Foreign Interference Keeps Libyas Crisis at a Boil
REESE ERLICH
07/04/2020
Though it has disappeared from headlines, Libyas humanitarian crisis
continues unabated.
( 48hills) I arrived at the airport in Tripoli, Libya, on assignment for
CBS Radio with my paperwork in order. I even had the phone numbers of local
immigration officials in case anything went wrong.
It quickly did.
An airport official said my papers wouldnt allow me into the country, even
though the visit had been approved by the Libyan Embassy in Washington, D.C.
He put me on the next plane leaving Tripoli, and I ended up in Vienna,
Austria. Turns out that the militia controlling the airport had a beef with
the Washington Embassy and wasnt recognizing its authority to issue visas.
It was 2012, not long after the US and other Western powers had overthrown
Muammar Gaddafi and brought democracy to the country. But Libya was
already on its way to becoming a failed state ruled by competing warlords,
as my airport experience affirmed.
In 2011, President Barack Obama and his liberal interventionists justified
yet another disastrous invasion by claiming they were protecting civilians
from a murderous dictator. But very soon, the actions of Washington and its
allies created chaos.
Libya is a failed state, Barah Mikail, associate professor at Saint Louis
University in Madrid, tells me in a phone interview. It is a country with
spheres of influence, not a government.
Today, a myriad of outside powers compete for dominance in Libya, none of
which care much about the countrys people.
Turkey, Qatar, and the Arab League back the so-called internationally
recognized government, which is actually an alliance of political Islamist
and extremist groups in Tripoli. Russia, France, Egypt, and the United Arab
Emirates support military dictator Khalifa Haftar based in Benghazi.
The Trump Administration has no coherent policy towards Libya, which has
given a free hand to the other intervening powers.
It was a mess from the beginning, Vijay Prashad, author of the 2016 book
The Death of the Nation and the Future of the Arab Revolution, tells me.
This was not an uprising against Gaddafi. It was a regional war.
Imperialist interests
Because of its rich reserves of oil and natural gas, outside powers have
long sought to dominate Libya, a country of only 6.9 million people. More
recently, with the collapse of the central government, terrorist groups have
sprouted up, contributing to regional instability. Immigrant smugglers also
use Libya as a jumping off point to Europe.
Libya was once in the anti-imperialist camp. In the early 1970s, Muammar
Gaddafi, who had come to power in a military coup, allied with rising
anti-imperialist movements to oppose US policy. But over time, he became
just another corrupt dictator soliciting bribes from foreign powers.
By 2003, Gaddafi made a 180-degree turn and allied with Washington, giving
up his nascent nuclear weapons program and opening his economy to additional
exploitation by Western corporations.
He was our partner, Mark N. Katz, professor of Government and Politics at
George Mason University, tells me by phone.
But Gaddafi was an expendable partner. In 2011, when Arab Spring protesters
ousted dictatorial regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, Libyans took to the streets
as well. Western powers saw an opportunity to replace Gaddafi with an even
more pliant ruler.
In March 2011, French, British, and US air forces bombed Libya, causing huge
damage to the countrys infrastructure. Western powers supported efforts to
write a new constitution and hold parliamentary elections. But real power
stayed with local militias. The country began to fall apart.
Other countries parachuted in Libyans who had been living in Arab countries
and the US, says Prashad. The militias didnt see them as leaders.
Nevertheless, the Obama Administration saw Libya as a great success story
for its policy of humanitarian intervention, with Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton proclaiming, We set into motion a policy that was on the right side
of history, on the right side of our values, on the right side of our
strategic interests in the region.
History has judged the invasion far more harshly.
How can you talk about the right side of history when youve just destroyed
a country? asks Prashad.
Recent fighting
General Khalifa Haftar, the leader of the powerful Libyan National Army,
launched a major offensive against Tripoli in April 2019, promising quick
victory. He relied on the backing of Russian mercenaries and arms from the
United Arab Emirates. The former CIA asset claims to represent secular
forces but allows extremists to control the mosques in areas under his
control.
Haftars military offensive ran into fierce opposition in January of this
year, when Turkey sent troops and sophisticated arms to back the
Tripoli-based Government of National Accord. For years, the GNA controlled
little more than that capital city. It consists of various political
Islamist parties and militias, including the Moslem Brotherhood and the
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, formerly affiliated with Al Qaeda.
The GNA also relies on extremist Syrians and Libyans who returned home after
fighting Bashar al Assads government in Syria. These brigades, politically
close to Al Qaeda, were the most experienced fighters, according to Wolfgang
Pusztai, Austrias former defense attaché to Libya.
These guys are crazy, Pusztai tells me in a phone interview from Vienna.
But they were the backbone of the anti-Haftar fight in the first months.
The Pentagon supports the GNA in Tripoli and offers low-key military
cooperation. But Washington has generally pulled back from Libya and allows
Turkey to do the heavy lifting.
The nearly decade-long war and outside intervention has been disastrous for
Libyans. According to the United Nations, 1.3 million Libyans need
humanitarian assistance and 200,000 are internally displaced. Human Rights
Watch notes that all sides are guilty of violating the laws of war and, in
some cases, of committing crimes against humanity.
Peace prospects?
Since June, the GNA and Turkey have been on a military offensive towards
Benghazi, Haftars stronghold in eastern Libya. Egypt, a Haftar ally, has
threatened to intervene militarily.
Egypt and Haftar have called for a ceasefire and peace talks, reflecting
Haftars weakened military position. So far Turkey and the GNA have rebuffed
this peace effort.
In the past, Washington would have maintained occupation troops in Libya, or
at least sent a lot of arms to a political faction. But both the Obama and
Trump Administrations have backed away from Libya, a sign of a weakened
empire.
Eventually there will need to be a political settlement in Libya, but not
until the major players recognize they cant win militarily.
Foreign interference and delivery of weapons is the main problem, analyst
Mikail says. If this stops, well have a different landscape.
Via
