Skip to main content

Slice it up already


Find out your favourite pizza topping based on your star sign ...

“The fight isn't over until you win.”

― Robin Hobb, Royal Assassin

Indeed. However, in Libya, both sides believe they have won, and the fight is still not over. General Khalifa Hifter launched a military offensive against the Government of National Accord (GNA) in April 2019, employing the rhetoric of freedom and empowerment of the people against neo-imperialist interests invested in the incumbent government. Everyone understands the fallaciousness of these claims, and that the fight is only but one for the control of oil, considering that Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa. Its land has long become a battleground for proxy wars that stretch across the European, Asian and African continents, whilst the USA is observing with much weary as it sees Russian influence slowly, but surely, extending to the southern Mediterranean.

Meanwhile, the Libyans are still at war. Lives are lost, security is shattered, the economy is struggling, and the society is polarized.  
What is it that Hafter wants? And what is it that the GNA refuses to cede? The moment the GNA forces recaptured the entire city of Tripoli, oil production resumed in the Sharara oilfield in the south. When Turkey struck two major agreements with GNA in November 2019, the energy competition in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Libyan crisis entered new phases. The Libyan civil war can only be summed up as an international competition over oil reserves. Full stop. Not a war over security, or ideology, or democracy. It is about oil.

Libya’s state National Oil Corporation (NOC) recently announced that oil exports were down by 92.3 per cent since the country’s oil blockade. As a result, Libya’s cumulative losses from the current oil blockade have neared $5 billion. Such reporting is the norm when it comes to the civil war in Libya. Gains and losses are quantified, usually in oil terms. Little do we hear about the people, the environment, or the losses inflicted on the society.

International powers supporting either side are concerned for their own economic and geo-strategic interests. Whether it is to land cheap oil contracts, or allow maritime privileges, the forces backing Hafter and GNA are openly, blatantly, and sassily professing their ulterior goal.
The UN support mission in Libya said the fighting over Tripoli "has proven, beyond any doubt, that any war among Libyans is a losing war." It urged both sides to "engage swiftly and constructively" in UN-brokered talks aimed at reaching a lasting cease-fire agreement. How will that be possible if it is in no one’s interest to allow national conciliation?

The way things are going, it seems that only two solutions are possible: splitting the country in the middle, with Hafter controlling one part and the GNA the other, and subsequently slicing both parts up like one of these pizzas in which each slice has a different topping (analogy evident here). I was wrong; there is no second solution.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Just as Orwell Said

         George Orwell said in his famous book 1984 that “first they steal the words, then they steal the meaning”, accurately foreseeing the political actions of world leaders and their manipulation of public opinion. His words are ever so precise once one examines the vocabulary applied by a number of world leaders when describing the policies and regimes of troubling countries: axis of evil, war on terror, terrorist killers, harbourers of fundamentalism etc. Ironic it is to see how those who were once described to have been allies with Satan himself seem to show good will in a matter of very few years. Iran is one very good example of this. The Persian nation has come out as a winner in the Geneva talks that were held in October, where not only did it get applauded for the concessions it offered, but it also ensured the west’s acceptance of its regional weight. Everyone seems to be more relaxed after the negotiations and ...
3 comments
Read more

Kaftar

Muaawiya Bin Abi Sufyan was the first Umayyad Caliph, who ruled as a just and jovial leader until his death in 683 AD. Known for his sense of humour and his love for women, Abi Sufyan was famous for a story that took place in his own harem. While escorting a woman for the Khorasan region in modern day Iran, a beautiful woman entered the harem and mesmerised the Leader of All Believers. With his pride in his manhood and prowess in the bed arena, Abi Sufyan did not hesitate to engage in a brazen and manly sexual act in front of the Khorasani woman, who was patiently waiting for her turn. After he was done, he turned victoriously to his first concubine and asked her how to say ‘lion' in Persian - in a direct analogy to his sexual performance.  The Khorasani woman, unamused, told him slyly, that lion is kaftar in Persian. The Caliph went back to his Court ever so jubilant and told his subjects – repeatedly – that he was one lucky kaftar. His...
2 comments
Read more

Público o Privado?

In los años 70, la administración pública dominaba la provisión de los servicios públicos, donde el término “servicios públicos” y el “sector publico” fueron sinónimos (Grout, 2008). Desde entonces, el mundo ha visto un movimiento hacia el sector privado para la provisión de los servicios públicos, algo que puede perjudicar el concepto de estado de bienestar.  Antes de hacer una comparación entre la provisión de los servicios por el sector privado y la administración publica tradicional, se debe antes fijar en el concepto de estado de bienestar. Este estado interviene, tanto en el nivel central como en el nivel autonómico y local, para mejorar el bienestar social y la calidad de vida de la población, a través de los servicios públicos, las transferencias sociales, intervenciones normativas e intervenciones públicas (Navarro, 2004). Entonces, se puede entender que este estado asume la responsabilidad de mejorar la calidad de vida, el desarrollo y el bienestar de la població...
2 comments
Read more