Menu
The process leading to elections is the way for solving the Libyan crisis, through creating the conditions for peace
© DR
His recent statement, claiming for elections to be organized during the current year, could be an attempt to come back in the game.
Indeed, for many years, it seems that the various proposed solutions have failed. Alternative methods should therefore be considered. Why not use these elections as a pretext to bring the main protagonists closer together ? It could, by some aspects, show them that some arrangements in the distribution of the post-crisis roles would allow everyone to protect his own interest.
, On May 29, 2018 already, the four main actors of the Libyan crisis agreed to enter the elections process in December 2018. This agreement was not imposed on them. It came after several rounds of negotiations to find a common ground and a distribution of roles allowing everyone to have guarantees about his future after the election. In fact, it is a question of determining the place of each of them in terms of political, economic, financial and influence consequences, whatever the future administrative organization of Libya should be at the end. This would be a win-win for everyone, provided that the game’s rules are respected to preserve the precarious balance of the process.
Because, it is in fact where the danger lies. Indeed, some groups can be manipulated by divergent interests to make this process fail. In the prevailing anarchy, it is tempting and easy to bribe militias to sow disorder and derail the agreement signed on May 29, 2018 in Paris.
Thus, the Libyan protagonists, eager to preserve a certain freedom of action, intend to lead the game in their own way, accepting external support, at their request, without having to obey to external sponsors. Some foreign nations, due to their lack of understanding this Libyan point of interest, lose their time and legitimacy to impose their influence.
In conclusion, even if the electoral process is a hard bet to win, it is not an end in itself. It serves only as a pretext for creating the conditions for a truly constructive dialogue with, in the background, the representation of what Libya might be tomorrow. This method has the merit of agreeing the main protagonists on their future role and of deciding the actions to be taken, in a coordinated way, to achieve this. Thus, this win-win relationship could move to the next step to sustainably stabilize the country.
Indeed, for many years, it seems that the various proposed solutions have failed. Alternative methods should therefore be considered. Why not use these elections as a pretext to bring the main protagonists closer together ? It could, by some aspects, show them that some arrangements in the distribution of the post-crisis roles would allow everyone to protect his own interest.
, On May 29, 2018 already, the four main actors of the Libyan crisis agreed to enter the elections process in December 2018. This agreement was not imposed on them. It came after several rounds of negotiations to find a common ground and a distribution of roles allowing everyone to have guarantees about his future after the election. In fact, it is a question of determining the place of each of them in terms of political, economic, financial and influence consequences, whatever the future administrative organization of Libya should be at the end. This would be a win-win for everyone, provided that the game’s rules are respected to preserve the precarious balance of the process.
Because, it is in fact where the danger lies. Indeed, some groups can be manipulated by divergent interests to make this process fail. In the prevailing anarchy, it is tempting and easy to bribe militias to sow disorder and derail the agreement signed on May 29, 2018 in Paris.
Thus, the Libyan protagonists, eager to preserve a certain freedom of action, intend to lead the game in their own way, accepting external support, at their request, without having to obey to external sponsors. Some foreign nations, due to their lack of understanding this Libyan point of interest, lose their time and legitimacy to impose their influence.
In conclusion, even if the electoral process is a hard bet to win, it is not an end in itself. It serves only as a pretext for creating the conditions for a truly constructive dialogue with, in the background, the representation of what Libya might be tomorrow. This method has the merit of agreeing the main protagonists on their future role and of deciding the actions to be taken, in a coordinated way, to achieve this. Thus, this win-win relationship could move to the next step to sustainably stabilize the country.
