Tripoli government in Libya attempts to fire its own prime minister

The General National Council(GNC) members of the Tripoli-based Libyan government voted to dismiss its prime minister Omar al-Hassi. Al-Hassi has rejected the decision.

+ Add Image

The Tripoli government, that controls much of western Libya, is a rival to the internationally-recognized government based in the eastern city of Tobruk, with its prime minister being Abdullah al-Thinni. Both governments are backed by their own military forces with the Tobruk government's forces being led by CIA-linked General Khalifa Haftar, who failed in a coup attempt he started in February 2014. He started his Operation Dignity in May last year attacking Islamist bases in Benghazi and also burning the Libyan parliament in Tripoli. At the time the now prime minister of the Tobruk government was prime minister of the interim government attacked by Haftar. Now the same Al-Thinni appointed Haftar as commander of his armed forces. The Tripoli government is supported by an umbrella group of militias called Libya Dawn.

The GNC administration claimed the move was made due to requests from administration officials and also allegations by an auditor that were not specified. Another report, claims that he was fired for failing to tackle corruption. Al-Hassi said he was surprised by the announcement and said that the GNC did not act within the constitution in firing him. Hassi said that he would consult with jurists and also with the armed militias who support the Tripoli government to determine if they support his being fired. Hassi said that: “I will comply with this decision if my revolutionary partners agree."

A New York Times article gives more details on the reasons why Hassi was sacked and it also portrays Hassi as a thorn in the side of the UN negotiators. The New York Times is frequently a mouthpiece for White House views and propaganda but no doubt the article shows the pressure that has been put on the Tripoli authorities to compromise to reach a deal. There is nothing evident in public about any similar pressure for the Tobruk government to get rid of Haftar. According to the Times article, 14 of Hassi's ministers had demanded he be fired. Government officials claimed that Hassi had reported more government revenue than it actually had and failed to meet the government payroll. But there were external factors involved.

The article goes on to claim that western diplomats working to help resolve the Libyan conflict regarded Hassi as preventing compromises in the interests of peace. The diplomats, anonymous of course, also claim that Hassi's name was on list of those who could be targeted by international sanctions for blocking the peace progress. The article does not suggest that perhaps General Khalifa Haftar, commander of the Libyan armed forces of the Tobruk government, is on that list. Haftar started the whole conflict to a considerable extent when, as mentioned earlier, he launched what the then government called a coup attempt in February of 2014. Later in May he attacked two Islamist bases in Benghazi and burned down the parliament as he began what he calls Operation Dignity, designed to purify Libya of Islamists. He convinced the UAE and Egypt to bomb Tripoli on his behalf a number of times. During recent peace talks he bombed Tripoli before one set of talks and then bombed the one remaining Tripoli airport again when the talks were to resume causing the Tripoli representatives to be late. When the talks began he began an offensive against Tripoli with the blessing ot the Al Thinni government. Haftar has condemned the peace dialogue as talks with terrorists. As shown in the appended video the Tobruk government wants a UN arms embargo lifted to deal with the threat of the Islamic State. However, while Tripoli withdrew from attacking the eastern oil fields, Haftar allies mounted an attack on Tripoli , while Tripoli forces are busy fighting the Islamic State in Sirte. Yet it is Al-Hassi who is on the UN sanctions list. Haftar will use any arms he receives not just to attack the Islamic State but the rival Tripoli government. No doubt now that Egypt's el-Sisi will receive $1.3 billion from the US in suspended military aid, as Obama just announced, Egypt can help Haftar out as well.

CIA-linked General Haftar seizes Benghazi branch of Libyan Central Bank

The UN yesterday condemned an attack on the office of the Libyan Central Bank in the city of Benghazi in the east of Libya. The attack appears to have been carried out by forces loyal to CIA-linked general Khalifa Haftar. The Libyan central bank has attempted to remain neutral in the conflict between militias and two rival government. The internationally recognized government is in Tobruk, led by Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni. The rival government that controls much of the western part of Libya is in the capital Tripoli and led by Prime Minister Omar al-Hasi appointed by the General National Council. The neutral role of the bank is crucial in maintaining whatever unity is left in the country: "It has continued to pay for fuel and food subsidies as well as the salaries of bureaucrats, doctors, teachers, local officials and millions of other public employees — often regardless of whether they showed up for work. By financing the budgets of the Interior and Defense Ministries, the same bank has even provided salaries and supplies for thousands of fighters battling one another from all sides of the struggle. But its continued distribution of paychecks and subsidies has helped communities and families across the country stay afloat despite the collapse of most other economic activity, even maintaining a semblance of order." Up until now both the headquarters in Tripoli and the branch in Benghazi have been under the control of the Tripoli government.

Benghazi was until recently controlled by the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries that includes the radical group Ansar al-Sharia. The leader of that group recently died of wounds incurred in battling against CIA-linked Khalifa Haftar's militia. Haftar's forces are responsible for the attack on the bank. A New York Times article put the challenge to the bank in frank terms:" Its most direct challenge has come from the Tobruk-Bayda government. It includes a recently elected Parliament, but it is under the de facto control of Gen. Khalifa Hifter, who defected from Colonel Qaddafi’s military and last year announced a military takeover pledging to rid the country of violent extremists."

The chairman of the National Bank, Sadik el-Kaber, a veteran banker has pleaded with both sides to respect the neutrality of the bank, but the Tobruk government has sought to replace him ever since last October so that they would be able to control the assets. El-Kaber has kept the bank's assets in Tripoli and has refused to resign. In spite of the fact that the Tobruk government is the recognized government El-Kaber still appears to have the support of at least some western governments including the US and the UK. Last month he flew to Washington where he met with US and UK diplomats and officials from the White House and Treasury Dept.The Tobruk-appointed manager also visited this month but was not accorded the same status according to a New York Times article.

The storming of the Benghazi bank has already resulted in the withdrawal of the Tripoli government from a second round of talks that should take place soon. While neither the government at Tripoli nor the main militia, Libya Dawn, took part in the first round, the militia had announced a ceasefire, and the government had agreed to attend the second round of talks if they were held in Libya and not Switzerland. A spokesperson for General Haftar, Mohamed Hejazi, confirmed that they had taken control of the bank and also now control of 80 percent of the Benghazi seaport. He refers to Haftar's forces as "the national army of Libya" and his opponents in Benghazi "terrorists". Benghazi had been ruled by the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries but Haftar launched an offensive to retake the city some time ago.

After the meetings in Geneva, the main Tripoli militia announced a cease fire. A couple of days later, the Tobruk government also announced a ceasefire. However, there was a caveat to the effect that terrorists would still be pursued. There has been no let up in the attacks by Haftar in Benghazi since he considers his opponents terrorists. However, Haftar considers all his Islamist opponents terrorists. Haftar appears to be using the ceasefire as an opportunity to concentrate on taking control of Benghazi while not having to worry about a battle on other fronts. It remains to be seen if Libya Dawn will allow him to continue in this manner. In any event, it would seem that Haftar has managed not only to sabotage planned peace talks but also to threaten to destroy a key remaining Libyan institution that has kept Libya running through all the conflict. Since the main branch is in Tripoli, his action may cause the Tripoli government to cease control there.

Egypt and no doubt many western countries support Haftar and his campaign against Islamists, but perhaps there may be considerable doubts about the wisdom of his actions. Haftar through his Operation Dignity and his earlier ineffective attempt to dissolve the General National Council last year was in large part responsible for the present conflict. Operation Dignity was launched in May of last year with an attack on two Islamist militia bases in Benghazi and then an attack on the parliament which was ransacked and burned. Below is a video about the start of Operation Dignity: The present prime minister of the Tobruk government, Abdullah al-Thinni was then prime minister of the GNC government. He declared Haftar's action illegal and a coup attempt. Now the same Abdullah Al-Thinni is prime minister of the Tobruk government. On November 6, last year the Libyan Supreme Court ruled that the elections in June of last year were unconstitutional and that the Tobruk House of Representatives should be dissolved. Al-Thinni and the Tobruk government rejected the ruling. The international community has studiously ignored it. This is one more key Libyan institution simply ignored by the Tobruk government.

Al Thinni applauded the court when it decided that a rival prime minister appointed by the GNC by Islamists was ruled not to have been duly appointed leaving al-Thinni as the caretaker prime minister. The Islamist-supported candidate in that case accepted the ruling.

A commander of Haftar's forces, Col. Farraj al-Barasi. told Reuters that the forces were forming a committee to decide what to do with the money from the bank: “We’ve moved out the technical equipment.The cash is still in the safes.” This strikes me as bizarre. What government would allow their armed forces to make such a decision. Yet the Tobruk government expresses full confidence in Haftar: "The commander of the Libyan National Army, Gen. Khalifa Haftar, is operating on the authority of the internationally recognized Libyan government based out of Tobruk, Libyan authorities confirmed this week. " If that is true, then the UN and the international community should be taking action against that government. Not only are they sabotaging a cease fire but they are also sabotaging peace talks, and exacerbating the situation by seizing the assets of the Libyan Central Bank whose neutrality has been crucial to what unity and stability still exists in Libya.

While the UN has threatened sanctions against any party that blocks the transition to democracy in Libya it is unlikely any action will be taken against the Tobruk government or Haftar. Haftar is the champion of the fight against terrorism as is his mentor next door in Egypt, Prime Minister el-Sisi. Rather than being subject to sanctions he is likely to receive even more support. This is a recipe for more civil war not peace.

Fires being contained in oil tanks at Libya's largest export port

There have been fires at Es Sider the main oil export terminal for a week now. The fires have reportedly destroyed four days of Libya's oil production.

Conflict continues between forces of the internationally-recognized Tobruk government under prime minister Al-Thinni with the militias loyal to the Tripoli government whose prime minister is Omar al-Hassi. A fire was started when a rocket hit a storage tank at Es Sider last week during an attempt by the Tripoli forces to take the port. Each side blames the other for the rocket strike. Seven tanks are damaged and up to 1.8 million barrels of oil have been destroyed. The conflict has shut down the two ports of Es Sider and Ras Lanauf, the two largest export ports in Libya. Oil output in Libya has declined to around 380,000 barrels a day, about one fifth production levels before Gadaffi was overthrown. 

Last Monday, Business Insider reported production at the far eastern port of Hariga at just 128,000 barrels a day as the two main ports remained closed. The price of Brent crude rose briefly but there remains an oversupply putting more downward pressure on prices. The Central Bank has tried to stay out of the conflict between rival governments but neither of the two rival parliaments has agreed on a new budget. Of the seven oil tanks that were ablaze at one time, only two remain burning according to Mohamed El Harari of the NOC the state oil corporation. The Tobruk government contracted with a US company to help fight the fires. Government spokesperson Mohamed Bazaza said that the value of the contract was $6 million. The name of the company was not given. More recently Ali al-Hassi, a military spokesperson for the Tobruk government forces at Es Sider, said the US firefighters might not be needed any more. Two tanks have completely collapsed and cost to rebuild the tanks runs at around $105 million. The Es Sider terminal is run by Marathon, Hess, and ConocoPhilips in a partnership with a Libyan state-owned firm.

 UN-sponsored peace talks are scheduled for January 6 somewhere outside of LIbya. However, continued violence between government and anti-government forces may make any meaningful dialogue unlikely. The UN has recently condemned a terrorist attack on the hotel in Tobruk where the internationally-recognized Al-Thinni government meets. A suicide bomber detonated a car outside the hotel wounding at least 11. A United Nations Support Mission(UNSMIL) in Libya statement said: “This despicable act will only increase the determination of those Libyans seeking a political solution to forge ahead with their efforts to bring stability and security to Libya.”

 Al-Thinni was the prime minister of the Libyan government when CIA-linked General Khalifa Haftar's allies burned and sacked the Libyan parliament as part of his Operation Dignity. Then Al-Thinni condemned those attacks and there was an arrest warrant out for Haftar but now Haftar heads Al-Thinni's own armed forces. The Libyan Supreme Court on November 6 ruled that the June elections in Libya were unconstitutional and that the Tobruk House of Representatives should be dissolved. The Tobruk government rejected the ruling and the international community and most of the international press have ignored the decision.

Libya clashes threaten operation of eastern oil ports

One Libyan oil export port is no longer functioning because of clashes between government forces and anti-government militia who are launching attacks nearby.

An official told Reuters that Ras Lanuf a large port east of Es Sider was still exporting oil but the al-Waha Oil Company that operates Es Sider had stopped work. Armed groups from Fajr Libya a coalition of militia opposed to the government had launched attacks on al-Hilal an important oil region but Brigadier-General Saqr Jarushi said they had been repelled by the air force:"Air force jets and helicopters struck the fighters as they advanced on Al-Sidra oil terminal," he said, adding that the air raids had caused "a large number of casualties". Libyan officials said. An aide to the Omar al-Hassi, the prime minister of the Tripoli government, said that the attack on Es Sider was part of a much larger offensive called "Sunrise".

The Tripoli government appears to be reacting to the Hafter offensive with its own counter offensive. The Es Sider terminal is held by the eastern separatist Ibrahim Jedran, who is loyal to the Tobruk government. Fajr Libya had earlier announced it had started an operation to "liberate oilfields and terminals". The group reported that two of its fighters had been killed and several wounded. The Al-Hilal region contains the Ras Lanuf and Brega terminals as well as Es Sider.

 Although the UN has demanded that fighting stop and a dialogue begin, the Tobruk UN-recognized government supports the CIA-linked general Khalifa Haftar who is now head of the Libyan armed forces and has given him the green light to liberate Benghazi and Tripoli. So far he has managed only to liberate part of Benghazi at considerable cost and may now face a united front of radical militias from Derna, where some groups have pledged allegiance to IS. The new Shura Council said: "Everybody saw what happened in Benghazi: disaster; institutions destroyed; houses demolished; mosques and universities burned by the criminal hands of Haftar's supporters." Certainly not everyone in the west saw this because it is reported only as a positive development that Haftar has retaken part of Benghazi.

 Egypt has been supporting the efforts of Khalifa Haftar. Some believe that Egyptian planes have been involved in the bombing of Benghazi by Haftar's forces and that Egypt provided support for planes from the UAE that bombed Tripoli earlier. There have been recent bombings of Tripoli as well including the one airport left functioning.

 The EU has recently banned all seven Libyan airlines from flying within the airspace of the group of 28 countries We can expect western countries and their Arab allies to continue to ignore the ruling on Nov. 6 of the Libyan Supreme Court that said the June elections were unconstitutional and the Tobruk House of Representatives should be dissolved. The international community will continue to recognize the Tobruk government even though it now has as head of the military CIA-linked Khalifa Haftar who was formerly called a "renegade general".

 Egypt is now taking diplomatic action which it hopes will eventually lead to foreign intervention as part of the "war on terror". No doubt we will hear more and more about radical Islamists in Libya and the threat they pose to the west in preparation for international action. Here is what Al-Monitor reports on the Egyptian diplomatic push: On the diplomatic front, Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry has held several meetings since the launch of the initiative to stabilize Libya and the formation of the Libyan neighbors group. The aim is to urge international action on Libya, with Egyptian diplomacy framing Cairo's policy as part of the global war on terror.

Even as CIA-Linked General Haftar continues bombings UN attempts to form unity government

CIA-linked General Haftar continues his bombing of what he considers military sites in western Libya in areas controlled by the rival Tripoli government. His attacks have the support of the internationally recognized government in Tobruk.

The United Nations Support Mission in Libya(UNSMIL) through its special envoy Bernardino Leon is attempting to hold more talks with "various stakeholders" in order to promote dialogue and end the fighting. Leon has been holding talks trying to convince both sides the Islamist-backed Tripoli government and the elected Tobruk government in the far east of Libya to form a unity government. This government could rule until the drafting of the new constitution, a referendum on that and then subsequent elections. Both sides accept the committee that is drafting the constitution. The new round of talks is to be held on December 9th.
The UN announcement does not say who the stakeholders are who will take part in the dialogue. The Tripoli government under prime minister Omar al-Hassi supports dialogue, although he has warned that with continued attacks by Haftar and actions of the Tobruk government, the country could break up. Earlier talks were virtually useless since they did not involve anyone from the Tripoli government, only elected parliamentarians who refused to go to Tobruk. At that time, the stress was all on the fact that the Tobruk government was the only legitimate government and needed to be strengthened. Since that time on November 6, the Libyan Supreme Court ruled that the June elections were unconstitutional and that the Tobruk government should be dissolved. At the time, the UN issued a statement saying that it was studying the ruling. The Tobruk government summarily dismissed the ruling.
Since November 6th the UN has studiously avoided even mentioning the ruling let alone saying anything about what the results of its prolonged study have been. The ruling has led the UN to extend the stakeholders to individuals associated with the Tripoli government although it has refused to provide them with any titles while still calling Abdullah al-Thinni of the Tobruk government as the prime minister of Libya. The most recent statement manages to even avoid talking of a Libyan government period. There are only "stakeholders" and "actors' and "parties." The UN statements for the most part avoid providing specific information on much of anything. They are filled with very general anodyne rhetoric and describe the situation in a manner that has virtually no relation to reality at times.
 For example, the recent statement says: There is agreement among the various Libyan actors that the way forward is to hold an inclusive political dialogue to tackle the crisis with a view to end the fighting and alleviate the suffering of the civilian population, ensure the political transition process is back on track and safeguard Libya's sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity. One of the actors, CIA-linked Khalifa Haftar, has been engaged in battle since last Spring on May 16 when he launched Operation Dignity. As part of the operation, he not only attacked Islamist bases in Benghazi but also through his allies the Zintan Brigades attacked the parliament, and burned and sacked it. Since that time he has together with the help of foreign countries, likely Egypt and the UAE, bombed Tripoli at least three times in August. Just recently there were two attacks on the one remaining functioning airport in Tripoli as shown on the appended video. Again, Haftar took responsibility for the attacks.
 Far from suggesting there be dialogue Haftar has boasted about his military plans: Libyan general Khalifa Haftar said on Friday he has given himself two weeks to take control of Benghazi and three months to capture the capital Tripoli. Haftar independently launched attacks on militias in the eastern city of Benghazi beginning in May but was recently reintegrated to the Libyan army by the House of Representatives (HoR). Haftar's actions hardly show any agreement among the "actors" that there should be dialogue and an end to the fighting except when he wins. He continues with attempts to retake Benghazi and also a new bombing on a warehouse and factory that killed eight people and wounded 24 in the city of Zwara, 110 km west of Tripoli the capital. A security spokesperson in Zwara said the one warehouse hit was used to store food and the other was a chemical factory. A spokesperson for the Tobruk government army said the building were arms depots used by "terrorists". The media center for the town reported that two Libyans and six African workers were killed.
If Gadaffi had bombed "his own people" who were rebelling in this way all the western nations would be up in arms. With the bombing led by a former CIA asset who is out to defeat Islamists and has strong support from President al-Sisi of Egypt next door, there is no sense of outrage at all. Haftar and the Tobruk government have turned the UN dialogue into a laughing-stock and thumbed their nose at the UN and its demands to stop fighting. Finally, Ministers of Foreign Affairs from France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK, the US Secretary of State, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy together with the UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs issued a statement after a meeting in Brussels to assess the situation in Libya:They expressed grave concern over the deteriorating situation in Libya and welcomed the announcement by the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General, Bernardino Leon, that he will convene on December 9 a new round of talks bringing together key Libyans. They also welcomed the positive reactions of the parties and urged them to participate constructively and without any conditions in this process, which represents the most viable path for Libya to chart its own future. They strongly endorsed the UN's efforts to work with key stakeholders to build a national unity government for Libya, and committed themselves to support such a government. They strongly condemned recent violence, including air strikes, which undermines the prospects for a negotiated settlement, and highlighted the terrible suffering for all in Libya caused by the continued violence. France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States, the EU and the UN reiterated their calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and underscored their willingness, if key stakeholders fail to participate in the UN-led process, to consider additional measures to protect Libya's unity, stability and prosperity, and to counter expanding terrorist threats to Libya and the region.
As with the UN statement there is no mention of the Libyan government, just unidentified stakeholders and parties.This statement also makes no reference whatsoever to the decision of the Libyan Supreme Court that the Tobruk government should be dissolved. The statement also welcomes the positive reaction of the parties to the process suggested by Leon, even though one party, the Tobruk government, and another, Khalifa Haftar, have vowed to carry on fighting. The statement condemns violence "including air-strikes" but fails to mention who is carrying them out and how such an "actor", "party" or "stakeholder" can be having a positive reaction to dialogue and the formation of a unity government through a political solution to the crisis.
 Notice that if the key stakeholders do not participate in the UN sponsored dialogue the signatories do not suggest punishing Haftar and the Tobruk government but rather additional measures to "counter expanding terrorist threats to Libya and the region." But that is exactly what Haftar wants to do according to him.

OPEC chooses sides in Libya dispute

Libya is a prominent member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries(OPEC). At present, Libya has two competing governments. The internationally recognized government is in Tobruk and the other in Tripoli, the capital.

The Tobruk government is led by Prime Minister, Abdulla al-Thinni who had also been Prime Minister earlier of the transition General National Congress. The Tripoli government is headed by Prime Minister Omar al-Hassi. Both governments expected to be invited to the OPEC conference last Thursday.
 A recent decision by the Libyan Supreme Court on November 6 had ruled that the June elections were unconstitutional and that the Tobruk government should be dissolved. The UN said that it was studying the decision but still talks of al-Thinni as the prime minister of Libya while refusing to assign any title to members of the rival government even on the rare occasion it even mentions any by name. The international community in general is observing strict silence on the ruling and acts as if nothing at all happened. OPEC decided to invite only the Tobruk government. This is further evidence that the international community remains behind the Tobruk government even though much of the country is under control of militias many of them Islamist who oppose the CIA-linked General Khalifa Haftar who now has the support of the Tobruk government. The Tobruk government has given him the green light to do battle in Benghazi and Tripoli even though these actions clearly violate the mission of the UN to broker dialogue and a political solution to the crisis.
 The oil minister of the Tripoli government Mashallah Zwai said his cabinet would take legal action against OPEC if they were not invited. Given that the UN so far has given no recognition at all to the Tripoli government the court case will probably go nowhere. Zwai spoke from the offices of the National Oil Corporation(NOC). He also threatened to not pay OPEC fees and cancel membership if his group were not invited. The Al-Thinni delegation in Vienna responded by appointing al-Malbrook Bou Seif as new chairman of the NOC. There may be some doubt if Seif will ever be able to travel to NOC headquarters in Tripoli.
While as the internationally recognized government the Tobruk government is entitled to the oil payments that are paid into the central bank, the headquarters of both the central bank and NOC are in Tripoli controlled by the rival al-Hassi government. While al-Thinni could stop sending the oil money to the central bank this would no doubt provoke a strong response from the Tripoli government as well as depriving Libyan civil servants and others of their income. Thinni too depends upon the NOC for regulating the oil industry and sales of oil. So far both sides have let the NOC and the central bank continue normal operations. If this structure breaks down then the entire country and economy will be in complete disarray. So far both sides have realized that both are dependent upon not interfering in the operation of these two key institutions but that may now change given the actions of the al-Thinni government in appointing their own oil minister.
The previous head of the NOC Mustafa Sanallah had been retained by al-Thinni. Appointing a new minister will simply increase the conflict with the al-Hassi government. The Tripoli government has taken over ministries, some oil facilities and control a large area of west and central Libya. Two bombing attacks recently on the Mitiga airport in Tripoli by General Haftar have exacerbated the situation to such a degree that even the UN complained and talked to Al Thinni about the situation. The Tobruk government has threatened to separate from Libya if the Tripoli government is recognized by the international community. Now al-Hassi warned that Libya might break up if the al-Thinni is allowed to appoint his own chair of the NOC and perhaps next form an eastern-based oil company.
 Hassi sees the appointment as an attempt to take over eastern oil facilities with the help of General Haftar's militia which have now in effect merged with what was left of the regular Libya army. Al-Hassi claimed: "There are attempts (by Thinni) to set up an eastern Supreme Court, there are attempts to launch a central bank in the east, there are attempts to establish a separate oil ministry in the east. " Al-Thinni denies he has any plans for secession. However, the new chair picked by al-Thinni, Al-Mabrook Seif is from the same tribe as Ibrahim Jathran. Jathran was the rebel leader who held the ports for a year pressing for regional autonomy and more oil returns to the east of the country. Jathran made a deal with Thinni to open the ports while Thinni was prime minister of an earlier government. Jathran said he will promote secession if al-Hassi's government is recognized. This illustrates the separatist aspect of the present conflict an issue often ignored in favor of the narrative that the conflict is between Islamists and their opponents led by General Haftar.
However Haftar does have supporters in the west notably the Zintan brigades. Hassi said that Turkey might be able to mediate between the two sides. Turkey is one of the few countries that has had formal contacts with the Tripoli government.Turkey has had meeting with senior officials in the Tripoli government and but also has good relations with al-Thinni. Hassi said: "We are open to dialogue. This conflict cannot be solved by war." The Tripoli government has suggested that subsequent to a referendum on the constitution after drafting is completed there should be new elections to create a legitimate government. Both sides accept the committee that is drafting the new constitution. On the other side, General Haftar speaks of nothing but defeating his opponents by attacks on Benghazi and Tripoli. He has already recaptured some parts of Benghazi but with considerable loss of life. He has not a word to say about dialogue.
 General Haftar told an Italian newspaper that he would capture Benghazi within two weeks and the capital Tripoli within three months. Haftar said: “For Tripoli we are only at the beginning. We need more men and more supplies and weaponry. I have given myself three months, but maybe we will need less.."
The UN meanwhile is demanding dialogue and still insisting that there is only a political solution possible: The members of the Security Council underlined that there can be no military solution to the current crisis. They expressed their full support to Special Representative of the Secretary-General Bernardino León and urged all parties to engage constructively with his efforts to resume an inclusive political process aimed at addressing the political and security challenges facing the country. The members of the Security Council strongly condemned the escalation in violence in Libya. They noted with concern the recent attacks on public and civilian infrastructure... Recalling resolution 2174 (2014), the members of the Security Council emphasized that the Sanctions Committee is prepared to sanction those who threaten Libya’s peace, stability or security or that obstruct or undermine the successful completion of its political transition. Notice that no groups are named and no specific violence is mentioned nor any individual named on either side. There is no mention that Haftar claims the bombings on Tripoli or that he has vowed to continue fighting in Benghazi and for Tripoli. Haftar need not worry about being sanctioned for threatening Libya's peace, stability, or security. He is the good guy tackling the bad Islamist menace after all.
You can expect see more and more about radical Islamists even links to the Islamic State by a group that runs Derna even though radical Islamists have controlled Derna for ages and even carried out a public execution on a soccer field back in August of this year when it was ruled by an Al-Qaeda linked group. All of a sudden after the group that runs Derna has pledged allegiance to the Islamic State it will be big news and will be used in a propaganda drive to support Haftar and warn about the Islamist menace in Libya. These same people were among the foremost rebels fighting against Gadaffi.

Even UN expresses concern about Tripoli bombings by General Haftar

UN special envoy to Libya Bernardino Leon has been trying his best to persuade the parties in conflict to stop fighting and engage in dialogue. He has stressed that there can only be a political solution to the Libyan conflict.

While the groups of militia opposed to the government still are in conflict in some areas, the capital Tripoli is free of fighting for the most part and Benghazi was also under control of anti-Tobruk government forces until recently. In spite of the UN's pleading to stop fighting CIA-linked General Haftar and his militia launched an operation that is intended to retake Benghazi. This operation was apparently aided by planes that probably came from Egypt . Some claim they were piloted by Libyans allowing Egypt to deny that they were involved.
 On November 6th the Libyan Supreme Court ruled that the June elections were unconstitutional and that the Tobruk government should be dissolved. The UN said it was studying the decision. Apparently it is still studying the decision. It makes no reference to it that I have seen in recent statements including the one made about a phone call to Al Thinni who still is called the "prime minister". The UN statement reports on a phone conversation of Special Representative(SRSG) for Libya, Bernardino Leon with "PM Abdullah al-Thinni": 25 November 2014 -Against the backdrop of the dangerous escalation in military operations in Libya and on-going UN mediation efforts to contain the situation, on 25 November SRSG Leon spoke by phone to Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni, Head of Libya’s interim government. The two discussed possible options for ending armed hostilities, including a cessation of aerial attacks against Mitiga Airport in Tripoli, and other areas in western Libya. Leon said that the latest military developments would complicate the overall situation in Libya and undermine efforts to resolve the conflict through peaceful means. Given the actions of General Haftar with the blessing of the Tobruk government, it is clear that the Tobruk government is simply thumbing its nose at the UN.
 The UN has no power to force Haftar to stop fighting those opposed to the government and he has no intention of doing so. Leon stressed to al-Thinni that he intended to press ahead with mediation efforts and hold a new round of talks in Ghadames. Earlier talks were only with elected members of the Tobruk House of Representatives who had boycotted the parliament. Leon stressed then that the Tobruk government was the only legitimate one. Since the Supreme Court ruling Leon has met with people associated with the competing government. The UN, even though it names some of the figures, refuses to give them any official title. Even since the Supreme Court announcement the language of the UN gives legitimacy only to the Tobruk government calling al-Thinni the prime minister of Libya.
 Leon insisted: " Building on the dialogue initiative launched in Ghadames on 29 September, the new round would bring together all the major stakeholders with the aim of forging consensus on ending the current state of polarisation and division affecting the State and its institutions." The Ghadames dialogue got nowhere and did nothing to stop the fighting. The one positive move that worked was the negotiation of a twelve hour cease fire in Benghazi. Leon briefed al-Thinni on his meeting with other parties. Al-Thinni outlined conditions for the success of any dialogue. The UN statement says nothing about what those are.
The final paragraph well expresses the complete divorce between what the UN-recognized government is doing and what it claims to be doing: SRSG Leon welcomed the Interim Government’s commitment to dialogue and to work on ensuring conducive conditions for a new round of talks to convene at the earliest opportunity. Both agreed to remain in close touch and to remain closely engaged on this issue. This is the same government that supports the Haftar campaign in Benghazi and gave him the green light to liberate Tripoli. The UN refuses to address issues such as this.
 Meanwhile, a court in Tripoli issued an arrest warrant for General Haftar as a response to his bombing attacks on the Mitiga airport. Even Ban Ki-Moon called for the air strikes to stop and as indicated in the UN statement urged all sides to talk: "The only way to resolve the current crisis is through dialogue." The Tobruk government claims it was forced to strike Mitiga airport because it is controlled by a rival administration. Imagine the response if the al-Hassi government in Tripoli bombed Tobruk giving the same reason.
 The prime minister of the Tripoli government Omar al-Hassi said: "The national salvation government has always adopted the policy of peace, acceptance and dialogue. Yet now, we are forced by what's happened in Benghazi, Kalkla and Tripoli to embrace the policy of war and armed confrontation." The Tripoli government has urged a referendum on a new constitution being drafted and then elections. Both sides accept the committee drafting the constitution. The UN has yet to suggest elections and as some have suggested an interim unity government as a solution. The reason I think is clear. This is not acceptable to the Tobruk government.
 A local resident told Al Jazeera: "We woke up to find airplanes striking three times. They hit houses where families and women were staying. They had nothing to do with the airbase." That sounds as if the government is bombing its own people. Clear evidence of the destruction of homes is given in the appended video. Since the bombing is not done by Gadaffi but by a UN and internationally recognized government don't expect the west to intervene.
Haftar is out to rid Libya of Islamists and that is a popular theme next door in Egypt, and no doubt the US and many European countries would be happy to see Haftar be successful. However, many may be starting to doubt his abilities to rout his opposition.
 Haftar is no doubt amused by the arrest warrant. An arrest warrant was issued ages ago against him after his first attempt at a coup early this year. The warrant was in effect when Al-Thinni the prime minister of the Tobruk government was also prime minister of Libya then. Now Al-Thinni is in Tobruk urging Haftar on.

Libyan Supreme Court decision could facilitate UN political dialogue

The Libyan Supreme Court well over a week ago ruled that the June elections in Libya were unconstitutional and that the House of Representatives now meeting in the eastern Libyan city of Tobruk should be dissolved.

The Supreme Court ruling complicates the situation in Libya. Up to now the UN and the international community has regarded the House of Representatives(HoR) meeting in Tobruk as the sole legitimate government of Libya, and its prime minister Abdullah Al-Thinni as the sole legitimate prime minister. The UN has been attempting to strengthen the role of the Tobruk government. The UN dialogue to reach a political deal involved elected members of the HoR, who had boycotted the meetings. The UN did not include the alternative government of Omar al-Hassi, which controls the capital Tripoli, nor any of its allies in the east such as the Shura Council in Benghazi. Nor did it apparently include talks with militia leaders on either side of the conflict.
 Jason Pack, Researcher of Middle Eastern History at Cambridge University has a long and very informative analysis of event in Libya. The article is worth reading in its entirety and can be found here. Pack believes that Libya should form a unity government composed of important figures from both sides of the conflict and he considers that the Supreme Court decision makes conditions for formation of such a government better than they were before the decision. The main reason for this is that the decision now makes consultation with political figures opposed to the Tobruk government necessary, since the claim that the Al-Thinni government is the sole legitimate government is now in question. Conditions on the ground should have made it clear that such negotiations were necessary all along and without it the previous negotiations were arguably an utter failure. After all, leaving out of negotiations a party that controls the two main cities and much of the territory of Libya while strengthening what is virtually a government in exile in the far eastern city of Tobruk does not make much sense in any practical terms.
Mohamed Eljahr of the Atlantic Council Rafik Hariri Center said: "The international community's next step is key. Despite the UNSMIL [United Nations Support Mission in Libya] statement that it is studying the Supreme Court's ruling with its international partners,.. the EU ambassadors to Libya met with the Minister of Health in al-Thinni's government in Tunis shortly after the ruling, suggesting it is business as usual with the Tobruk government".
 As far as I can determine the EU has not made any statement on the Supreme Court decision and I can find nothing from the U.S. either. The EU, as the quote indicates, appears to simply be ignoring the decision and continues to act as if nothing has happened. The UN response has been a bit more complex as discussed in my earlier article. The UN envoy Leon did meet with Nouri Abu Sahmein who is head of the GNC which appointed Omar Al-Hassi prime minister and who then formed the rival Libyan government. As the article points out, the UN does not even say who Sahmein is let alone saying what his position was. However, the same statement talks about Leon meeting prime minister Al-Thinni. While unwilling to even mention the General National Congress (GNC) at least the UN envoy did talk to an official of that body. Perhaps he will next meet with Omar al Hassi but not tell us who he is.
The UN and the international community show little sign of changing their relationships with the Tobruk government due to the Supreme Court decision. While the Supreme Court ruling was immediately rejected by the Tobruk government, it was welcomed by the Tripoli-based parliament and Omar Homaidan a spokesperson for the government suggested a positive solution to the political impasse." He said a possible way out of the crisis was to wait for a 60-member panel to finish writing Libya’s new constitution, then call a referendum on it and hold elections after that." This solution does not settle the question of who should rule up until that happens.
 Pack has a solution to that problem although he admits that the Supreme Court decision has the potential to produce even more divisions within Libya: Despite this new potential for division, all domestic and international actors should agree on the form of a 'National Unity' government incorporating all the major political factions (MLA, Muslim Brotherhood, HoR members, Liberal-leaning technocrats, Berbers/Amazigh, Federalists, key tribal leaders, Tebu, and Toureg). Such an agreement would bypass the need for each actor to definitively 'take sides' by choosing to recognise one governing body as opposed to the other. In the western media the narrative about the Libyan conflict is that it is between an Islamist bloc and their militia, and a secular bloc or at least those opposed to the Islamist role in politics lead by CIA-linked Khalifa Haftar and his allies whose Operation Dignity was directed against Islamists. His rhetoric and actions seem to be directed not only at violent jihadists but also the moderate Islamists who were a majority in the parliament his allies the Zintan brigades burned down. As Pack describes it: Haftar's binary approach was due partially to a misreading of the international scene and partially to international actors like the UAE, Qatar and the US wishing to see a binary narrative of events in Libya where they could 'easily understand' whose side to be on. Haftar concluded that the key to Western support was to claim to be fighting Islamists – of all stripes and of all backgrounds. In the first weeks of 'Operation Dignity', American Ambassador Deborah Jones stated "Haftar's enemies are our enemies." [45] This gaffe – which did not reflect any official US support of Haftar – dramatically encouraged his polarising tendencies as he concluded they would lead to greater Western and regional support. Pack, rightly in my opinion, rejects this binary narrative. He thinks that the situation is much more complex and less related to religion than other factors.
Religion is used by the parties involved for their own political purposes. Pack describes the so-called Islamist bloc as follows: The term 'Islamist bloc' is a misnomer. In reality, the so-called Islamist bloc incorporates the Misratan-led alliance (MLA), which dominates the West of the country, as well as Jihadist and Islamist fighters throughout the country's East and South. This bloc's only shared ideological ground does not pertain to a specific view of the role of Islam in governance, but rather to their opposition to former Gaddafi functionaries serving in positions of power. [8] This bloc is led by the umbrella group of militias termed Libya Dawn – a loose coalition of Misratan, Islamist, and Berber militias based in Libya's Northwest. Libya Dawn [9] was assembled in July 2014 to evict the anti-Islamist Zintani militias from Tripoli. As such, the so-called Islamist bloc can be said to exert a hegemony over most of Western Libya via Libya Dawn, as well as control Derna and parts of Benghazi via the more ideological Islamist militias in Libya's East. While Pack's suggestion that there should be a unity government until the constitution is written and voted on in a referendum followed by elections is certainly a good idea, the chances of such a government actually coming into being seems to be slim.
Pack himself describes the situation which might make this difficult: Starting in October 2014, Haftar and the Zintanis began referring to themselves as components of Libya's official army and claiming to follow orders from a unified central command. By the start of November, Haftar's counteroffensive in Benghazi had achieved significant (although not necessarily decisive or permanent) gains, retaking many neighbourhoods from his Jihadi opponents. These successes are likely due to increased Egyptian backing and Western passivity. The perception of outside intervention elicited a backlash from the Islamists who used their military control of Tripoli to pressure the Supreme Court to issue its controversial ruling. These developments have welded together the fortunes of Haftar and the Thinni government. Lacking the capacity to administer territory outside of Tobruk and Bayda, the Thinni government no longer derives its internal legitimacy from the June elections (it was elected by less than 20% of eligible voters but rather from the extent of external backing and recognition it receives and the fortunes of Haftar's military moves on the ground. [7] Hence, the future of the Thinni government depends largely upon whether international actors continue to treat it as legitimate – in spite of the Supreme Court's ruling and its poor administrative performance.
The evidence seems clear that the international community with few exceptions such as Turkey and Qatar continue to act as if the Tobruk government is the legitimate government. The Tobruk government rejects completely the Supreme Court ruling and no doubt Haftar too will consider the decision simply forced on the court to grant an Islamist uprising legitimacy. He is continuing his offensive to retake Benghazi with the blessing of the Tobruk government even though the UN envoy pleaded with the parties to quit fighting and not do anything to further polarize the situation. Egypt has clearly come out in support of the Tobruk government even since the Supreme Court ruling: The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that it also “fully supports the Libyan government in its efforts to carry out its responsibility of preserving the unity of Libyan lands and its territorial integrity”. There is no question about the legitimacy of the Libyan government.
 Pack claims that for the international community to play a positive role in the dialogue necessary to form a unity government that it must show a greater inclination to deal with the Tripoli government. The community must also stress that all sides should respect the constitutional drafting process. It does appear as if both sides at least at the political level do respect this process and that is one positive to the situation. However, the Tobruk government appears to be completely unwilling to give up its claim of legitimacy and have given Haftar and the Libyan armed forces a green light to retake not only Benghazi but Tripoli. This allows absolutely no room for dialogue and the Tobruk government and Haftar clearly pay no attention to the UN demand that the parties stop fighting and not do anything the exacerbates the situation.

UN still studying Libyan Court decision declaring Tobruk government dissolved

The United Nations Support Mission In Libya (UNSMIL) issues periodic statements on the situation in Libya. Every statement has predictable motherhood bromides urging all the parties to eschew violence and stop fighting.

The statements are mostly of interest not because of what is said but by the way it is said and what is left out. For this article I will consider three recent statements about the situation in Libya beginning with a statement about the Libyan Supreme Court decision that declared the June elections unconstitutional. The ruling also said that the resulting parliament meeting in Tobruk should be dissolved. UNMSMIL on November 6th a day after the Supreme Court decision issued a statement that includes the following: The United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) takes note of the Supreme Court’s ruling, and will be studying it closely. In this regard, UNSMIL is consulting closely with Libyan stakeholders across the political spectrum, and with international partners. UNSMIL emphasizes the urgent need for all parties to forge consensus on political arrangements regarding the transition. In this regard, Special Representative of the Secretary-General Bernardino Leon will confer with all the main stakeholders on the way forward.
 Notice that the statement does not say who the stakeholders are with whom Leon will confer. Up to this point the stakeholders were members of the House of Representatives and on the other side elected members of the house who boycotted the Tobruk parliament. The UN regarded the Tobruk government and the House of Representatives as the sole legitimate government, the aim seemed to be arrange for the inclusion of some who were elected into that government but were boycotting it. As UNSMIL said in an earlier statement about the political dialogue that they were hosting: This is why we believe it is very important, as it has been stated today that there is one parliament, one legitimate parliament representing all Libyans and that has to be the House of Representatives.. The dialogue was with other parliamentarians who had not joined the legitimate government yet: This is a dialogue between parliamentarians, between members of the House of Representatives. The country has to overcome the institutional crisis it has today. It is very important to send a very strong message about the unity and territorial integrity of Libya ..
Relevant stakeholders such as CIA-linked General Haftar and his militias, the Islamist militias such as Libya Dawn, and the competing government of Omar al-Hasi who was declared prime minister by the General National Council were not stakeholders who took part in the UN dialogue. The whole dialogue exercise was intended to increase the power and legitimacy of the Tobruk government. The Tobruk government is dominated by non-Islamists or even anti-Islamists. This is the type of government many of the "international partners" who recognize the Tobruk government want. The Supreme Court ruling throws a monkey wrench into the UN plan, not that it was working in any event, since the militias simply went on battling each other in many places. The situation has changed however, in that the Tobruk government now supports Haftar and his Operation Dignity.
 The prime minister of the opposing government Omar al-Hasi has called for new elections as a way out of the impasse. Do not expect to hear a word about that in any UN statement. A spokesperson for Omar al-Hasi's government also proposed a variation on the elections theme: Omar Homaidan, spokesman for the Tripoli-based parliament, which is not internationally recognised, suggested the supreme court’s reasoning for the ruling was the fact that the March amendment that put in motion the June elections had passed without a required majority vote in the assembly. He said a possible way out of the crisis was to wait for a 60-member panel to finish writing Libya’s new constitution, then call a referendum on it and hold elections after that. The problem would be who would rule Libya until that happens.
 Since the November 5th decision of the Libyan Supreme Court over a week ago UN statements for some reason do not even make reference to it. Perhaps they are still studying it even though it is quite clear what the decision was and as the quote above points out the probable grounds for making it. The Tobruk government has rejected the decision unlike the Islamists who eventually accepted a Supreme Court decision when it went against their choice of premier. This resulted in Abdullah Al Thinni becoming premier. Al Thinni is also premier of the Tobruk government now. The next statement by the UN after the Supreme Court decision speaks of the UN envoy meeting with Prime Minister Al Thinni as well as the person who heads the committee drafting the new constitution: I also met with Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni in Shahat to hear his views on the latest developments in the country, including efforts to agree on a ceasefire to alleviate the suffering of the Libyan population in the east and in the west and ways to move forward with the political dialogue. Note that Al-Thinni is still the prime minister as far as the UN is concerned.
The Supreme Court decision has not led to any change in their view of which government is legitimate. The language is even more revealing in a subsequent statement on November 11 which shows that at least the Supreme Court decision led the UN to feel that they had to extend their envoy Mr Leon's dialogue with new stakeholders: Mr Leon met Mr. Nouri Abu Sahmein in the framework of his consultations with different political personalities to overcome the Libyan crisis. Mr. Leon listened to his views and ideas on how to break the stalemate in the efforts to resolve Libya's current political and security crisis. The discussions were fruitful, frank and open, and in-depth views were exchange. On Sunday 09 November, Mr. Leon traveled to Al-Baida where he met with the Chairman of the Constitution-Drafting Assembly, Ali Tarhouni, to discuss UN technical assistance and later met in Shahat with Prime Minister Abdullah Al-Thinni to hear his views on the latest developments in the country. In the meeting Tuesday, (UNSMIL). So who is this Nouri Abu Sahmein? How come Al Thinni is given the title of Prime Minister but Abu Sahmein not only has no title, there is not even an account of who he might be. He cannot be described because that might give some legitimacy to his position. Abu Sahmein was the president of the General National Congress and according to those in the alternative government still is. He convened the GNC who made Omar al Hasi prime minister and tasked him with forming a government. The UN is not about to explain any of this.
 Of course the UN insists: The United Nations is impartial and neutral in its approach and wants the best solutions for the Libyans, but it is for the Libyans themselves to come up with these solutions and we will assist in every way we can. Our work will always be guided by full respect for Libya’s sovereignty, national unity and territorial integrity. Probably in their spare time the people who write these statements turn their talents to writing for Onion.
 Perhaps the UN should be applauded for taking the time to study the Supreme Court decision unlike the UN-supported and internationally recognized government in Tobruk which immediately rejected it. However, it is now well over a week since the decision. Shouldn't the public be apprised of the results of their study. The public also await the pronouncements of important international stakeholders such as the US, EU and others about the decision.

The new plan for Western intervention in Libya

The New York Times seems at times an outlet for Obama administration policy and trial balloons for possible policy directions. Perhaps the recent op-ed suggesting the EU should intervene with a peace-keeping force in Libya is a trial balloon

The op-ed is penned by Dirk Vandewalle an associate professor of government at Darmouth College. Vandewalle is an expert on Libya and two years ago wrote an article for Foreign Affairs in which he expressed optimism about developments in post-Qaddafi Libya although he does note the militia issue that was developing even then. The appended video shows Vandewalle in an interview shortly after the attack on the US consul in Benghazi that resulted in the death of US ambassador Stevens and several others. He remained optimistic about developments in Libya. Vandewalle begins his article by noting that 11 special envoys had met in Paris at the end of October. He says that the group: " issued a final communiqué with predictably anodyne recommendations: support for the formal government, suggestions for making it more inclusive, a call for the militias to withdraw and a proposal that the United Nations spearhead a comprehensive dialogue among the warring parties." The final communique in its entirety can be found here.
 Among predictably anodyne recommendations were that there be no external interference in Libya: They commended the determination of the special representative to organize, in the near future, a new round of discussions and urged the parties to remove all obstacles to these discussions. They stated that the efforts of all international partners should aim to support the UN mediation efforts. They rejected any external interference in Libya. Vandewalle is correct that so far the discussions have achieved very little if anything but that is in part because the discussions have not been with the parties that count, CIA-linked Colonel Haftar's militias, the Islamist militias such as Libyan Dawn, and the alternative government of Omar al-Hassi.
Professor Vandewalle is all for foreign intervention. According to him this is the way forward for Libya: What Libya needs instead is a European peacekeeping force that would shield the fledgling government from the various armed groups currently contesting its power, and one another, and allow it to rebuild state institutions.
The article is dated November 11th. Back on Thursday November 5th the Libyan Supreme Court ruled that the June elections were illegal and the new government unconstitutional. This is surely relevant to Vandewalle's policy recommendation since it implies that the internationally recognized government is not constitutional. The kindest explanation of this omission is that Vandewalle wrote the article before this even happened in spite of the fact it was almost a week ago. Perhaps he may think it is of no significance. There are many things that Vandewalle apparently thinks are of no significance. Here is his account of some recent events in Libya:When the Islamist parties fared poorly in the election in June for the G.N.C.’s successor, the House of Representatives, fighting flared up in the western part of the country. The Islamist militias, emboldened by several military advances, including their overtaking the international airport in Tripoli in August, have proclaimed that the G.N.C. would remain Libya’s rightful legislative body. There were no Islamist parties per se running in the elections. Everyone ran as an independent. However, he probably is correct that those elected who actually went to the meetings in Tobruk were mostly not Islamists. But Vandewalle manages to describe these events without ever mentioning CIA-linked General Haftar, his attempt to declare the GNC suspended on Feb 14 , his Operation Dignity launched on 16 May 2014, his attack on Islamist militia bases in Benghazi, and the burning of parliament by his allies the Zintan brigades. Without understanding this background there is no way that that the public can really fathom what has been happening in Libya. Perhaps this is the entire purpose of an expert academic ignoring the obvious. Vandewalle manages to go through an entire interview without mentioning General Khalifa Haftar nor does his name even come up in his entire op-ed in the New York Times.
Of course this sort of omission is not uncommon in respectable media. Here is a Reuters account of the attack on the Libyan parliament The gunmen are not identified. The attack is not linked to Haftar at all or his operations in Benghazi. There is editorial propaganda against the parliament that was attacked almost seeming to justify the attack. Contrast that with the Al Jazeera coverage below which links the operation with Haftar allies, the Zintan brigades, and to the beginning of Haftar's Operation Dignity that began earlier in Benghazi. Vandewalle realizes that Libya is on the verge of a civil war and also notes correctly that countries such as the UAE and Egypt are intervening against Islamist militias and that Qatar supports some Islamist groups. He thinks dialogue is impossible because the militias flush with weapons have no incentive to cooperate. He fails to mention that the anti-Islamist militias of Genral Haftar have the support of the Tobruk government led by the same prime minister Al-Thinni who called General Haftar's attack on parliament attack on parliament illegal and noted that there was a warrant out for his arrest. He was prime minister of that government as well. Now his government has given the green light to attack not just Benghazi as Haftar is doing but to liberate Tripoli as well: Libya’s internationally recognized government ordered on Tuesday its military, led by renegade General Khalifa Haftar, to advance on the capital Tripoli and called for a civil disobedience there against armed Islamist groups. Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thani’s cabinet said in statement posted on Facebook that the armed forces have the green light to “liberate” Tripoli “and state institutions from the grip of armed groups.” No doubt the professor simply forgot the relationship of Haftar's militia to the present government.
 Vandewalle remarks that the US has no appetite for boots on the ground in Libya. However, it does have special forces there since it has been involved in kidnapping terror suspects and at one time they attempted to train Libyan forces. Now due to security conditions in Libya this job has been moved out of country, even to the UK which recently closed their program down after the trainees did not behave as proper proxies for western imperial aims.
 Vandewalle concludes:The responsibility for creating a peacekeeping force for Libya falls squarely on European states. Considering their longstanding economic and political interests in North Africa and their concerns over immigration, it is they, after all, that have the most to lose from Libya’s collapse. Libya is part of the European Union’s soft underbelly. The long-standing economic and political interests are no doubt related to the history of Libya as a colony of Italy and in part of France. As in the 2011 intervention the Europeans should spearhead the intervention, "with logistical and intelligence support from the United States". Vandewalle notes that France has openly called for intervention.
 Apparently Vandewalle gets around since he was testifying before an Italian parliamentary commission on foreign affairs in Rome on Oct. 24 and says:I was struck by how frankly some members were arguing that only a European-led force could provide a way out of the current impasse. The original notion some European politicians held — that a beefed-up U.N. mission was needed — has lost its appeal. Vandewalle suggests that the model for the intervention should be the International Assistance Force(ISAF)used to put down the Taliban in Afghanistan. The problem is that ISAF came into being only after a US-led attack on the Taliban in concert with the Northern Alliance. Only after the Taliban had been driven out of government did ISAF enter the picture. Operation Enduring Freedom began on October 1st 2001 and ISAF was formed only in December two months later.
 Vandeville sees the EU peace-keeping role as strengthening the Tobruk government through protecting infrastructure and state institutions. However, much of that infrastructure is in the control of Islamist militias.Vandewalle warns that Europe must intervene decisively or face another failed Arab state. So just how did Libya, now trending towards a so-called failed state, get to this point?

Libyan Supreme Court declares recent elections and new government unconstitutional

As if things could not become even more unsettled in Libya, the Libyan Supreme Court has just announced that the internationally recognized and UN-backed government is dissolved and the June elections declared illegitimate.

The elected government moved to the eastern city of Tobruk. It was supposed to convene in Benghazi in August but Benghazi was by then under the control of a umbrella group of Islamist-oriented militias and so was moved to a luxury hotel and a Greek ferry in Tobruk, where the CIA-linked General Haftar could protect them. After all, it would not do to have the new parliament supposedly dominated by anti-Islamists to be attacked and burned, as had happened to the former parliament — which was attacked by Haftar's allies the Zintan brigades as part of his Operation Dignity. A number of Islamists who were elected boycotted the new parliament. A coalition of Islamists have now taken control not only of Benghazi but also Tripoli. They reconvened the General National Council and appointed their own prime minister who then formed a competing government to that in Tobruk.
The ruling came after a member of the Tripoli parliament asked the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of the vote on June 25th in Libya. The vote led to the creation of a government by Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thinni. He had also been prime minister when the parliament was stormed and burned by allies of General Haftar. At the time he noted that there was a warrant out for Haftar's arrest and he claimed that the attack was illegal and an attempted coup. Now Al-Thinni's government supports Haftar and his Operation Dignity and supposedly Haftar's militia are just part of the Libyan armed forces.
 LANA news agency reported that "The Constitutional Circuit in the Supreme Court has ruled on Thursday to accept the appeal concerning the illegality of developments leading to the elections,. Al Jazeera reporter Mahmoud Abdul-Wahed said that this court ruling means that the present al-Thinni government is unconstitutional. The UN is claiming that it will closely study the decision and also talk with "Libyan stakeholders across the political spectrum, and with international partners."
The UN also says that is will continue to work with all parties to help Libya overcome the present political and security crisis. So far the UN position is that it will talk to everyone except those who count, the two competing groups of militias and the alternative government in Tripoli. Not surprisingly, the talks so far seem to have achieved little or nothing. The Supreme Court decision may have a positive effect in that now the UN can claim that it should talk to figures in the rival government. While the legislature in Tobruk has called an emergency meeting to discuss the verdict, one can expect that it will be dismissed out of hand. Issam al-Jehani, a Tobruk-based parliamentarian said on Facebook: "Lawmakers will not recognise a verdict decided under the gun,"
The prime minister of the rival government Omar al-Hassi called for new elections in a recent interview saying: "We need new elections, This parliament is no longer accepted in Libya. It has lost its legitimacy. We need new elections, The poll must take place under the supervision of (elected) local councils." Al-Hassi claims to be an independent. He describes the present conflict as between "enemies of the revolution" against "revolutionaries". Haftar describes his opponents as Islamist terrorists.
 Al-Hassi's proposals do provide a possible political way out of the crisis, although one fraught with difficulties. It would require Haftar's militias, now the Libyan army, and his Islamist militia foes to agree to a ceasefire, an unlikely scenario. It would require too that the militia leaders accept the results of the political process. In any event elections are unlikely. The more likely scenario is that important power brokers such as Egypt and the UAE with the tacit support of the US and its allies will support the Al-Thinni government in Tobruk and provide aid and training for the Libyan army which is now in effect just an add-on to Haftar's militias. The Libyan situation narrative will be about the war on terror and combating militant jihadists such as those in Anshar al-Sharia the group alleged to be behind that attack on the US consulate in Benghazi. Haftar will be touted as a military leader who can do for Libya what President el-Sisi did for Egypt, turn it into a repressive regime just as bad if not worse than that of Mubarak but having the support of the west and allies such as Saudi Arabia by jailing members of unapproved Islamist groups who will be designated terrorists.
 As shown on the appended video an earlier decision by the Supreme Court that the election of an Islamist-supported prime minister was illegitimate was accepted by the Islamists and the person who lost out in the decision. I doubt that the same acceptance will now come from the government of Al-Thinni in Tobruk.