Libya: The beginnings of an agreement to form the fourteenth government after the revolution

Rashid Khashana – Al-Quds Al-Arabi
Al-Dabaiba is facing the worst waves of popular and political discontent, as voices calling for his ouster have risen, describing his government as a government of “corruption and normalization” in protest against what it considers the spread of corruption and the absence of sovereignty and security.

More than one hundred and twenty members of the Libyan House of Representatives and the Supreme Council of State cut their hair with the head of the National Unity Government, Abdul Hamid Dabaiba, after they moved from criticizing his delay in resigning, to embarking on a political path that will most likely lead to the overthrow of his government and the naming of a new government. New national unity. Dabaiba is facing the most serious political crisis since his government was chosen to run the country’s affairs, at a meeting in Geneva, with the participation of 75 political figures, selected one by one by the United Nations.
Al-Dabaiba is also facing the worst waves of popular and political discontent throughout Libya, as voices calling for his ouster have risen, describing his government as a government of “corruption and normalization” in protest against what it considers the spread of corruption, the absence of sovereignty and security, and the collapse of the climate of reassurance and personal and collective security. Therefore, elements of the Libyan elite stress the search for consensuses that enable the formation of a single government, and the expansion of the dialogue table, so that it accommodates and represents all Libyans, ensuring the success of the elections and acceptance of their results.

Demands for resignation

But what is notable about the current version is that the United Nations is not a direct party to it. There are those who considered the initiative a response to the recent briefing by UN envoy Abdullah Batili, in which he accused the current Libyan parties of rejecting the elections. Indeed, we can see the ball of crisis rolling to hit the de facto government and turn its page, amid ever-increasing demands for the resignation of its president, Al-Dabaiba. Through these consultative meetings held last Tuesday and Wednesday in Tunisia, the Libyan representatives hope to put an end to the crisis, similar to the Skhirat meetings in Morocco in 2015, from which a government of national accord emerged headed by Fayez al-Sarraj.
The presidents of both councils were absent from the meetings, making their outcomes non-binding. The question today is the following: Do the presidents of the two councils agree with this initiative? It makes sense that they would be aware of it, but they seem to be keeping their distance for now. It is said that the French presidency is currently working to host the two Libyan rivals, Mohamed Takala and Aguila Saleh, to achieve a reconciliation that allows the crisis to be resolved, under the auspices of the United Nations, and in addition to the signature of the presidents of the two councils on the minutes of the Tunisian meetings. It is likely that ministers from the Dabaiba government will be retained, in the context of maintaining some governmental stability, and that the majority of ministers will be technocrats, whose mission is limited to preparing for presidential and legislative elections postponed since 2021.
One of the participants in the meetings reported that the organizers were initially intending to hold the meeting in Morocco, but the Moroccan authorities apologized, fearing that their position would be considered participation in the overthrow of Dabaiba and his government. It seems that the Tunisians initially took this position, and it was said behind the scenes of the Ramada Hotel in the northern suburb of the Tunisian capital that there was pressure on the party calling for the meeting, and its pressure did not ease until it provided reassurances.
What is new about this agreement, which came in the wake of months of political deadlock and unemployment, is undoubtedly the absence of the representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations (or his absence), with the presence of employees from the mission behind the scenes of the meeting. It is likely that the Libyans wanted to punish the mission, after its head, Abdullah Batili, criticized the Libyan leaders, accusing them of not wanting to give up their chairs. The two-day meetings in Tunisia also came after Batelli failed to pass the “five-party table” proposal, which is a meeting between the five influential people in the Libyan crisis, with the exception of the head of the parallel government, Osama Hammad, based on a veto from Dabaiba.
In other words, what was agreed upon among the 120 representatives was the minutes of a meeting, stipulating the formation of a new government that would work to achieve the electoral entitlement, as stipulated in Articles 86 and 90 of the electoral laws. Identical sources reported that Al-Dabaiba sought to disrupt the meeting of members of the House of Representatives and the State, by all means. He contacted Tunisian officials to convince them that the Tunisian meeting was illegal. The meeting coincided with the National Oil Corporation’s pledge to disburse 200 million dinars to Tunisia for health debt receivables, despite the Central Bank of Libya’s objection to this process.

Punish the mission?

Some Libyans believe that the Tunis meetings came to punish the UN mission and confirm Libyans’ ownership of the political process. This is a statement far from reality, because successive UN envoys to Libya, from the Lebanese Tariq Mitri to the Czech Jan Kubis and then Abdullah Batelli, were controlling the decision. Libyan, one way or another.
Hence, it was agreed to hold a new consultative meeting between members of the House of Representatives and the state, within a month, and to commit to implementing electoral laws No. 27 and 28 of 2023, completed through the “6+6” committee and issued by the House of Representatives, by consensus between the two chambers. On this basis, it was agreed to form a new national government under the auspices of the UN mission, which would prepare and supervise the holding of elections, and to choose a prime minister “in a fair and transparent manner.” Among the political statements issued by the two councils, after the meeting, was the emphasis on “establishing binding controls and legislation for the next government, ensuring the fight against centralization, supporting local units, and direct allocations to municipalities and governorates.”
This is about the political section of the outcomes, while in the economic and security section, the attendees expressed “deep concern about the deteriorating living and security conditions, the increase in corruption, and the encroachment on the country’s sovereign wealth and resources.” The unified government will be prepared by a follow-up committee of members of both councils, which will undertake the task of local and international communication, that is, contacting the influential forces at home, and also with the capitals of decision-making in the Libyan file abroad, i.e. America, Russia, Turkey, the Emirates, and Egypt, with the committee submitting its report after a month. This means that a meeting will be held next month in the presence of members of both councils, to consider the extent of progress in implementing the outcomes of the aforementioned dialogue rounds, and what can be built on them.
Among the fruits of the Tunisia meetings was also an agreement to call on the High National Elections Commission to begin implementing electoral laws, and to ask it to announce the date of holding the elections. Announcing the timing of the electoral process will be a turning point in the path of a political solution to the conflict in Libya, and an overcoming of previous obstacles. But there are those who have the ability to obstruct and confuse the path, led by Abdul Hamid Al-Dabaiba and retired Major General Khalifa Haftar, who will work to place his followers in the unified government. That is why the attendees called on the two prime ministers, the international community, the United Nations, and the UN mission to support this agreement and build on it.
But the statement issued after the meetings was weak, as it did not address the disease, from which crises emerge, one after another, represented by the spread of weapons without the ability of the state, or what remains of its agencies, to control and neutralize it. The statement also did not address the militia members, who have established their own emirates, preventing the holding of free, fair and transparent elections at the level to which all Libyans aspire.

Extrajudicial execution

What is more dangerous than that is the lack of security, especially in the Eastern Region, where dissenting opinions are not allowed, and where former Defense Minister Mahdi Al-Barghathi was imprisoned and killed, along with forty of his guards and relatives, without a trial or specific charge, which prompted the UN mission to demand that the authorities in the Eastern Region , which is run by Khalifa Haftar and his sons, has requested to conduct an “independent and transparent investigation” into the fate of these dead, who are still registered on the list of “missing persons.”
As for the economic part of the outcomes of the Tunis meetings, it focused on the diseases that afflict most sectors, including the high level of inflation in spending and funding from unknown sources, based on what was stated in a report by the Central Bank of Libya. This is a clear indication of the negligence of the Dabaiba government, which prompted those gathered in Tunisia to warn against increasing expenditures, and to demand the formation of an investigation committee into this.
Among the movements present in the Tunisian meetings is the movement calling for the return of the monarchy, as a solution to the intractable political crisis in Libya. Among the participants in the recent meetings were representatives defending this option. King Muhammad Idris Al-Senussi (1890-1983) was the first king to ascend to the throne of Libya, in 1951 following its independence from Italy, before he was overthrown by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi 18 years later. Today, the Senussi family is represented by the son of Crown Prince Muhammad al-Hassan al-Rida al-Senussi. Since the 2011 uprising, the royal tricolor flag has returned as the official flag of Libya, instead of Gaddafi’s green flag.
When the conflict over the conditions for enacting a new constitution became intense, many intellectuals, politicians, and constitutional experts called for a return to the monarchy constitution as a compromise solution. Today, the royalists believe that the solution to the political and security problems that Libya has been facing for thirteen years is to return to August 31, 1969, which is the day before the military coup led by Gaddafi, and the king was in the Turkish city of Bursa that day. It is noteworthy that the Crown Prince has been receiving delegations from various Libyan cities in a “national dialogue,” stressing the necessity of “restoring royal constitutional legitimacy, through which Libya will restore its legal and constitutional framework and preserve its unity,” according to what he told a delegation he recently visited.
In the end, the position of the presidents of the two councils, and behind them the forces supporting them, at home and abroad, will be decisive in the success or failure of the current political initiative, like the fate of its predecessors.