Libya's latest bout of violence highlights the urgent need for intervention

The UN desperately needs to step into the feuding space, and states with a vested interest in Libya's stability, from Europe to the Middle East and Africa, must back these efforts

Libya's latest bout of violence highlights the urgent need for intervention

Libya’s national crisis—steadily deteriorating since the end of the 2020 civil war—recently slipped once again to new depths of division, danger, and depravity as war briefly returned to its capital. But while everyone remained shocked by the brief explosion of violence, the bigger war waged on.

If the UN doesn’t step in to take control of Libya’s political transition from these warring parties, then we should be assured that Libya’s politics will turn violent again soon, and we should be worried about what that means for regional stability—from the Mediterranean to the Sahel. But in an environment where every UN move is met with escalation from Libya’s conflicting parties, they will need broader international support to have any stabilising effect.

As the old cliché reminds us, war is simply politics by other means, and few cases illustrate this truism as clearly as Libya. For years now, a showdown for absolute power between Libya's two de facto rulers has been in play. The Dbeibeh family, who run the civilian Government of National Unity from the capital Tripoli, and the Haftar family, who run the rival government from Libya’s eastern capital Benghazi.

Sure, there are other bit-part players and other influences on Libya’s tragedy over the past five years. But this central driver and its associated dangers have often been misinterpreted as a helpful vehicle for neo-colonialism by outside actors who see considerable profit through exploiting the lawlessness and division. Or, patronisingly underappreciated as a status quo that is “Libya good enough”, which can eventually be resolved by some good old-fashioned mediation over dividing Libya’s wealth.

Stark reminder

But the suddenness of the recent violence and its remarkable potential for rapid and exponential escalation should serve as a reminder of why those misreadings are so dangerous, especially as diplomats slip back into familiar roles and violent skirmishes are replaced by political games.

In short, the violence began as Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibeh, who has been losing influence and—perhaps more crucially—control over Libya’s finances for over a year now, feared that his enemies would move to replace him as prime minister and so sought to consolidate power in Tripoli. This meant displacing militias he had once relied upon to secure his government, and who had extorted him in the process to massively increase their own wealth and power. Now, he feared they could act as a fifth column to replace him with a rival who would essentially be appointed by Haftar.

So, relying upon the Turkish-trained and equipped 444th battalion of the Ministry of Defence, and units from his home city of Misrata, he put on his Michael Corleone hat. (reference to The Godfather movie) Abdulghani al-Kikli (known as Ghneiwa)—Tripoli’s most prominent militia leader—was invited to a meeting only to be summarily executed. In the aftermath, the 444 quickly moved to secure Ghneiwa’s former bases.

The suddenness of the recent violence should serve as a reminder of why misreadings are so dangerous

But the next day, Dbeibeh overstepped. He announced the dismissal of armed groups not under his control and the appropriation of their bases, but unlike Michael Corleone, he only assassinated one of his enemies. So, as the 444 moved through the rest of Tripoli executing that order, other groups, namely the Salafist Special Deterrence Force (SDF) controlling Tripoli's Meitiga airport, fought back, drawing in other anti-Dbeibeh groups from western Libya. It was a chaotic night of large-scale violence as make-shift drones and heavy weapons headlined a series of skirmishes across every neighbourhood of the capital.

The next day, shocked over the scale of the fighting and how quickly it threatened to spread along western Libya's dividing lines and central Libya's ceasefire line with Haftar, neutral units within Libya's Ministry of Defence orchestrated a shaky truce. Meanwhile, President Mohamed al-Menfi stepped in to rescind Dbeibeh's executive orders. Tripolitanians, blasted out of their nihilism by the night's fighting, poured into the streets demanding that Dbeibeh and the entire political elite, whom they blame for bringing them nothing but destitution, collectively leave office.

Back to the familiar

As the fighting dissipated, it returned to more familiar political battlegrounds. Dbeibeh's political rivals, Ghneiwa's acolytes, and the militias he had declared war on contrived to co-opt this new movement for their old goal of appointing a puppet prime minister.

Protestors were bussed in to make a more emphatic display demanding Dbeibeh's resignation. At the same time, armed militiamen waited for nightfall before attacking police and trying to ransack the prime minister's offices, while others blocked roads with burning tyres. Then, two ministers, representing SDF interests, resigned from Dbeibeh's government. This was all designed to create the overwhelming impression that Dbeibeh's position was untenable, to encourage international players to back calls for his resignation.

But Dbeibeh's enemies also overstepped. The violent attacks on police during otherwise peaceful protests and blocked roads while people tried to return to normality only made them look bad. Meanwhile, Dbeibeh was able to actually look good to visiting diplomats despite what he had just been responsible for, as he could claim to allow protest while his opponents ban them and even torture or murder MPs for challenging them.

Then, Libya's notoriously unpopular parliamentary speaker, Aguila Saleh Issa, unilaterally launched a process to appoint a new prime minister, claiming the protests showed Libyans had rejected Dbeibeh. However, he typically could only pull a handful of MPs into attending, and his process was legally and logically incoherent, requiring more MPs than even existed to adequately function. Moreover, the irony of Saleh's criticism of Dbeibeh not responding to protests from his makeshift parliamentary headquarters in Benghazi after his initial building in Tobruk was burned down by protestors three years ago was not lost on observers.  

It is clear that if left untended, this political fight will return to war as Saleh illegally appoints a new prime minister to displace Dbeibeh, who will be given the justification to dig in by the brazenness of the gambit.

A conflict on autopilot

The conflict has been nearly the same since 2020. Even deals supposed to lead to unity, like the 2022 oil deal or last year's central bank deal, were expensive sacrifices, using Libya's wealth and the pillars of its economy to buy temporary peace like throwing Kobe beef steaks to stop two stray dogs from fighting.

While everyone remained shocked by the brief explosion of violence, the bigger war waged on

Libyan protestors have repeatedly made clear the popular position: The system is rotten, and all the leaders from Haftar, through Saleh to Dbeibeh, are considered corrupt.

Following the 2020 war, it was the UN that promised to guide Libya to political change, alongside the group of countries that took part in the Berlin process designed to secure a ceasefire. But since then, all those parties have been derelict in their duty.

The case for intervention

Today, the UN desperately needs to step into the feuding space and validate the protestors' position before it is fully corrupted by using the moment to restart an independent process towards political change. But that's easier said than done. After all, it can be argued that the recent round of escalation was an attempt to pre-empt the UN's advisory committee from announcing its findings on what a new political process should look like. It involved a stepping up of efforts to replace Dbeibeh, a leaked video of Ibrahim al-Dersi, an MP, imprisoned by Haftar in inhumane conditions to discredit and undermine his rule by showing its reality, and this round of violence, which, if successful, would have made Dbeibeh immovable and likely pre-empted a new round of deal-making with the Haftars.      

This shows that the UN will not be able to suggest—let alone lead—a different path forward without concerted international support. States with a vested interest in Libya's stability, from Europe to the Middle East and Africa, must push the UN to lead and then protect it to do so.

This involves threatening all its illegitimate leaders with sanctions and travel bans if they try to spoil the process. Using the ICC to rein in the brutal criminality of armed groups. And using influence on international financial channels to put controls on central bank spending, and oil sales, to stop Libya's illegitimate leadership from continuing to cannibalise their country.

Diplomats have often shied away from such strong measures, claiming an unwillingness to violate Libya's sovereignty. But if the last few weeks have shown anything, it's that Libya is not sovereign. Libya's government doesn't control its capital, its parliament cannot make quorum or protect its MPs, the people hate all of the political bodies, and no state group can control Libyan territory or even its borders.

In fact, by intervening in this way, the international community would be protecting the last vestiges of Libyan sovereignty and the stability of their region. But they don't have much time left to do so, before the Libyan parties take matters into their own hands, and we go back to the volatile, unpredictable and uncontrollable world of war.

font change