Undaunted

America’s admirably frank ambassador to Libya Deb Jones answered a lot of questions at the Stimson Center this afternoon about Libya, where an American citizen militia leader, Khalifa Hiftar, has been whacking extreme Islamist militias he holds responsible for political violence in Benghazi and Tripoli.  This comes on top of more than a year of struggle in the country’s parliament between Islamists and secularists, a semi-abortive election of a constitution-drafting committee, expiration of the parliament’s mandate, resignation of one prime minister and failure to confirm a new one….  The US military calls this a goat rope.

Deb though was undaunted.  She refused to criticize Hiftar for his attack on extremists, among whom the United States counts many of its enemies in Libya.  The Syrian war and chaos in Egypt are sources of trouble-makers in Libya (as presumably it is for them).  She noted (but did not endorse) that Hiftar wants the parliament to step aside and the constitution drafting committee to take over.  She hopes he will contain his political ambitions and satisfy himself with taking out the bad apples.

Beyond that she was reluctant to say what precisely Washington would like to see happen.  Training of the General Purpose Force by the US, Italy and Turkey is continuing, but its relationship to Libyan governing institutions, which are still rudimentary, is not clear.  The Libyans will have to decide what they want.

They have their share of issues to resolve, which Deb characterized along these lines:

• what to do about a “political isolation” law that prohibits former Libyan officials from the Gaddafi era from playing a political role, thus excluding a lot of competent people;
• how to deprive the militias of their political power (“neutralize” them, not in the physical sense);
• how to sort out the confusion of executive and legislative authority in the current constitutional declaration;
• what to do about decentralization of governing authority;
• how Libya’s ample oil and gas resources and revenue will be shared.

The Libyans are going to need help getting these things done, but their absorptive capacity is limited.  As Deb put it, there were more people in the room at Stimson (fewer than 100) than there are Libyan officials able and willing to interact to good effect with foreigners.  It would be easy to overwhelm them, to no good effect.

The US diplomatic effort she suggested is like a dentist’s drill:  a big, complicated piece of (interagency) machinery culminating in a pointy end that has to be wielded with skill to have a good effect.  Mixing metaphors:  it would be easy to give Libya too much love.   There are also pretty severe limitations on what the embassy can do.  Its personnel do not visit Benghazi or Derna.  Security is tight.  Deb gets out, but the embassy is “lean.”

National political dialogue is what Libya needs.  Several countries, including the US, have appointed special envoys to help with that process.  The dialogue process launched under former Prime Minister Ali Zeidan is continuing.  Some people believe it is too closely associated with him to have much good effect.  But some process of that sort is necessary to resolve the two big issues that drove the Arab uprisings, not only in Libya:  legitimacy and dignity.  Restoring both and overcoming the legacy of humiliation by illegitimate regimes will be no quick or easy task.