Turkish President Recept Tayyp Erdogan has warned Europe it could face new threats from "terrorist" groups if Libya's United Nations-recognised government in Tripoli were to fall, in an article published in Politico.
In the article released on Saturday, the eve of a Libya peace conference in Berlin, Erdogan said the European Union's failure to adequately support the Government of National Accord (GNA) would be "a betrayal of its own core values, including democracy and human rights. Terrorist organisations such as ISIS [ISIL] and al-Qaeda, which suffered a military defeat in Syria and Iraq, will find a fertile ground to get back on their feet. Keeping in mind that Europe is less interested in providing military support to Libya, the obvious choice is to work with Turkey, which has already promised military assistance. We will train Libya's security forces and help them combat terrorism, human trafficking and other serious threats against international security.
Renegade military commander Khalifa Haftar's eastern-based forces have been engaged in an offensive on Tripoli for more than nine months targeting the GNA led by Fayez al-Sarraj. The fighting has killed more than 2,000 people, including some 280 civilians, and displaced tens of thousands of others.
In a joint initiative, Turkey and Russia have brokered a ceasefire but Haftar walked away from talks in Moscow this week aimed at finalising the truce agreement.
Inside Story: What role will Turkey play in Lybia?
Actually, since the outbreak of the Libyan revolution in 2011, which saw the intervention of NATO countries, under the pressure of warmongers Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and the toppling of Muammar Gaddafi's regime, international involvement in Libya has gradually escalated. Although some Western states took a step back in recent years, there has been growing intervention by other countries such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), France, Turkey, Russia and Egypt, which have all been looking to secure their own interests in the post-Gaddafi era.
The Tripoli-based Government of National Accord (GNA), which was formed in 2015 through a UN-brokered agreement approved by the Security Council, has struggled to establish control over the country. Although it is the only governing body which has been recognised by the United Nations, it has been undermined by foreign intervention. Formally, the GNA has been supported by the United States and the European Union, but its main backers in recent years have been Italy, Turkey and Qatar.
The UAE, Egypt and to a certain extent France and Russia have all been supporting renegade military commander Khalifa Haftar, who since 2014 has been trying to take power in Libya through military force. The military operation he launched in April 2019 to take over the capital Tripoli, has further complicated the situation.
The conflict has been dragging on for nine months and the dynamics of international involvement has been shifting rapidly with significant external factors coming into play.
Although Haftar pledged to take the Libyan capital quickly, he failed to do so and was forced to seek additional support from his allies. After a visit to Moscow last year, a few hundred Russian mercenaries, mostly from the private military company Wagner Group, were sent to aid his war effort. Over the past few months, their number increased to 1,500.
Earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin admitted there are Russian fighters in Libya, but claimed they do not represent the state and are not paid by the Russian government.
In the face of another offensive on Tripoli, the GNA requested help from its backers and Turkey responded. In November, the two signed mémorandums of understanding, allowing for maritime and military cooperation between both countries. In January, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced the deployment of troops to Libya "to support the legitimate government and avoid a humanitarian tragedy".
The Trump administration seems to be content with Turkey playing a leading role, which may be why the US has become less involved. Washington has had limited diplomatic engagements through the US ambassador to Libya as well as the deputy national security adviser for the Middle East and North Africa, Victoria Coates, who has held several meetings with both camps in the past three months.
The Turkish military entrance into the conflict is not likely to be met by an escalation of involvement from Egypt, although this would exacerbate the conflict if it were to happen. Some Egyptian analysts, while condemning the Turkish intervention in Libya, have indicated that it is unlikely for Egypt to face off with Turkey militarily.
Libya's neighbour Algeria, which has just had a new president elected, has also become more vocal about getting involved in resolving the conflict, reiterating that the GNA is the legitimate government and that Tripoli is a red line. Algiers opposes Haftar's campaign and is perceived as balancing off the Egyptian involvement.
The main European players, namely Italy and France, have had to take a backseat in the past year. Italy lost much of its credibility and influence in Libya after its recent failure to host talks between Haftar and the head of the GNA, Fayez al-Sarraj. On January 7, Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte tried to organise a surprise meeting between Haftar and al-Sarraj in Rome, but the latter refused to attend.
Currently, Turkey and Russia seem to be trying to work together to resolve the conflict, as they have become the two key international players in Libya. The two managed to broker a ceasefire between the GNA and Haftar's forces which came into effect on January 12.
The following day, al-Sarraj and Haftar met in Moscow to sign an official open-ended ceasefire agreement. The latter, however, decided to pull out of the talks.
Amid this uncertainty and persisting tensions, on January 19, a conference will be held in Berlin to attempt to move the peace process in Libya forward. It will be attended by the two warring sides, as well as representatives of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council as well as Italy, Turkey, Algeria, Egypt, the UAE and the Republic of Congo, which chairs the African Union's special commission on Libya.
Whether Italy and France can use the Berlin conference to seize back the initiative in the Libyan conflict from Turkey and Russia remains to be seen. For now, the shift in dynamics on the ground has established Ankara and Moscow as the main powerbrokers.
The Turkish military presence in Libya will mean that the GNA is in a much stronger position to survive the onslaught by Haftar. This is likely to cause Egypt and the UAE to review their strategy on Libya and they may abandon their hopes of imposing a military solution through Haftar.
The deal struck between Erdogan and Putin ultimately means that both sides in Libya will need to compromise and realise that there is no way for either side to achieve a victory through military means. This should hopefully hasten the end of the current conflict and pave the way for political dialogue to negotiate a long-term political solution in Libya.
Inside Story: Is Haftar aggressor or leader in Lybia?
Since renegade military commander Khalifa Haftar launched an offensive on Libya's capital Tripoli in April, the conflict in the North African country has ground to a standstill.
After months of fighting, forces aligned with the United Nations-recognised Government of National Accord (GNA), based in Tripoli, have largely prevented Haftar, who is affiliated with a rival administration in the east, from seizing the city
Following a recent escalation in fighting, the UN on Wednesday welcomed calls by Turkey and Russia - who support opposing sides in the conflict - for a ceasefire amid warnings that Libya faced becoming a "second Syria".
As more foreign actors jostle for influence in Lybia, let's take a look at the powers looking to shape events in the war-wracked country and who they are siding with.
Inside Story: Who is fueling war in Lybia?
United Arab Emirates:The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is seen by many experts as one of Haftar's main supporters, having supplied him with advanced weapon systems in violation of a 2011 UN arms embargo imposed at the beginning of an uprising that toppled longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi.
Haftar's self-styled Libyan National Army (LNA) has relied heavily on UAE air support, which includes the suspected deployment of Chinese-made Wing Loong II drones during its months-long offensive against the GNA.
A UN report released in November said the UAE also supplied Haftar with the Russian-made Pantsir S-1 advanced air defence system that was installed at the al-Jufra base near the town of Gharyan.
"The complexity and costs of the system make it very unlikely that the United Arab Emirates has supplied it to any other entity who could have subsequently transferred it to Libya," the report said.
A separate UN report in 2017 said the Gulf country built an airbase at Al Khadim in eastern Libya and provided Haftar with aircraft as well as military vehicles.
The UAE considers Haftar a trusted partner capable of curbing the spread of political Islam, most notably the Muslim Brotherhood.
"Abu Dhabi has no tolerance for political Islam, including its most moderate manifestations,"said a Libya expert. "The only way for them to sleep easy at night and be sure proponents of political Islam do not wield any power in Libya is to prop up strict autocracy instead. The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood happens to be very weak politically in Libya is not going to reassure or appease the Emiratis. The latter prefer erring on the safe side, by combating any form of democratic opening, whether legitimate, corrupt or dysfunctional."
Egypt : Like Abu Dhabi, Cairo's aversion to the Muslim Brotherhood has meant that it found in Haftar a natural ally.
President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi took power after a 2013 military coup that toppled the elected president Mohamed Morsi, Egypt's first democratically elected head of state and a member of the Brotherhood. The group was outlawed that same year and declared a "terrorist" organisation by Egyptian authorities.
For Cairo, the GNA's makeup, one that accepts the participation of groups such as the Brotherhood - already an important component of the UN-recognised government - in the political decision-making process, constitutes a major red line.
Haftar's endorsement by wealthy Gulf states, his military background and ability to rein in armed groups in eastern Libya's sparsely populated desert region have also earned him the support of el-Sisi.
Egypt has used its vast border with Libya to funnel weapons and provide logistical support to Haftar, according to Libyan officials and Egyptian foreign ministry.
During a recent trip to Cairo, Haftar - who received part of his military training in Egypt - said he would take over Tripoli "within hours" if Egypt were to send troops to assist his forces.
France : French President Emmanuel Macron, who sees himself as Napoleon, has officially backed efforts for a peaceful solution to the conflict in Libya.
That stance, however, is counterweighed by France's diplomatic support for Haftar, which includes the blocking of a European Union statement calling on the renegade military commander to halt his assault on the capital, prompting GNA Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj in April to accuse the Macron administration of backing a "dictator".
There are also concerns that France is providing Haftar with military support.
Tunisia's border guard in April denied entry to 13 French nationals attempting to cross into its territory after the group failed to disclose weapons it had in its possession.
Quoting a "well-placed source" at Tunisia's presidential palace, Radio France International reported the men were not diplomats as claimed but intelligence agents.
In June, US-made Javelin missiles belonging to France were found at a base used by Haftar's troops in the town of Gharyan, located some 80km (50 miles) south of Tripoli.
In 2016, a French helicopter crashed near Benghazi, killing three soldiers, during what then-President François Hollande described as a "dangerous intelligence operation". The GNA said the incident was a "violation" of its sovereignty.
Russia: Much like France, Russia has publicly supported the UN's mediation efforts led by Special Envoy Ghassan Salame. Moscow, however, in April blocked a UN Security Council statement that would have called on the Libyan commander to halt his advance on Tripoli.
Russian mercenaries from the private Wagner group have also reportedly joined the battle alongside Haftar's forces. If true, it is hard to believe that it could have happened without the Kremlin's greenlight and suggests a push by Russia to establish itself as a new power broker in the region.
While Russia may lack the political capital to launch an Astana-like process in Libya, its gamble on the inaction of its counterparts may still position it as a power broker.
Moscow denies sending troops to back Haftar.
United States: The US was among the states that supported the efforts that led to the GNA's creation in late 2015. But soon after taking office in January 2017, US President Donald Trump said he did not see a "role" in Libya.
"I think the United States has right now enough roles. We are in a role everywhere," Trump said in April, 2017. But Washington began to send mixed signals shortly after Haftar launched his offensive on Tripoli.
In an April 19 phone conversation with Haftar, who is also a US citizen, Trump recognised "Field Marshall Haftar's significant role in fighting terrorism and securing Libya's oil resources".
Washington in July blocked a UNSC statement ciondemning and air raid on a migrant detention centre that killed more than 40 people, which the GNA blamed on the US ally UAE.
Saudi Arabia: The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported in April that Saudi Arabia offered tens of millions of dollars to help fund Haftar's Tripoli offensive. According to the US publication, the offer came during a visit by Haftar to the Saudi capital, Riyadh, in late March 2019, days before the launch of his assault on Tripoli.
Citing senior advisers to the Saudi government, the WSJ said the offer of funds, which Haftar accepted, was intended to buy the loyalty of tribal leaders, recruit and pay fighters and other such military purposes.
However, Riyadh, which views the Muslim Brotherhood with the same level of apprehension as the neighbouring UAE, has been bogged down by a conflict of its own in Yemen.
Sudan/Jordan : A report by the UNSC Libya sanctions committee in November accused Sudan and the head of Sudan's Rapid Support Forces (RSF), Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, widely known as Hemeti, of violating UN sanctions by deploying 1,000 troops to Libya.
Citing Sudanese military commanders in Libya, The Guardian said in December that as many as 3,000 Sudanese soldiers were participating in Haftar's military campaign. They included fighters from the impoverished Darfur region.
Jordan is another country that is mentioned in the report.
Turkey: Turkey has been one of the GNA's foremost supporters since its inception in 2015.
Ankara has stepped up its military support for the GNA in the face of Haftar's military campaign.
In addition to armoured vehicles, the GNA was reported to have bought 20 Bayraktar TB2 drones from Turkey last summer. It is currently stepping up, as I explained above.
The maritime border delineation deal is a way for Ankara to affirm its position as a leading power in the region, according to analysts, who are quick to point out that drilling rights in the contested seabed only tell part of the story.
Turkey is going to Libya to make sure that any discussion in the Mediterranean includes Ankara because neighbouring countries are trying to exclude it. If Libya falls under Haftar, who is an ally of the UAE, which in turn is antagonistic to Turkey, that essentially puts all of Turkish maritime interests in the Mediterranean at the mercy of the UAE, Egypt and Greece," said an expert.
Qatar: Qatar's dispute with its Gulf neighbours is reflected in the Libyan theatre where Doha supports a Tripoli government that is more tolerant of Islamist elements - such as the Muslim Brotherhood - than the Haftar-affiliated House of Representatives (HoR), which in turn enjoys the support of the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Doha had played a key financial and military role in the 2011 overthrow of Gaddafi but has since taken a backseat with its support for GNA tempered and limited to diplomatic backing.
Italy: Lybia is a former Italian colony and Rome has maintained strict neutrality throughout the conflict raging across the Mediterranean.
Though supportive of the internationally-recognised GNA, Italy advocates for a comprehensive peace process that would incorporate all segments of Libyan society, which it knows well as the country's former occupying power.
In April, Italy's then-Interior Minister Matteo Salvini warned France against supporting any of the warring factions for "economic or commercial reasons" after Paris blocked the EU's call for restraint.
Rumour has it that Italy is concerned France is trying to usurp Italian oil giant ENI's privileged position in the North African country.
Inside Story: How is outside intervention shaping Lybia's future
Inside Story: Are the chances of finding peace in Lybia getting worse?
PALESTINA
“Israel has impounded the only vehicle available to a medical team that provides assistance to 1,500 Palestinians living inside an Israeli military firing zone in the West Bank,” according to Haaretz.
The Palestinian community that was denied its only access to medical services is Masafer Yatta, a tiny Palestinian village located in the South Hebron hills.
Masafer Yatta, which exists in complete and utter isolation from the rest of the occupied West Bank, is located in ‘Area C’, which constitutes the larger territorial chunk, about 60%, of the West Bank. This means that the village, along with many Palestinian towns, villages and small, isolated communities, is under total Israeli military control.
Do not let the confusing logic of the Oslo Accords fool you; all Palestinians, in all parts of the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and the besieged Gaza Strip, are under Israeli military control as well.
Unfortunately for Masafer Yatta, and those living in ‘Area C’, however, the degree of control is so suffocating that every aspect of Palestinian life – freedom of movement, education, access to clean water, and so on – is controlled by a complex system of Israeli military ordinances that have no regard whatsoever for the well-being of the beleaguered communities.
It is no surprise, then, that Masafer Yatta’s only vehicle, a desperate attempt at fashioning a mobile clinic, was confiscated in the past as well, and was only retrieved after the impoverished residents were forced to pay a fine to Israeli soldiers.
There is no military logic in the world that could rationally justify the barring of medical access to an isolated community, especially when an Occupying Power like Israel is legally obligated under the Fourth Geneva Convention to ensure medical access to civilians living in an Occupied Territory.
It is only natural that Masafer Yatta, like all Palestinians in ‘Area C’ and the larger West Bank, feel neglected – and outright betrayed – by the international community as well as their own quisling leadership.
But there is more that makes Masafer Yatta even more unique, qualifying it for the unfortunate designation of being a Bantustan within a Bantustan, as it subsists in a far more complex system of control, compared to the one imposed on black South Africa during the Apartheid regime era.
Soon after Israel occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza, it devised a long-term stratagem aimed at the permanent control of the newly-occupied territories. While it designated some areas for the future relocation of its own citizens – who now make up the extremist illegal Jewish settler population in the West Bank – it also set aside large swathes of the Occupied Territories as security and buffer zones.
What is far less known is that, throughout the 1970s, the Israeli military declared roughly 18% of the West Bank as “firing zones”.
These “firing zones” were supposedly meant as training grounds for the Israeli occupation army soldiers – although Palestinians trapped in these regions often report that little or no military training takes place within “firing zones”.
According to the Office for the UN Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Palestine, there are around 5,000 Palestinians, divided among 38 communities that still live, under most dire circumstances, within the so-called “firing zones”.
The 1967 occupation led to a massive wave of ethnic cleansing that saw the forced removal of approximately 300,000 Palestinians from the newly-conquered territory. Many of the vulnerable communities that were ethnically cleansed included Palestinian Bedouins, who continue to pay the price for Israel’s colonial designs in the Jordan Valley, the South Hebron Hills and other parts of occupied Palestine.
This vulnerability is compounded by the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) acts with little regards to Palestinians living in ‘Area C’, who are left to withstand and resist Israeli pressures alone, often resorting to Israel’s own unfair judicial system, to win back some of their basic rights.
The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993 between the Palestinian leadership and the Israeli government, divided the West Bank into three regions: ‘Area A’, theoretically under autonomous Palestinian control and consisting of 17.7% of the overall size of the West Bank; ‘Area B’, 21%, and under shared Israeli-PA control and ‘Area C’, the remainder of the West Bank, and under total Israeli control.
This arrangement was meant to be temporary, set to conclude in 1999 once the “final status negotiations” were concluded and a comprehensive peace accord was signed. Instead, it became the status quo ante.
As unfortunate as the Palestinians living in ‘Area C’ are, those living in the “firing zone” within ‘Area C’ are enduring the most hardship. According to the United Nations, their hardship includes “the confiscation of property, settler violence, harassment by soldiers, access and movement restrictions and/or water scarcity.”
Expectedly, many illegal Jewish settlements sprang up in these “firing zones” over the years, a clear indication that these areas have no military purpose whatsoever, but were meant to provide an Israeli legal justification to confiscate nearly a fifth of the West Bank for future colonial expansion.
Throughout the years, Israel ethnically cleansed all remaining Palestinians in these “firing zones”, leaving behind merely 5,000, who are likely to suffer the same fate should the Israeli occupation continue on the same violent trajectory.
This makes the story of Masafer Yatta a microcosm of the tragic and larger story of all Palestinians. It is also a reflection of the sinister nature of Israeli colonialism and military occupation, where occupied Palestinians lose their land, their water, their freedom of movement and eventually, even the most basic medical care.
These harsh “conditions contribute to a coercive environment that creates pressure on Palestinian communities to leave these areas,” according to the United Nations. In other words, ethnic cleansing, which has been Israel’s strategic goal all along.
BRASIL
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário