence?


Corporations have no power to finally decide on this matter, at least technically so.

If the subject of the question is the US or the UK I will definitely answer "yes".
#15257502
noemon wrote:... the LNA(controlling 2/3 of Libya and the only duly elected Libyan parliament before the revolution) by Russia, Egypt, UAE, France & Greece.


Are you implying that Russia is on the right side in this particular case?
#15257585
noemon wrote:No westerner forced Qaddaffi to fire live rounds on the crowd of Libyan protesters and throw his country into chaos thus turning the whole country into open season for everyone.

All our news sources have to do is announce "opened fire on peaceful protesters", and the Pentagon can send in its planes to destroy a nation state and the lives of all its people?
The Kent State shootings... meant that it would have been okay for the USSR to nuke all American cities and completely destroy its economy and social system? The UN would have been fine with that?

Likewise, stories like "killed peaceful protesters", "prohibits women from wearing or not wearing veils" , "is trying to develop nuclear weapons" (like world leaders are playing Civilization with one another), and "used chemical or bio weapons".... are all marketing terms for Wars Inc.
#15257588
Foreign actors cannot fuck up a country that has not already destroyed itself.

No foreigner touched Libya before Qaddaffi turned his own country into open season.

You believe that all you got to do is tell a story accusing westerners for everything and that in your mind is all the analysis anybody requires.

Reality tells a different story.
User avatar
By noemon
#15257589
Patrickov wrote:Are you implying that Russia is on the right side in this particular case?


Of course she is.
#15257591
noemon wrote:Foreign actors cannot fuck up a country that has not already destroyed itself.


And this is why "the country has already ruined itself" is such great marketing for the forever wars.
#15257595
Your marketing is even greater for the forever wars because when the culprit is always a foreign someone, noone has to actually do anything about it internally.
#15257759
Listing some of the marketing memes used to defend the Libyan chapter of the Western Forever Wars:

In 2016 the Washington Post wrote:...(Hillary) Clinton has repeatedly defended the Libya military intervention as U.S. “smart power at its best.”

“We had a murderous dictator . . . threatening to massacre large numbers of the Libyan people,” she said during an October Democratic presidential debate. “We had our closest allies in Europe burning up the phone lines begging us to help them try to prevent what they saw as a mass genocide, in their words. And we had the Arabs standing by our side saying, ‘We want you to help us deal with Gaddafi.’ ”...


1. Murderous dictator... (West loves some, hates others, and thinks it's okay to kill them)

2. Threatening to massacre... (Oh my god! Threats! No time to think...)

3. the Libyan people... (our bombs are all about helping the little guy)

4. Closest allies (Sarkozy and other oil-less, bankster-friendly, Western colonial leaders)

5. Arabs standing by our side (the Gulf dictators)

6. Help us! (bombing countries to rubble are altruism)

7. Deal with Ghaddafi! (suggests voices of victims crying out in the night)
#15257764
noemon wrote:Foreign actors cannot fuck up a country that has not already destroyed itself.

Gaddafi had been in power for 41 years while having seven sons and still couldn't secure his legacy. He was actually friends rather than enemies with the West, with Sarkozy and Berlusconi especially. The West gave him the finishing stroke only when his regime ran out of steam and his power structure started to spectacularly collapse.
#15257907
Beren wrote:Gaddafi had been in power for 41 years while having seven sons and still couldn't secure his legacy. He was actually friends rather than enemies with the West, with Sarkozy and Berlusconi especially. The West gave him the finishing stroke only when his regime ran out of steam and his power structure started to spectacularly collapse.


Thanks for the synopsis of what mainstream media has been telling us about the countries they have asked us to destroy for them.For reality, we can look elsewhere.

Image"He was unable to secure his legacy, so we destroyed the entire country." - NATO

We were allowed to do this, weren't we, Beren? We're allowed to judge other countries (especially those with resources our industry wants at low prices) and then we're allowed to destroy their infrastructure.

This mentality that you have demonstrated shows why gangs (like NATO) can't be trusted with arms or huge amounts of cash. They think they own the world and can destroy whomever they see fit. Their out-sized power blinds them to the realities of human existence on the planet.

Imagine if the country you live in, Beren, was having a hard time finding a successor to a very succesful president. Should the rest of the world destroy your country and steal its resources? Does this apply to everyone everywhere forever?

***

American Free Press wrote:In a speech in San Francisco, top General Wesley Kanne Clark, Sr. recounted a memo drafted by former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s office in the wake of 9-11 that was brought to his attention by a top Pentagon official. The neocons’ plot, he was told, was “to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Clark said the neocons “wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control.”
#15257913
Some people just like to believe the ones with opposite views are brainwashed by their enemies with their media.

Let it be known that most if not all of such media are seen as laughing stock rather than anything more serious.
It's more likely there's a "push factor" behind, e.g. the exhibited stupidity, absurdity and / or cruelty of the entities they hate.

As I said some time before, if there is a way for Qatzel and I exchange places I will gladly do it.
User avatar
By Beren
#15257991
QatzelOk wrote:Imagine if the country you live in, Beren, was having a hard time finding a successor to a very succesful president. Should the rest of the world destroy your country and steal its resources? Does this apply to everyone everywhere forever?

I'd actually welcome a NATO intervention to prevent an escalating civil war, bloodshed, and even genocide perhaps, although they'd be more successful in Hungary. Without Western intervention the inevitable collapse of the Gaddafi regime could have destabilised the whole of North Africa, so thus the Middle East and the Mediterranean, while now it's a rather limited tribal conflict within Libya.
#15258057
Beren wrote:...Without Western intervention the inevitable collapse of the Gaddafi regime could have destabilised the whole of North Africa...


Another non-event that proves something? ie. "If we hadn't X-ed, then Y."

Where is your proof that Y would have happened? CNN?

In reality, if NATO hadn't intervened, North Africa would have its own currency, not be paying interest to European usury operations, and would have been on its way to more independence from the European vampire financiers.

...could have destabilised the whole of North Africa


And North Africa is stable now, right? (or by "stable" do you mean almost dead and ripe for plunder?)

How can you repeat lies even after they have been proven false by real world events?
Is the penetration of propaganda that deep? The economic interests are blinding?

What the issue is? The US government NEVER had th[…]

No, I do not believe you have. Please repeat you[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Looks like we finally are shifting from "wint[…]

Exit Brexit, Part Deux

Reality was probably less clear, as a superpower […]