Q&A: The Latest Developments in the Libyan Crisis
Question:
This morning, the formation of the Libyan government based on the agreement signed in Sakhirat 17/12/2015 was announced, after two days of delays from the scheduled date, according to the date mentioned in the agreement within a month… Many agreements were signed before this one; on 5/12/2015, a number of Parliament members from Tobruk and Tripoli conference have met in Tunisia. During the meeting, “they agreed on the declaration of principles and a national agreement to resolve the Libyan crisis.” On 13/12/2015, America called for the Rome Conference and discussed the topic of the Libyan crisis … Will this government that is announced be able to continue, and bring about stability in Libya, noting that the Sakhirat agreement which formed this government was surrounded by a great international presence? And another thing, the calls for military intervention in Libya have become louder, will this government prevent this intervention, or is it a prelude to speed up the pace of intervention? May Allah reward you.
Answer:
To get a clearer picture and to arrive at the precise answer, we outline the following:
1. It is best to recall some of what we issued previously about the Libyan issue, especially in relation to two issues:
First: Although the United States dominates the Tobruk Parliament by way of Haftar, and Europe, particularly Britain dominates the Tripoli Conference (GNC) through the old political medium, but each have hands at the other end, though Britain has more of the lion’s share of the parliament and the Conference more than America because America entered the political medium due to an urgent matter after Gaddafi, who was strongly loyal to Britain. In the Answer to Question issued on 11/4/2015: “…because Haftar does not carry a good relationship with many of the members of the House of Representatives in Tobruk, some of whom are coming from the old political circle… Therefore, America wants to impede any results of the negotiations to be able to form a political center supporting it and is more effective, that is, it is important for it to delay the negotiations as much as possible…” Europe has more influence on the Tobruk parliament in spite of Haftar’s control of it, as it is likely that America has extended its hands to the other side, if so, not as effective or bearing any weight yet. As stated in the Answer to Question issued on 23/09/2015,
“As such the negotiators from the Conference (also) realise that and some news has been reported about there being a movement from parties of the Conference towards meeting some of the American officials in an attempt to reach an understanding with them. The rescue government in Tripoli that emanating from the conference of the meeting in Sakhirat made a forward step and their head Khalifah Al-Ghuwail met with an American official in respect to developments in regards to the issue. Sources of the Tripoli government informed (Al-Hayaat News) that Al-Ghuwail signed a series of agreements Sunday and Monday night with William Palmer, the deputy head of the institution for the management of American logistics services, which covered memorandums of understanding to ‘Open new horizons for cooperation in the areas of defence, health and investment’. Sources in the Tripoli government described these agreements as representing ‘an important step’ in respect to relations with America” (Al-Hayaat, Tuesday 22/09/2015).” This means that dominating the Tobruk parliament and over the General Conference does not mean that both of them are one copy in each of its parts.
Second: is about how the conflict between America and Britain in Libya and their position regarding the political solutions, we mentioned in the Answer to Question on 23/9/2015:
“As for Europe then it wants the negotiations to produce a political solution in the quickest possible time because the majority of the political medium is with her and any solution directed by the political medium will be in its favour. As for America, then it agreed to the negotiations because it was unable to find an opening for military intervention and because it is lacking in respect to the political medium within Libya. For this reason it will work to innovate style of obstruction so when the negotiations come close to arriving to a solution it will then ruin it via military actions…”
This was clear from the position of both parties: Europe sought through haste to conclude the Sakhirat agreement in order to produce a political solution it can build upon and instill its influence through it, and it appeared that Bernardino León, who has with European tendencies, is hasting to find a solution before the expiry of his dispatch mission by the United Nations… However America’s followers had a different position, as it was clear that the stated position of the Parliament of Tobruk, that was dominant by Haftar, was against the conclusion of the agreement. France 24 reported on 20/9/2015: “The Libyan Parliament, which is recognized internationally, confirmed from its headquarters in Tobruk in the east of the country its rejection of the agreement in the Moroccan Sakhirat resort between the deputies of the Parliament and members who were boycotting the meetings…”
Even so, Leon remained adamant about the announcement of the text of the final agreement, which appeared on Al Jazeera Net website on 22/09/2015 stating: “The United Nations envoy to Libya, Bernardino Leon announced reaching the final political agreement between the parties of the Libyan dialogue in Sakhirat, Morocco, pointing out that the United Nations gave the parties until the beginning of next October to sign it.” Leon said in a press conference at the conclusion of the negotiations: “Now we have a final text of a comprehensive agreement between the parties of the Libyan crisis.” It appears from the words of Leon that this final agreement is not adjustable; it appears that he wants to impose a solution regardless of any opposition, particularly by Haftar’s side. In a ceremony held in Morocco on 08/10/2015, Bernardino Leon held a press conference in which he announced the names of many potential members of the unified government. However, differences remained between the various governments, so it was decided to choose the 17th of December 2015 as the upcoming date to reach the unified government. Thus, Leon was interested and keen to produce a solution tending towards the European perspective without bothering about the opposition of America’s followers, especially Haftar. Therefore, the initial Sakhirat agreement that was developed by Leon agrees with Europe’s vision of the solution, especially Britain’s vision. This made what America interested in ending the work of Leon and this is what took place.
2. As for Martin Kobler, the new United Nations envoy, he came with a semi American- European agreement, and even though he is from Germany, he handled issues in the United Nations previously where he served American interests, as he is closer to America. So, when he took over his mission as the UN envoy to Libya, he took care of amending Sakhirat agreement before the final signing of the agreement, even though Bernardino León previously said that the draft was final, which was signed using initials, meaning that it is not permitted to adjust it, but Kobler conducted amendments on it. In an Arabic 21 site on 24/11/2015: “The President of the United Nations sent on Tuesday the German Martin Kobler as a support for Libya, to the parties of the Libyan political dialogue in order to make amendments to the draft of the political agreement related to adding deputies to the Presidency of the unified Government and Minister of the State, and the mechanism to select Cabinet Ministers… The amendments stated the addition of two other deputies of the Council of Presidency for the unified national government and the Minister of State for Civil Society Affairs, and the right of objection against the government’s Vice-Presidents on the planned decisions issued by the Council of Ministers. The new amendment confirmed that the selection of the government’s Cabinet Ministers or the dismissal of one of them, in case voting upon them isn’t available within the Presidential Council in the first and second time, it will be by the majority of the Council of Ministers, while assuring that the Prime Minister has the right to object or consent the passing of the ministerial structure.’”
These amendments are related particularly to Haftar, as it was one of the most prominent results that would have fall upon the Sakhirat Agreement put by Leon is to get rid of Haftar and end his official post in the Libyan army, because Article VIII of the Sakhirat agreement stipulates “that all the supreme powers of the military, civil and security positions stipulated in the current Libyan laws and legislation should move to the Prime Minister immediately after signing this agreement. The Council must decide on the occupants of these positions within a period not exceeding 20 days, and in case of the absence of a decision within this period, the Council will make decisions of new appointments during a period not exceeding 30 days, taking into consideration the current enforced Libyan legislation”. In spite of the presence of this article, the increase of the number in ruling structure with the decision-making mechanism is to ensure the survival of Haftar or at least makes getting rid of him not as easy as it was before the amendment.
3. Britain realized after the advent of Kobler, especially after submitting the amendments that Kobler will not be spared from the influential US pressures that will befall him during his work on the Sakhirat Agreement, and the prospect of removing its members who serve the interests of Europe is a possibility. Therefore, it instructed some of its loyalists in the conference and parliament to meet in Tunisia, and this resulted in reaching an agreement of principles. These negotiations were promoted as Libyan-Libyan negotiations even though they are externally motivated… The Middle East Online website mentioned on 06/12/2015: “Representatives of both parties of the Libyan crisis announced on Sunday to agree on a set of principles in the hope of converting that into a political agreement that will be approved by the two legitimate authorities in the East, which are internationally recognized, and the parallel one in Tripoli which is not internationally recognized,” which have been fighting for power and end the ongoing conflict in the oil-rich country … A number of members of the Conference and a number of members of the internationally recognized Parliamentary representatives met on Saturday 05/12/2015 in Tunisia, and during the meeting they “agreed on a declaration of principles and a national agreement to resolve the Libyan crisis.” Britain wanted from this meeting to be a new weapon in its possession, in case America was able to block the Sakhirat agreement, else it won’t resort to it.
4. However, Kobler was keen to complete the Sakhirat agreement, and he ignored the meeting in Tunisia, and this explains why Kobler cut off the Sakhirat meeting and went to meet Haftar. Al-Hayat Newspaper mentioned on 17/12/2015: “… Kobler went yesterday to the Libyan city Al Marj where the army headquarters is, and held talks with Haftar that dealt with, according to recent sources, persuading him to take on security arrangements relating to the agreement of Sakhirat. Haftar sources added that Kobler offered him a list of the members of the Committee that will emerge in the upcoming government and that will be in charge of restructuring the army. The sources quoted Haftar telling Kobler: “Our war on terrorism is ongoing and we are not involved in the political affairs.”
It seems that Kobler tried to give consolation to Haftar with his statement, as it has been reported on Al-Hura site on 17/12/2015: “Khalifa Haftar, the leader of the pro-government Libyan forces that is recognized internationally, said that the special envoy to Libya, Martin Kobler wants the support of the Libyan military to counter terrorism. Haftar said in a statement after meeting the international envoy, that the latter supports the lifting of the arms embargo. Kobler, from his side, confirmed that he had a “fruitful” dialogue with Haftar, and that they agreed on the need to confront terrorism and the presence of a strong Libyan army. Kobler called on the Libyan parties to sign the political agreement on Thursday.” With all these consolations it seems that America wants more! That is why America was absent from attending the signing of the agreement; however, its interests are not affected and remained immune, as it was reported in Arabic 21 on 06/01/2015: “…Both Vice-Presidents of the consensus government, Ali Al Qatrani and Fathi Al Majbari threatened to withdraw from the consensus government if Haftar does not remain at the head of the military establishment.”
However, in spite of these divisions and conflicts, delegates from the two competing governments signed on December 17, 2015, a peace deal sponsored by the UN, in Sakhirat-Morocco, but only 80 members of the 188 MPs in Tobruk’s parliament and 50 of the 136 competitive Members in Tripoli attended the signing of the agreement. The document was signed by Mohamad Shoaib, Vice President of the government in Tobruk and Salah Makhzoom, the second Deputy of the Tripoli government, which means that the amendments angered the followers of Europe, and was not enough to satisfy America’s followers… For this, the parties kept for themselves a return road that caused the split: One party went and the other party stayed pending a future conflict to go beyond a mere political action to the joint action between politicians and military intervention, because in practice the agreement was not complete from both parties, rather it was also not approved by the Heads of Parliament and the Conference, Aqeela Salih and Nouri Abu Sahmain, so they did not attend the signing ceremony…!
5. Britain was aware that the political center or most of it was on its side, so it was reassured that any interim government, according to Leon’s proposals, will be on its side, and so it was interested in accelerating the Sakhirat agreement and getting it approved in Leon’s era. When it could not, then Kobler was appointed, and the amendments were made, Britain realized that these amendments were because of the US pressure on Kobler, as a step of other US steps to thwart fully the agreement, so that it will be completely shaped by America again as it wishes. That came after forming a new political class as a result of military actions carried out by Haftar in conjunction with political conspiracies run by America. Britain therefore saw the urgency to conclude the agreement before other unprecedented events took place. So the agreement even with amendments remained acceptable, and so it rushed things, and was keen to hold the final agreement in Sakhirat, Morocco on 17/12/2015, and to make it legitimate and acceptable internationally, it resorted to the Security Council, and submitted the Draft Resolution 2259 to support the decisions of the final agreement.
What made Britain rush is the US moves to block the agreements: either directly through military intervention actions that it began to carry out under the pretext of the fight against ISIS and others, as well as political actions, such as holding the Rome conference on 13/12/2015 to make the negotiations start again, ignoring all achieved agreements. Or indirectly through its agent Haftar, in order to postpone the solution as long as possible to enable America to form a new political center of its followers, and then begins a political solution which will be conducted by the majority of its men. The former adviser to the President of the Libyan Council of Representatives, Issa Abdul Qayoom pointed to this on 13/12/2015 on Al Ghad Al Arabi TV when he said: “… Kerry’s statements, the American Secretary of State, made it clear that the Americans do not have enough enthusiasm to resolve the crisis, unlike the British and the French, who expressed enthusiasm for it…”.
Based on this, Britain’s ambassador to the United Nations, Matthew Rycroft, introduced the decision to the 15 members of the Security Council to approve the new government, where he said that the new government “is a strong collective sign of our commitment to the sovereignty of Libya, territorial security and national unity, and this is just the beginning to a prosperous and stable future for all Libyans. We urge all those who did not sign yet to decide now to support the agreement and to work with the government of national consensus.” (Al-Jazeera, 24/12/2015).
America was forced to approve the agreement in submissiveness of the public opinion, which demanded the agreement although it sought to obstruct it through Haftar. It also undertook political work such as holding the Rome meeting on 13/12/2015 to shuffle the cards… but the decision has been submitted to the Security Council so America was not able to find any justification to block the issuance of this resolution, because it recognizes previous international resolutions issued on Libya.
On the surface, the US agrees with a political solution, an agreement, and the formation of a government that it desires… so it approved it, and the spokesman of the then-Spokesperson for the Department of State John Kirby said about the agreement: “It provides a framework for the formation of a unified Libyan government of national consensus”… The US State Department also said that Washington is committed to providing a unified government with “full political support, technical, economic and security assistance, and counter-terrorism.” However, that does not mean that it is satisfied and will stay quiet, but it will get up, move and fight even if need-be directly, because it is a colonial state that has always sought to extend its influence and impose its colonization whilst expulsing the influence of other competing countries. Therefore, even though the final agreement and the resolution of the Security Council has been finalized, Haftar’s forces on 24/12/2015 attacked areas under the pretext of the existence of ISIS there, and his troops still take advantage of every suitable chance to continue the attacks. America began to intervene in Libya militarily directly without the issuance of the Security Council resolution authorizing the military intervention, after Britain blocked its release, and that is under the pretext of fighting against ISIS, and this looks like its intervention in Syria through this excuse without a UN resolution… Thus, the motivation that drove both parties to agree are disparate.
6. Kobler seemed to be stumbling in his work because he is compelled to satisfy both parties, so he brought a semi agreement between them, unlike how Leon was acting through a clear European vision. Kobler stumbled especially when he amended the Sakhirat proposals prepared by Leon, which made Europe uncomfortable and unsatisfied with him, and this was reflected on the group of the Tripoli Conference, which insulted Kobler when he wanted to hold a press conference in Tripoli. The Libyan news agency of the Government of Tobruk said that Jamal Zoaibah, Head of the Foreign Media Authority in the Tripoli government, has boycotted a press conference convened by the UN envoy to Libya Martin Kobler on the evening of 01/01/2016 and has asked him to leave the country immediately, saying that he was “unwanted”. His argument was that the press conference was held without his permission, being the Head of the Foreign Media Authority. Kobler left angrily with his entourage from the conference hall and went straight to the airport, boarded his private plane and left the country … In addition, there is a lack of satisfaction with him from the group of Tobruk because of Kobler’s keenness on the implementation of the agreement on time and they wanted him to delay. The political adviser of the House of Representatives in Tobruk, Ahmed Abboud has criticized Kobler’s actions, where he said: “The attempts by Kobler to convince the Libyan parties of the government of national consensus in a specific timeframe are unrealistic and illogical…” (Al-Ghad TV on 06/01/2016). Thus, the international envoy became under more pressure instead of being the one to impose pressure! This is because Europe wants the agreement to be according to its wishes as the political medium is mostly of its followers, and America wants to postpone any effective solution to be able to create a political medium of its followers that can stand in the face of the European political center if it is unable to defeat it, and all this of course leads to the stumbling of Kobler.
7. The United States and Europe are aware of this, and therefore plan for military intervention to find solutions that are suitable with the reality that they create on the ground. The American intervention is clear. Digital Tunisia published on 8/1/2016: “The US military command in Africa revealed its intention to officially intervene militarily in Libya, according to the five-year action plan it announced, which aims to tighten the noose on terrorist groups in Africa, particularly in Libya. This came during a meeting between General David Rodriguez, who is at the head of this leadership, and General Commander in Chief of the US Marines, Joseph Francis Dunford. This action plan is based on the strategy that was adopted during the year 2015 by Gen. David M. Rodriguez, the commander of AFRICOM on five key special objectives of lifting the security challenges off the African continent…” The declared pretext at the top of the list of priorities for the US military in Libya is to fight ISIS under the name of the fight against terrorism, as a usual cause given recently for the US military intervention, while its purpose is a political colonial action, bigger than the issue of terrorism. Therefore, it plans for intervention, but America has actually sent its troops to Libya; as it was reported on BBC Arabic on 18/12/2015: “Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza, spokeswoman for the Pentagon explained that “on the fourteenth of December, a group of US military personnel arrived in Libya to strengthen relations and communication with officials of the Libyan army.” She added that, “members of a Libyan militia demanded the US military to leave the country immediately, and in order to avoid any clashes, the military left the country, without causing any incidents…”. It is clear that sending the troops was three days away from signing the agreement in Sakhirat on 17/12/2015! The meaning of this is that America is working on derailing the political process or hindering its implementation until it has political control or become able to impose its military agents like Haftar to become the decision maker if it was able to. In this case, the As-Siraj government will not be effective, even if it was formed, will not be able control things, and America will exercise its military actions alongside Haftar’s attacks in order to dominate and control the Libyan ground and gain more agents to find a strong political center.
As for Europe’s intervention, it became clear through their statements… Al Wafd published on 23/12/2015: “Le Figaro, the French newspaper, confirmed that containing the terrorist group ISIS in the Libyan territory has become a matter of urgency for France, which is preparing to form an international coalition to intervene in Libya…” The newspaper pointed out that in light of these threats, France has supported the efforts of the private envoy to the Secretary-General of the United Nations in Libya, Martin Kobler, and the paper pointed out another hypothesis that should not be excluded. According to sources in the Defense Ministry, the political agreement stalled between the Libyans and that in this case France will continue its efforts to form a military coalition. The newspaper pointed out the intensive diplomatic efforts by Italy in the recent months to push the Libyan negotiations and it expressed its willingness to send troops and special forces to Libya, as well as allowing the use of its military bases in any military action targeting the terrorist organization there…
Africa Gateway has quoted on 12/01/2016, from the British (Socialist Worker) site, that: “The Conservative government sent 1000 British troops to Libya to defend the oil fields, which are threatened with the progress of the ISIS forces. Also a naval destroyer ship from the British Royal Navy headed towards the coasts of North Africa; meanwhile, it was request from the Air Force to prepare for air strikes against targets in Libya.” The British Daily Telegraph on 12/12/2015 published a report based on the sources from the Ministries of Defense and Foreign Affairs about the “British preparations in cooperation with the European allies for military intervention in Libya to face the increased risk of terrorist groups, and that military intervention could start by sending military support and equipment to Libya but it is anticipating a government of national and comprehensive unity in the country.” News media reported on 12/12/2015 the words of the British ambassador in Libya Peter Millet: “that his country is ready for military intervention in Libya to counter terrorism as soon as the request from the expected Libyan national consensus government comes,” meaning that Europe wants to form a Libyan government that will request from them military assistance and intervention. The French aviation carried out in the past months’ exploratory maneuvers over Libya. Britain and France do not want America to intervene militarily to their exclusion, as that means leaving the arena for America, and therefore the two countries began to intervene to counter the US intervention all under the pretext of the fight against ISIS and terrorism, and another excuse will be added, namely to meet the legitimate national government’s requests! All this is a fraction of the truth, but the fact is that they are grand colonial countries fighting for our country and its resources and wealth…
8. Accordingly, it can be said that this government will not be effective, because the balance of forces that were behind the Sakhirat agreement and then behind the difficult birth of this government, these scales are not conclusive in favor of one party, and therefore this government will remain concerned, and may not go beyond being a third government walking in the footsteps of the Tobruk Government and Tripoli Government, even if those governments were formally canceled, and those who run them remain behind the scenes… The description of the Sakhirat agreement and its government is close to what Claudia Jezzini from the International Crisis Group have commented on the Sakhirat agreement and the government
that has emerged from it: “On paper, this is fantastic news. But from a practical point of view, the level of awaited support to the expected agreement in Libya is uncertain, and the fact that the leadership of both the existing parliaments oppose it, and are very busy in the development of their own peace plan, and the fact that the new government will have little control over key parts of the country, all of this makes many people skeptical of its effectiveness.” (http://blog.crisisgroup.org 18/12/2015).”
As for the reasons for the failure of such agreements and governments in Libya, there are two reasons. First, that the motives of the parties which manage the conflict are disparate, each is working for its own interest, and these parties are clear for all to see, it is America from one side and Europe on the other, particularly Britain, and to a lesser extent France and Italy… These two parties, America and Europe, are in conflict with each other within their own colonial interests… The second reason: The solution for the Libyan crisis is not managed by the hands of its people, instead it is according to the Sakhirat agreement which is managed by the hands of the Kaffir colonists, though it should be handled by the hands of the people of Libya, as they are Muslims, and the solution in Islam is clear to all crisis and every problem, and this solution is realized by the aware sincere ones,
إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَذِكْرَى لِمَنْ كَانَ لَهُ قَلْبٌ أَوْ أَلْقَى السَّمْعَ وَهُوَ شَهِيدٌ
“Indeed in that is a reminder for whoever has a heart or who listens while he is present [in mind]”
(Qaf: 37)
These are the two reasons that are bound to cause the failure of the Sakhirat agreement and its government to create stability, security and safety in Libya and it is expected that this new government will be closer to activating the military intervention instead of keeping away its danger, and then the members of this government will be extremely remorseful.
It is heart-breaking that the Muslim countries have become a field of political conspiracies and military actions which result in more Muslim blood being shed… and the most painful is that among Muslims we find those who see the solution in seeking assistance from the Kaffir colonists in resolving the crises of the Islamic countries, and forget or intend to forget that the Kaffir is the one who plots against Islam and the Muslims.
لَا يَرْقُبُونَ فِي مُؤْمِنٍ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً وَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْمُعْتَدُونَ
“They do not observe toward a believer any pact of kinship or covenant of protection. And it is they who are the transgressors.”
(At-Tawba: 10)
However, we know that there is no shortage of goodness in the people of Libya, a country full of the Holy Quran memorizers, where there are truthful sincere men who are able, by the permission of Allah, to abort all the projects of those hostile to Islam and its people, and Allah سبحانه وتعالى is Mighty and Strong, He سبحانه وتعالى grants support to those who support Him.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللَّهَ يَنْصُرْكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتْ أَقْدَامَكُمْ * وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَتَعْسًا لَهُمْ وَأَضَلَّ أَعْمَالَهُم
“O you who have believed, if you support Allah, He will support you and plant firmly your feet * But those who disbelieve – for them is misery, and He will waste their deeds.”
(Muhammad: 7-8)
9 Rabii’ II 1437 AH
19/01/2016 CE
Source: khilafah.com