Month: August 2011
Next in Libya
Joshua Foust and I enjoy a tame bloggingheads:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Rebuilding Libya: the first few steps
Theatlantic.com published my piece this morning:
Aug 22 2011, 6:39 AM ET
The most immediate challenges facing post-Qaddafi Libya
Reuters
Muammar Qaddafi’s finale in Libya is coming faster than even the rebels likely anticipated. They are reported to have arrested Saif al Islam, his favored son. If they take Qaddafi alive, the rebel leadership body Transitional National Council (TNC), or its successor organization, will presumably transfer him and his son to The Hague, for trial at the International Criminal Court. This would be a remarkable end to a 42-year reign as Libya’s chief governing authority and a first opportunity for the court to try a chief of state, even if he did not claim that title.
Some may prefer to try him in Tripoli, but it is going to be years before the Libyan courts are able to meet the necessary international standards. A show trial will not help Libya in its understandable passion to lay the foundations for a freer society.
Qaddafi’s continued resistance risks making the situation inside Libya far more chaotic than it need be. Some of his loyalists may go underground as people harmed by the regime seek revenge, rivalries among rebel groups may emerge, looting and rioting could break out, and criminal gangs are sure to try to take advantage of any disorder. Restoring public order will be job one, with restoring electricity, food, and water close behind. Oil installations will need to be protected, weapons depots guarded, and secret police files preserved. It is certainly a good sign that the rebels are reported to have thrown up a protective cordon around the National Museum.
The rebels say they believe everything will go smoothly, and they appear to have trained some police to protect sensitive infrastructure and maintain law and order. But hope is not a plan. They need to get things under control as quickly as possible, appealing for foreign help if need be.
European governments could step up to this challenge, since they are tied to Libya via gas pipelines that float beneath the surface of the Mediterranean. If Libya succumbs to chaos, it will be to Europe that refugees will flow, and mostly European investments in Libya that will be lost. Unfortunately, Washington seems to have allowed Europe to remain distracted with its own financial problems. There does not appear to be any serious plan for dealing with chaos in Libya, which could quickly turn into a humanitarian disaster. American boots definitely do not belong on the shores of Tripoli, but it has happened before and may happen again.
The TNC will have to be particularly alert to risks of revenge killings against Qaddafi loyalists, and of score-settling among rebels. They have already lost one of their military commanders, apparently to rebel-affiliated attackers who resented his role in Qaddafi’s army. In immediate post-war situations, the urge to exact quick justice is enormous. But allowing vigilantes to even the score will only lead to a spiral of violence that is hard to stop and inimical to democratic evolution.
Virtually overnight, the rebel leadership will need to shift its focus from fighting Qaddafi’s forces to protecting them. In the past few months, the local councils that have emerged in liberated areas have not generally allowed violence against regime supporters. But that is partly because many of Qaddafi’s loyalists have fled from newly liberated towns to Tripoli. Their concentration there and in his hometown of Sirte is going to make the challenge of transition much greater there than anyplace else in Libya.
It is critical that regime loyalists and rebels alike do not grab and “privatize” state assets, as often happens in chaotic moments and takes years to reverse. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, the government has been trying for years to recover valuable mines from those who took possession of them during the civil war. The liberty Libyans have fought for will require massive rebuilding of the country’s infrastructure and economy, which is in miserable condition. Early efforts to ensure transparency and accountability could help Libya avoid the kind of corruption that has plagued Afghanistan and Iraq.
Only the most selfish and egotistical leader would fail to make arrangements to transfer power and try to avoid bloodshed. Tunisia’s President Zine el-Abidine ben Ali fled, but left the country with a constitutional succession that is enabling a relatively smooth transition. Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak tried to leave power in the hands of his vice president, a move negated only when the army stepped in. Yemen’s President Saleh has so far refused to allow a constitutional succession, leaving his country seized with violence.
Qaddafi is still calling on his supporters to fight and vowing to restore his own version of law and order in Tripoli. This is Qaddafi’s last misdeed. There is no constitution in Libya, so no clear constitutional succession. The revolutionaries have wisely written their own constitutional charter, but the real challenge will not be on paper. It will be in the avenues and alleys of Tripoli.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Qaddafi’s last misdeed
Muammar Qaddafi and his sons have apparently failed to arrange an orderly transition, leaving at least some of their loyalists lashing out in desperation against the inevitable as rebels enter Tripoli. This risks making the situation chaotic, if not desperate or even catastrophic.
While I certainly hope the rebels who believe everything will go smoothly are right, hope is not a plan. The Transitional National Council (TNC) likely now has a big mess on its hands. They need to get things under control as quickly as possible, appealing for foreign help if need be. Widespread looting and disorder would be a bad way to start the new regime, likely opening the door to someone who claims to be able to restore public order. Continuing shortages of food, water and electricity could also undermine the legitimacy and viability of the new regiome.
I have repeatedly hoped that the Europeans would step up to this challenge, since they are tied umbilically to Libya via gas pipelines that float beneath the surface of the Mediterranean, which is their great lake, not one of ours. We seem to have allowed Europe to remain distracted with its own financial problems. So far as I can tell, my recommendation of a several thousand person EU constabulary force for Tripoli will just not happen. I hope this does not mean NATO steps in, but that clearly is about the only backup capacity anyone has. American boots definitely do not belong on the ground in Tripoli, but it has happened before and may happen again.
The TNC needs to be particularly alert to revenge killing of Qaddafi loyalists, and settling of scores among the rebels. In immediate post-war situations, the urge to exact quick justice is enormous. If my children had died in these months of fighting and repression I would certainly be tempted to claim what justice I could rather than wait for a new regime to catch up with the miscreants. But allowing vigilantes to even the score will only lead to a spiral of violence that is hard to stop and inimical to democratic evolution.
The shift from fighting Qaddafi’s forces to needing to protect them will happen virtually overnight. Libyans have thus far been cognizant of this requirement in the areas liberated in the past few months. The local councils that have emerged are not to my knowledge organizing violence against regime supporters. But that is partly because many of Qaddafi’s loyalists have fled to Tripoli. Their concentration there, and the attachment of the Qaddafi leadership to the privilege and property the regime afforded them, is going to make the challenge of transition much greater than anyplace else in Libya.
Only the most selfish and egotistical leader would fail to make arrangements to transfer power and avoid bloodshed. Tunisia’s President Ben Ali fled, but left the country with a constitutional succession. Egypt’s Mubarak stepped down and tried to leave power in the hands of his vice president, a move negated only when the army stepped in, responding in part at least to a demand of the demonstrators. Yemen’s President Saleh has so far refused to allow a constitutional succession, leaving his country seized with violence.
This is Qaddafi’s last misdeed. There is no constitution in Libya. The revolutionaries have wisely written their own constitutional charter, but the real challenge will not be on paper but in the avenues and alleys of Tripoli.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Step aside
I discussed current events in Syria and the Obama Administration call for Bashar al Assad to step aside, along with a bit of Libya, this morning on C Span’s Washington Journal:
Here are the notes I did for myself on Syria in preparation:
1. The contest continues:
- Military assault is undiminished, security forces still united
- Demonstrators trying to mark beginning of the end
2. The international community is speaking louder and with a more unified voice
- U.S. “step aside” echoed in Europe, Turkey had already given “final warning”
- Arab ambassadors withdrawn: Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi, Tunisia
- Europe getting ready to bar oil imports
- UN fact finding report “scathing”: torture, murder, disappearances, arbitrary arrests, supposedly going this weekend (Navi Pillay and Valerie Amos)
- IAEA found NPT violation
- Unrelated, I think, to current events: Syria disqualified from 2014 World Cup!
- Diplomatic observers possible
3. Bashar still has internal and external pillars intact
- Iran solid, Russia still protecting in UNSC
- Army and business community still backing him
- Republican Guard (10k) and 4th armored division show no signs of cracking: Deraa, Banias, Homs, Idlib
- Shabbiha still active
4. Opposition strong
- Widespread protests
- Still relatively weak in Aleppo and Damascus, but growing
- Good unity: several iterations, now Syrian National Council
- Good nonviolent discipline, though some arms
- Good planning
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Still another Balkans interview?
I did this one for Dejan Kozul of the Croatian weekly Novosti:
Q. You have been in Kosovo. Can you describe general feeling after latest problems in north Kosovo?
A. I was in Kosovo late last week, over the weekend in north Mitrovica, and in Pristina again Monday-Wednesday. People in the north are frightened of Pristina and resentful of what they consider abandonment by Belgrade. People in Pristina are so far satisfied with the results of their initiative at the border but anxious to establish permanently Kosovo’s customs and police authority there.
Q. Serbian press writes about autonomy for north Kosovo but on the other side Serbian officials deny that they discussed it. Do you think that this might be proper solution?
A. A very wide measure of self-governance is provided for the Serb-majority communities in northern Kosovo under the Ahtisaari plan. That is still on offer. I imagine there might also be implementation agreements that would meet legitimate concerns of the Serbs in northern Kosovo. But anyone who imagines that northern Kosovo will be allowed to develop into the kind of autonomy that Republika Srpska is claiming in Bosnia is kidding themselves. It isn’t going to happen because Pristina, the EU and the U.S. will not want it.
Q. Can you compare the situation in Kosovo with the situation in Croatia during the nineties where autonomy was also solution for Croatian Serbs but in the end Milan Martic and authorities in Krajina refused it? Could it be compared at all (Krajina was not part of Serbia but Kosovo was)?
A. I think there is some analogy. But the kind of very wide autonomy that Milan Martic refused is not being offered and would not be acceptable to Pristina. Reintegration with self-governance is what is being offered, and it is not a bad deal if implemented correctly.
Q. When we speak about Croatia it is well known that Croatian Prime Minister Jadranka Kosor is supposed to visit Pristina. What are the reasons for this invitation and do you think that this is the right time for it?
A. I think it natural that the Prime Minister of Croatia visit Kosovo, which after all is a neighbor, even if not an immediate one. And certainly there is a good deal Croatia can now do to help Kosovo prepare for EU membership. Neither Serbia nor Croatian Serbs should regard a visit of this sort as anything more than routine.
Q. Two customs stamps, a Serbian and a Kosovo Albanian one, are mentioned as one of the possible solutions for stamp problems. Do you think that this might be good solution for beginning and is this problem taken too seriously? There are much bigger problems in Kosovo then the stamp question but it is used as a cause.
A. There are many solutions for the customs stamps, if there is good political will. We’ll have to wait until September when the Pristina/Belgrade dialogue reconvenes to see if that exists. It is important in my way of thinking that Belgrade accept the fact that the Kosovo government is the legitimate authority in all of Kosovo, even if Belgrade still refuses to accept its independence. What is needed in northern Kosovo is cooperation between Belgrade and Pristina to end a lucrative smuggling trade that is financing organized crime on both sides of the boundary/border.
Q. Ivica Dacic few months ago was the first Serbian official who mentioned that splitting Kosovo is the only solution. Do you think that this might be the official Serbian policy? What implications would there be?
A. Serbia denies this is the official position, but it seems clear to me it is what Belgrade wants. Even if you think it might solve one problem, however, it would reopen five or six other problems in the Balkans. Neither Serbia nor Kosovo can afford today to be a source of such instability. The Serb-majoirty communities in northern Kosovo have been offered a good deal under Ahtisaari. They should appreciate it and start negotiating about implementation issues.
Q. Recently, in Macedonia you mentioned that this is the era of reintegration. For something like that Serbia has to change its constitution and admit Kosovo’s independence. Under what condition do you think this might be possible?
A. That’s for Belgrade to figure out: they painted themselves into a corner with a constitution that they claim passed even though the requirement for 50 per cent of registered voters to vote was not met. It would be no easier for Pristina to change its constitution to allow the north to leave Kosovo, a proposition that clearly violates UN Security Council resolution 1244, which Belgrade refers to so often. It will not be easy to change the constitution, but it will, so far as I understand, be necessary before Belgrade can enter the EU.
Q. Do you think that referendum about Kosovo or EU might be solution?
A. That’s for Belgrade to decide. It is a possible solution, but not the only one.
Q. How do you see regional scene? The EU has so many problems. Do you think that Brussels has the will and strength to help the Western Balkans avoid more confrontations and to lead the region to EU membership?
A. The Balkans are an EU burden, but not an enormous one. Several of the countries are already de facto in the euro zone, and the Stabilization and Association Agreements give the Balkans countries many of the economic advantages of membership. What Europe has lacked is clarity about the Balkans. I hope they find it.
Q. It’s not just Kosovo that is a problem. We still have Bosnia and Herzegovina as a country without Government, we are aware that splitting Kosovo might cause other problems in South of Serbia (Presevo, Bujanovac…) and also in Republika Srpska, maybe in Macedonia, Sandzak…?
A. Yes, that is what I was referring to when I mentioned opening up new problems in the region. That would be a grave mistake, one neither Pristina nor Belgrade would want to make.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Good show, now what?
While my twitterfeed remains skeptical that the U.S. has any leverage to get Bashar al Assad to step aside, I think the Administration put on a pretty good diplomatic show in the last day or two, with more to come. In addition to the US moves, the UN published a fact-finding report that Colum Lynch appropriately describes as “scathing.” The Europeans and Turkey seem to be lining up to say the right things.
More important is what Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Europeans do now. The Administration is hinting that the Europeans will block their own Syrian oil imports. This they can do because it is not much oil, but it accounts for more than a quarter of Syria’s revenue. Turkey’s National Security Council today called for democratic change in Syria, but that likely won’t have much impact as the Foreign Minister has already issued several final warnings to Bashar al Assad. What is needed is some action from Turkey in blocking trade or investment, which would signal clearly to Syrian businesspeople that the end is near. The Saudis can make life hard for Bashar in many ways, not least just by indicating that it supports the protesters, as the King did late last week.
New York will be the center of the international action the next few days. The Americans are pushing a Security Council resolution. The Human Rights Council is to meet Monday to discuss the fact-finding report. That should provide an occasion for lambasting the Syrian regime. Legitimacy counts, even for autocracies. When the UN is taking you to task for murdering your own citizens with their hands tied behind their backs, legitimacy comes into question.
Today in Syria is also key. Already this week there have been demonstrations in Aleppo, Syria’s largest and most important commercial city. A big turnout there and in Damascus would confirm that the judgment that it is time for Bashar to step aside. How widespread the demonstrations are will also count. The international moves may elicit a big response among the Syrians.
What we can’t really know is how all this will affect the small circle around Bashar al Assad. It would take only a few of them to abandon his cause for Syria to turn quickly in a new direction.
The problem is what to do with Bashar. Pressure is building for the Security Council to refer him to the International Criminal Court. I am not as opposed to an indictment as many diplomats, who believe it would only strengthen his resolve to hold on to power. That it may do, but it may also make those who work for him begin to wonder whether carrying out his orders to kill civilians is a smart thing to do.
I have my doubts though that evidence can be gathered in a time frame that would make an indictment meaningful. More likely, a referral would be followed by a long delay, which would make matters worse rather than better (remember the Hariri case, and the case against President Bashir of Sudan?).
So what happens next? Bashar al Assad won’t step aside until his security forces crack more dramatically than they have so far. I don’t know anyone who can even pretend to know when that will happen, but the American/Turkish/Saudi/European/UN pressure being brought to bear this week is pushing things in the right direction.
Paul Pillar, in a piece published yesterday by The National Interest focused on Gary Locke, the new American ambassador to Beijing, notes:
The incidental influence that the United States exerts simply through people around the world observing its behavior is consistently underestimated, just as the influence the United States can exert intentionally by exercising its economic, military, or other instruments of hard power tends to be overestimated.
My twitterfeed is underestimating America’s “incidental influence” on events in Syria. I don’t know whether it will be enough, but it will make Bashar al Assad very uncomfortable for the next few days, at the very least.
RSS - Posts
