BY J. MICHAEL SPRINGMANN
Oil Agreement = Political Agreement?
*(Top image: Khalifa Haftar (L) and Ahmed Maitiq (R). Credit: uwidata)
On September 18, 2020, Vice Chairman of the Presidential Council of Libya, Ahmed Maitiq announced an agreement on resuming the country's oil exports. Khalifa Haftar, head of the Libya Libyan National Army (LNA), with whom the pact had been reached, confirmed Maitiq's statement.
Despite the advantages to the war-torn, ravaged country, the deal between eastern Libyan military commander Khalifa Haftar and the Tripoli government's deputy prime minister, Ahmed Maitiq, prompted negative reaction from Maitiq's allies, many of whom the West supports.
So far, Libya has lost about $9 billion because of a blockade of its oil exports, largely as the result of local tribes claiming that the distribution of oil revenues throughout the country has been uneven. In the past, all oil revenues went to the Central Bank and were then parceled out to the country's various regions. The ethnic groups in Libya's east and south (where the main oil fields are located) believed that a significant amount of the petroleum income went to Islamists controlling Tripoli, Libya's capital. However, the UN-backed Government of National Accord blamed Haftar's LNA for blocking oil exports.
This is not a new issue. The January 2020 Berlin Summit (Turkey, Russia, Egypt, France, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States, along with the UAE, Algeria, China, the Republic of the Congo, the United Nations, European Union and African Union) wrestled with the fair distribution of oil revenues.
The Maitiq-Haftar agreement, supported by the native tribes, seems to have resolved the matter. A joint commission would be established to control oil production and the distribution of oil revenues between the two sides in the civil war. This would open the door for the free flow of petroleum funds into Libya and the resolution of pressing economic problems. The latter have led to weeks of protests in Libya's west and east.
This arrangement could well lead to further negotiations between the warring sides, possibly ending the long running conflict. This oil arrangement, if it holds up, could help create conditions for a sustainable inter-Libyan political dialogue. This is especially important for the entire region's stability. Just a few months ago, Egypt was ready to intervene in neighboring Libya.
This pact between Maitiq and Haftar seems to have been a catalyst for change in the Government of National Accord (GNA). Many figures, most notably Khaled al-Mishri, a Muslim Brotherhood supporter, opposed it. A successful agreement weakens that opposition. Especially so, since Ahmed Maitiq demonstrated that he could conduct effective negotiations with the opposing side in a serious conflict. Given this success, he seems to be an effective diplomat on whom to bet.
The chances for Ahmed Maitiq to assume the position of Chairman of the Presidential Council of Libya after Fayez al-Sarraj, the incumbent's resignation, are increasing. Simultaneously, Maitiq's people are likely to occupy key positions in the joint committee on oil exports, thereby providing powerful leverage in influencing domestic politics.
Maitiq's advantages are that he is a secular businessman and respected politician. He is not a powerless figurehead like Fayez Sarraj, a warlord like Fathi Bashagha, or a Brotherhood backer like Khaled al-Mishri. Ahmed Maitiq appears to be a compromise figure who could coordinate the peace process between the GNA and the LNA.
Yet the opposition won't go quietly. According to the Voice of America (VOA), " A news conference at which Maitiq was to explain the oil production agreement ended abruptly when supporters of a Tripoli militia prevented him from speaking. Saudi-owned Al-Arabiya TV reported that partisans of Islamist Interior Minister Fathi Bashaga blocked both the deal and the media event." Continuing, VOA noted "The foreign minister of the interim government in eastern Libya, Abdul Hadi al Hwiej, told Arab media that he thought Turkey was responsible for torpedoing the oil deal. The agreement included a stipulation that no oil money would be used to fund mercenaries or agreements with Ankara."
Still on point in its analysis, the VOA concluded "Arab media reported that Tripoli-based Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj, who recently announced his intention to step down by the end of October, rejected the deal made by his deputy, Maitiq." Still, "Libya analyst Aya Burweila, a visiting lecturer at the Hellenic National Defense College, told VOA that Friday's deal was a "breakthrough for conflict resolution" since "traditionally antagonistic parties" from both east and west "cooperated" to make it, but that "a minority of spoilers and actors, who have profited from the staggering corruption and lack of transparency in Libya, are up in arms over the agreement."
WRITER
No comments:
Post a Comment