Aya

1953
HT logo
 
 
 
               
 

:::
:::
 

Bismillahi Al-Rahman Al-Raheem

Answer to Question:
Political Developments on the Libyan Scene
(Translated)

Question

On 4/11/2017, Middle East published: “The conclusion of the Cairo meetings with an agreement on the unification of the Libyan military institution”. Libyan military officials had met in Cairo on 30/10/2017 under the announcement of restructuring the national army, noting that the UN envoy to Libya, Ghassan Salame, began to lead Libyan talks with Siraj government and the Tobruk House of Representatives on his proposed road map for the solution since 21/9/2017, but it was suspended before it reached a month because of the dilemma of Article 08 of the Skhirat Agreement signed on 17 December 2015. The question is: Does the initiation of military meetings mean that political meetings have failed? In other words, are the military talks intended to find a military solution to Article 8 after the failure of political talks? Then, what’s new that took place during these two years after the Skhirat agreement, which was contracted by both parties at that time, and now they disagree?! Thank you.

Answer

Nothing new took place; the two parties have contracted the agreement and the seeds of dispute existed, but each party had signed for a different purpose and with different motives. To get a clearer picture, we present the following matters:

1. In the era of Qaddhafi, the active political circle was loyal to Britain, while the American influence was not effective in that era. When the Qaddafi rule ended, the old political class was re-established because its roots were present and were not uprooted. While politicians loyal to America did not have an effective presence. That is why Europe was interested in the elections to find a government and a parliament as soon as possible because it expected that the results would be in its favor because of the influence of the old political circle. America was interested in blocking any elections to create a new political circle to stand in the face of the political circle that is loyal to Britain. So what Europe was interested in was accelerating the political solution, whereas America was interested in delaying the solutions until it creates a new political circle and it has no choice to make this circle except through the military arrogance, as is the habit of America.

2. America has sent the Libyan officer Haftar to work in Libya to serve its interests, a man whose profile pronounces his loyalty to America. He and about 300 Libyan soldiers were taken hostages in March 1987, then American brokered with Chad, and negotiated with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency in 1990 for his release. Haftar was taken to Zaire on a U.S. aircraft, and then to America and was granted a political asylum in the United States, where he joined the Libyan opposition movement abroad. So, he spent the following 20 years in the state of Virginia, USA, where he was trained in guerrilla warfare by the CIA, and did not return to Libya, until after the revolution of February 17 (February 2011). America sent him to Libya to try to establish a military force to gain land in Libya and to create a new political circle through military (victories), by providing him with arms and funds directly through it, or through Sisi, its agent in Egypt. America was disrupting any political solution in Libya while waiting for Haftar to be able to find effective influence. He focused on the East because Tripoli was full of pro-European political circle, especially Britain, and to a certain extent he succeeded in establishing power in eastern Libya and dominated the Parliament in Tobruk.

3. In the year 2015, Europe was keen not to wait for more than that year to find a political solution before the reality of the political circle changed. Europe has been able to focus on sending an envoy to Libya who is loyal to Europe to speed up the steps, and has succeeded in sending Leonand began to promote the political solution and was able to create a lobbying atmosphere in the Security Council, while at the same time an embarrassing atmosphere for America if it rejects the political solution. On the one hand, America has considered the matter from another angle, it saw that the objection to the political solution after that promotion is not in its favor, at the same time, it has made its plan to agree on the Skhirat agreement to dominate it by amending or eliminating it, and so it was. Thus, Article 08 of the agreement was about the control of military power. The European community was aware that Haftar is an American agent and that America wants him to be the army commander, so they laid out this article which states that the army follows the prime Minister since Siraj is loyal to them. This article became the stumbling block in which America saw a suitable opportunity to disrupt the agreement until Haftar succeeds to become an effective force in the army and on the ground and then creates an effective political circle that conflicts the European political circle in and around Tripoli.

4 .This is the current reality which has not changed much from what it has been since the Skhirat Agreement in late 2015, so there has been nothing new in the objectives of the parties and their political and military motives. We have already issued answers to questions on the subject of Libya since the Skhirat Agreement in which we have clarified this matter for whoever has a heart or who listens while he is present in mind:

- It was stated in the Answer to Question on 3/6/2014: “The United States recognizes that the political circle in Libya is a British manufacture with some French presence that strengthens the political circle loyal to Britain in Libya which means that any future elections will see the rise of the men of Europe with a few “independents”. Then the situation will stabilize and end the ambitions of America which wanted to exploit its actual military influence during the end of Gaddafi’s rule to get the largest share of the influence, and this is not possible through holding elections in this atmosphere, which is still the European atmosphere. It thought of shuffling the papers militarily and rearranging the atmosphere in Libya to create a new political class loyal to America and then hold elections. The first step was to assign a military man to take a move similar to a coup against the status quo, which is dominated by the National Congress, where the majority of the men belong to Europe… in order to shuffle the cards and for the postponement of the elections to better the conditions for America only to dominate the arena, if not then it can be in partnership with Europe, and will not let Europe dominate the arena entirely. Thus, Haftar steps in with a profile that pronounces his loyalty to America…”

- The Answer to Question on 11/4/2015 stated: “Europe is aware of this matter; that America is working to derail the negotiations, and therefore, they chose a reliable envoy, Bernardino Leon, a European envoy in origin. Bernardino Leon has proceeded to reach a political solution; his main concern was to accomplish his mission in the first period of his office, which was due to expire at the end of March 2015, before its extension under Security Council Resolution 2213 until September 15, 2015… and he was in a hurry to end it in the first period which began in Geneva and moved to Libya and then to Morocco, then Algeria and then returned to be held in Morocco. In Morocco and in the negotiations session on Thursday, 12/03/2015, the Tobruk parliament members asked to postpone the resumption of political consultations between the Libyan parties for another week i.e. on Thursday, 19/03/2015 for further consultation… Leon focused on the importance of a political solution as soon as possible… also on 16/3/2015 a joint statement of the European Union was issued, and it warns of the failure of the negotiations. It states, “The failure to reach a political agreement will put Libya’s security at risk. As soon as an agreement is reached on forming a government of national unity and related security arrangements, the European Union would be willing to strengthen its support for Libya ” (German news agency 16/3/2015).”

- The Answer to Question on 19/1/2016 stated: “Britain was aware that the political center or most of it was on its side, so it was reassured that any interim government, according to Leon’s proposals, will be on its side and so it was interested in accelerating the Sakhirat agreement and getting it approved in Leon’s era. When it could not, then Kobler was appointed and the amendments were made. Britain realized that these amendments were because of the US pressure on Kobler, as a step of other US steps to thwart fully the agreement, so that it will be completely shaped by America again as it wishes. That came after forming a new political class as a result of military actions carried out by Haftar in conjunction with political conspiracies run by America. Britain, therefore, saw the urgency to conclude the agreement before other unprecedented events take place. So, the agreement, even with amendments, remained acceptable, and so it rushed things, and was keen to hold the final agreement in Sakhirat, Morocco on 17/12/2015, and to make it legitimate and acceptable internationally, it resorted to the Security Council, and submitted the Draft Resolution 2259 to support the decisions of the final agreement… what made Britain rush is the US moves to block the agreements… The former adviser to the President of the Libyan Council of Representatives, Issa Abdul Qayoom, pointed to this on 13/12/2015 on Al Ghad Al Arabi TV when he said: “... Kerry’s statements, the American Secretary of State, made it clear that the Americans do not have enough enthusiasm to resolve the crisis, unlike the British and the French, who expressed enthusiasm for it…”.

- And the Answer to Question on 12/3/2016 stated: “As for the reason for this “American” obstruction, then that is because the greater portion of the political medium in Libya are from the remains of Gaddafi’s era, i.e. they are loyal to Europe… This means that any ministerial formation will be in accordance to this measure just as it is within the new ministry. This is whilst America is reliant upon Haftar and a band from amongst the military around him… For that reason, America is obstructing the political solution to the best of its ability by way of military intervention, by Haftar and its subordinates until it can guarantee a rule in which it has the lion share within it… This is contrary to what Europe is doing as it is working to make the agreement succeed and the government to be formed and approved since it still has control or dominance over the political medium and the indications for that are numerous. British Foreign Minister, Phillip Hammond, undertook a visit to Algeria and met with its Foreign Minister, Ramtane Lamamra, on 19/02/2016 and reiterated there that “military intervention in Libya is not representative of the most appropriate solution to solving the crisis that the land has witnessed, and he called for a political solution” (Algerian News, 19/02/2016)”

5. Therefore, things have been clear to all those who have vision since the signing of the Skhirat Agreement in the month of December 2015, or even before, that Europe was rushing the solution because the existing political class is loyal to it, while America was blocking the solution until it is enabled to the military power through its tools and then it will manufacture a new political authority… As a result, negotiations have been in place; sometimes they get close and then they distant away and so on. Thus, after a month of their launch, there was a withdrawal of the Tobruk delegation, and then they were suspended ... Salame was meeting with this and that, and proposing suggestions from here and there, and he justified their withdrawal and their return from Tunisia to Libya to consult with their references ... Perhaps he knows that the agreement of the parties to the final solution requires the approval of the international forces behind them, which Ghassan Salame himself does not have, and even the parties do not have it unless those behind them agree. And so was the withdrawal, the suspension and the return from Tunisia to Libya under the pretext of consulting with their respective references:

- Al-Jazeera correspondent said that the delegation of Libyan House of Representatives has withdrawn from the negotiations with the Supreme Council of the State without revealing the reasons for this after two rounds of dialogue in Tunisia to amend the Skhirat agreement… However, the reporter stated that the reasons may be related to the wording of Article 08, which was discussed at a loud session this morning, at which the issue of the Presidential Council and the Government were debated (Al-Jazeera, 16/10/2017)... A source told Al-Jazeera that a meeting at the headquarters of the UN Mission in Tunisia between the United Nations envoy to Libya, Ghassan Salame, and the two heads of the dialogue committee, Musa Faraj and Abdel Salam Nasieh, to assess what happened on Monday of the suspension of meetings between the two delegations (Al-Jazeera, 17/10/2017)...AlsoAl-Jazeera correspondent in Tunisia reported that the UN mission in Libya handed over to the two sides of the Libyan dialogue a document that included the drafting of points of consensus as well as the points of divergence between them to be discussed at their meetings during the day and to make their comments on them separately (Al-Jazeera, 18/10/2017)… In a press conference held in Tunisia on Saturday 21/10/2017, Salame pointed out that there are areas of understanding and agreement between the delegations of the Libyan House of Representatives and the Supreme Council of the State interlocutors in Tunisia, which calls for their return to Libya on Sunday to discuss with political leaders there, pointing out to the existence of points of difference, including Article 08 that the United Nations Mission will seek to remove them (Al-Jazeera, 24/10/2017).

6.Therefore, Haftar was focused on military action, and this was not a secret. The military work of Haftar and his statements during the negotiations of the Presidential Council and the Tobruk Parliament under the auspices of Ghassan Salame, which began on 21/9/2017, was focused on military action, and his statements in the meantime questioned the effectiveness of the negotiations. Al-Jazeera published on 14/10/2017: Retired Major General Khalifa Haftar questioned the possibility of resolving the crisis of Libya in accordance with the UN-sponsored negotiating track… Haftar said in a speech at the first security conference in Benghazi that there are no indicators to reassure the people that the ongoing dialogue is the only solution to the political crisis. He brandished other alternatives to political dialogue, including the military and all security services “which will comply with the wishes of the People”. Haftar has declared in mid-August 2017: “We are determined to continue the struggle until the army extends its control over the entire Libyan territory ...” (Middle East, 15/8/2017). 

Therefore, America’s focus on the military solution to lead the political solution is at the heart of its work in Libya; it hinders the political solution until it can increase the scope of its military control and then it executes the solution with a stronger American influence than a European influence. That is, America focuses on the military solution to lead the political solution, and takes every appropriate opportunity for this ... So, when it found the opportunity to hold a military meeting in Cairo to ensure the effective influence of Haftar in the army, it ordered Haftar to do this on 30/10/2017. Thus, a meeting was held in Cairo between Libyan military factions, all of which support Haftar or do not oppose him… and the meeting concluded on the evening of 2/11/2017: Middle East learned that the third round of negotiations on the unification of the Libyan military institution held in Cairo between Libyan officers, which concluded its work on the evening of the day before yesterday, reached near-final points of agreement on the unification of the Libyan army and its relationship with the civil authority in Libya, which has been plagued by military and security chaos since 2011 (Middle East, 4 November 2017). This is an indication that America and its tools, Egypt and Haftar, have made some progress to some extent where Haftar has become a difficult figure who has control on a large part of land, 
especially in the East and the Oil Crescent, in exchange for some slowdown in Europe’s gains (Britain and something from France and Italy). However, this does not mean that the conflict has ended since Europe also has forces in Libya as well as it is more cunning in the political work than America ... Thus, it is expected that the international conflict on Libya will continue between America and its tools on one hand, and Europe and its tools on the other… and the flames of this conflict will be fought by the Libyans…

7. It is worth mentioning that Muslims issues are to be resolved by the hands of the Muslims, not by the hands of their enemies, and the solution is easily possible for those whom Allah (swt) made it easy for. The weapon of such solution is sincerity to Allah in secret and in public and righteousness with the Messenger of Allah (saw) in word and deed, and then negotiators will see that they are in front of an ancient Islamic country since the Islamic conquest at the time of Khaleefah Omar Ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, and all of its people are Muslims, and the solution for its issues are in the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw), it has no connection with the Kaffir colonists,

((وَلا تَرْكَنُوا إِلَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا فَتَمَسَّكُمُ النَّارُ وَمَا لَكُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ مِنْ أَوْلِيَاءَ ثُمَّ لا تُنْصَرُونَ))

“And do not incline toward those who do wrong, lest you be touched by the Fire, and you would not have other than Allah any protectors; then you would not be helped.” [Hud: 113].

In conclusion, we reiterate what we have previously said: It is painful to see the Muslim countries that were the launching points of the conquests that spread Islam, which carries the justice and goodness throughout the world, have become a battlefield that the Kaffir colonists compete to kill us and plunder our wealth and laugh heartily when every drop of blood shed from us, not in their hands, but also by the hands of their agents from us.

The Kaffir colonists are our enemies; therefore, it is not surprising that they excel their efforts to kill us, but when the opposing parties of Libya line up and some of them befriend America, and some of them befriend Europe, then they fight among themselves, fighting not for Islam and upholding the word of Allah but for the interests of the Kaffir colonists… It is one of the major sins, the killing of Muslims among themselves is a major crime in Islam. The Prophet (saw) said,

كُلُّ الْمُسْلِمِ عَلَى الْمُسْلِمِ حَرَامٌ، دَمُهُ، وَمَالُهُ، وَعِرْضُهُ»»

“It is prohibited for the Muslim to violate a Muslim over his blood, and his money, and his honour” (Narrated by Muslim from Abu Huraira) and the Prophet (saw) said,

«لَزَوَالُ الدُّنْيَا أَهْوَنُ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ مِنْ قَتْلِ رَجُلٍ مُسْلِمٍ» “The demise of the world is lesser to Allah than the killing of a Muslim man.” (Extracted by An-Nasa’I from Abdullah ibn Amr).

((إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَذِكْرَىٰ لِمَن كَانَ لَهُ قَلْبٌ أَوْ أَلْقَى السَّمْعَ وَهُوَ شَهِيدٌ))

“Indeed, in that is a reminder for whoever has a heart or who listens while he is present [in mind].” [Qaf: 37]

17th Safar 1439 AH

   
06.11.2017
   



Read more:-

Question & Answer: Political Developments on the Libyan Scene


Question & Answer: Political Repercussions in the Province of Catalonia!


Question & Answer: What is behind the Referendum on the Separation of the Kurdistan Region


Q & A: America’s Strategy in Afghanistan


Ameer’s Q & A: Queries on Usul Al-Fiqh