Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Leonid Tsukanov
[REGNUM] A delegation of EU ministers led by European Commissioner for Migration Magnus Brunner recently arrived at Libya's Benghazi airport to discuss the fight against illegal migration with local officials.
However, upon arrival, the European guests were suddenly declared persona non grata and banned from entering.
Moreover, this was done not by the central government in Tripoli, but by the “alternative cabinet” that controls the east of the country.
| The central government in Tripoli controls about the central business district in Tripoli, as I recall — we haven’t been playing close attention to them as not much has been happening there. |
The diplomatic row seems to herald a quick end to Brussels' balancing act between the two centers of power in Libya. However, Europe is in no hurry to make the first move, rightly fearing that it will only make things worse.
TWO HEADS
Dual power in Libya is not a new phenomenon. After the overthrow of the country's leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, the country plunged into a protracted civil war from which it has not been able to emerge to this day.
By the mid-2010s, two centers of power had emerged in Libya.
One is in the capital Tripoli, which claims to be legitimate and enjoys the support of the UN, Turkey and a number of Western countries. It is led by Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah.
The other is in Tobruk, in the east of the country, challenging the legitimacy of Tripoli and relying on the support of some of its European neighbors (such as Italy and Spain) and Egypt. Its face is the commander of the local armed forces, Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar
...Self-proclaimed Field Marshal, served in the Libyan army under Muammar Qadaffy, and took part in the coup that brought Qadaffy to power in 1969. He became a prisoner of war in Chad in 1987. While held prisoner, he and his fellow officers formed a group hoping to overthrow Qadaffy, so it's kind of hard to describe him as a Qadaffy holdover. He was released around 1990 in a deal with the United States government and spent nearly two decades in the United States, gaining US citizenship. In 1993, while living in the United States, he was convicted in absentia of crimes against the Jamahiriya and sentenced to death. Haftar held a senior position in the anti-Qadaffy forces in the 2011 Libyan Civil War. In 2014 he was commander of the Libyan Army when the General National Congress (GNC) refused to give up power in accordance with its term of office. Haftar launched a campaign against the GNC and its Islamic fundamentalist allies. His campaign allowed elections to take place to replace the GNC, but then developed into a civil war. Guess you can't win them all. Actually, he is, but slowly...
The governments of Tripoli and Tobruk exist side by side, periodically engaging in armed clashes. At the same time, they appoint their ministers and conclude international agreements on the development of mineral resources and the delimitation of territorial waters (often mutually exclusive or contradictory).
The attempts of the world community to weld the East and West into a single “transitional cabinet” have led to nothing – their views on the future of the country are too different.
However, the European Union, as one of Libya's major neighbours, has to find ways to coexist with the divided country, responding to the threats it poses as best it can.
A SORE POINT
Thousands of residents of Africa and the Middle East flee to the Old World through the “Libyan corridor” every year, hoping to receive refugee status in the EU or at least move to safer places.
Many of them die along the way, especially off the coast of Italy and Greece, where the currents are too strong. In the last six months alone, at least 700 cases of illegal migrants dying on the water have been recorded, about 60% of them in Italian territorial waters.
Rome and Brussels, still suffering from the consequences of the previous migration crisis of 2015, are trying to combat the influx of migrants, cut off illegal routes and centrally send captured illegal immigrants back to their historical homeland.
But they cannot defeat the attack without help from the other side, that is, from Libya. High-ranking European officials have to go there every now and then for consultations. Moreover, they have to interact with both Tripoli and Tobruk at the same time - observing the same politeness.
Eurosceptics, while seeing this behavior as “undermining the legitimacy” of the UN-endorsed government, turn a blind eye to the situation: Haftar’s forces control about 40% of Libya’s coastal area.
Some of the settlements in the east (for example, the village of Kurat Makrun near Benghazi) have repeatedly appeared in the testimonies of surviving illegals. And the timely closure of these channels would help strengthen trust in the alternative government and its leaders.
However, contrary to expectations, Europe's recent attempts to coordinate with Tobruk have ended in a major diplomatic scandal.
GOT CAUGHT IN THE CROSSFIRE
As soon as the European officials led by Brunner arrived in Benghazi, they were immediately accused of "disregarding the sovereignty" of Libya and violating entry rules. On behalf of Haftar, the delegates were protested and informed of the need to immediately leave the country without the right to return.
The scandal is made even more acute by the fact that among the expelled European officials were representatives of countries with which the alternative government had fairly warm relations.
For example, Matteo Piantedosi, head of the Italian Interior Ministry, was sanctioned. During the period of the most intense rivalry between Tripoli and Tobruk, he (then still the head of the Interior Minister's administration) participated in the development of a number of peacekeeping initiatives. For example, in the involvement of Libyan tribal militias to stabilize the domestic political situation, prevent smuggling and illegal migration.
The "border initiative" of Piantedosi and his colleagues played into the hands of not only Tripoli, but also Tobruk, since the work of the border detachments, recruited from the Tubu and Tuaregs, was financed from the European pocket and excluded rebellion in the rear.
Greece was also a tactical ally of the Eastern forces for some time, trying to annoy Turkey with the help of Tobruk. Its Minister of the Interior was also labeled non grata, which enraged Athens. The country's authorities declared that they would not tolerate diplomatic manipulation and would demand explanations from the East.
THE ROOT OF THE SCANDAL
Probably the reason for such a cold reception of yesterday's friends lies in the decision of European officials to upset the established balance and hold consultations first in Tripoli, and only then with Tobruk.
Until now, EU delegates had always started negotiations with “non-state actors” in order to take their position into account in subsequent contacts with opponents and find a compromise.
Moreover, this time Tripoli clearly violated the status quo: Prime Minister Dbeibah announced the development of new mechanisms for regulating migration in Libya, which, among other things, would expand the powers of the Libyan coast guard and allow it to operate even in those waters that were formally controlled by the east.
Until recently, this approach seemed advantageous to the EU, as it would allow interaction with the Libyan coastguard on a one-stop-shop basis, via Tripoli, and would also take the burden off Tobruk.
Moreover, officials in the east regularly complained to Brussels about the lack of personnel and resources for continuous monitoring of the coast.
However, from Tobruk’s point of view, Dbeibah’s initiative created a threat of constant provocations from Tripoli for the alternative Libyan government, including attempts to accuse Haftar’s supporters of organizing “migrant routes” to the Old World.
Both Brussels and Tripoli are now somewhat confused by what happened in Benghazi. However, this is more likely the calm before the storm.
European sceptics are calling on EU leaders to cut ties with the alternative leadership and focus on interaction with Tripoli, including in the hope that Haftar, deprived of external support, will quickly back down.
On the other hand, such tactics are fraught with a new round of armed struggle between the east and west of Libya - and an attempt by Tobruk to gain legitimacy by force. Especially since one of the conditions for ending the previous clashes was precisely the obligation of external forces to communicate not only with Tripoli.
Moreover, the east of the country is well aware of the effectiveness of the “migration bogeyman” and in response to increased pressure they may open their coastline to “caravans to Europe.” Or at least create such a conviction in their opponents.
Greece was the first to come under attack, being the one most outraged by the diplomatic scandal: the very next day after the incident in Benghazi, local media began writing about blackmail by the Haftar government. Allegedly, Tobruk demanded several billion dollars from Athens, threatening to “flood” the country with illegals in case of refusal.
And although the claims of blackmail may turn out to be rumors sponsored by Haftar's opponents, Europe took this as a signal and is in no hurry to sever ties with eastern Libya.
|
...established in the early 1990s through an agreement between portions of Uganda’s Salaf Tabliq Islamic sect and the National Army for the Liberation of Uganda (NALU), who said they had been sidelined by Museveni’s policies. At the time, the rebels staged deadly attacks in Ugandan villages and the capital, including a 1998 attack in which 80 students were massacred. A Ugandan military operation later forced the ADF into eastern Congo. The ADF has since established ties with the Islamic State group. The ADF has received funding from the Government of Sudan, which has also provided supplies and training. The ADF may also have received funding from the illegal mining and logging industries of the DRC....
...a Moslem country located in the Horn of Africa. It is noted for its affinity for rule by ex- or current generals, its holy men, and for the oppression of the native Afro population by its Arab conquerors. South Sudan, populated mostly by the natives, split off from Sudan proper, which left North and South Darfur to be oppressed by the guys with turbans...