Photograph by Tehran Times
Libya can well be explained by the theory of ‘realism’, which emphasises the desire for more and more power on the economy and society. The development potential of this North African country was great, having close proximity to the European Union- the world’s largest economic block. Between 1969 and 2011, Libya was ruled by President Muammar Gaddafi as a ‘Jamahiriya’ (Republic of the People). However, in 2011, the Arab Springs protests escalated into a full-scale conflict and eventually led to the overthrow of the government. The first free election took place in 2012, giving way to a wave of optimism and hope. However, violence erupted again in 2014 and the country gradually sank into a civil war, leading to dire consequences for people’s well-being and livelihoods.
In Arabic, the ‘Maghreb’ means ‘where and when the sun sets’. The Treaty of Marrakech has failed to eradicate poverty and unemployment in the Arab Maghreb Union countries experiencing ‘immiserising growth’, wherein external shocks and low policies have dire effects on growth. Since the outbreak of violence in 2014, instability and conflict has led to great suffering among the Libyan population and Libya’s growth is ‘immiserising’ (the meaning is self-explanatory: miserari= to pity and immiserise= to become poorer, pitiful in Latin).
Quoting renowned economist Ragnar Nurkse, “Countries become perpetual debtor and are trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty”. Libya’s growth has been creating urban power-hungry monsters rather than being focused on development and prosperity for the citizens. In Orwellian terminology, “All men are equal but some are more equal than others”. The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya is no longer a ‘state of the masses’, it has now become a ‘state of robbers’, in formal terms a ‘kleptocracy’.
The Libyan people have for far too long been denied the right to choose their own leaders and political system and to benefit from their country's wealth via oil-and-gas deals of the kind the west is now so keen to promote. International relations play an important role in the termination of hostilities and therefore, a slack in global trade. Libya faced a balance of payments (BOP) disequilibrium due to the imposition of sanctions. When sanctions were lifted, trade became better with Libya. However, it led to widespread kleptocracy since Colonel Qaddafi’s family and his government accumulated billions of dollars with the help of international corporations in order to fund their own lavish lifestyles including luxury homes and Hollywood film investments.
Libya’s Like a Cake, Everybody Wants a Bite
Libya’s current global prominence is a consequence of its geo-strategic importance. Renewed access to its oil wealth, military, and political chaos, and the tangible opportunity for a political resolution have attracted the attention of a variety of stakeholders, while also exacerbating conflict.
A wide perception is that the NATO invasion and occupation of Libya marked the ruinous ‘rebirth’ of Libya’s standard of living and there was a historical reversal in the country’s economic and social development. This shows us how war and globalisation are intricately related. The NATO bombings destroyed the standard of living in Libya and then conveniently offered to help ‘rebuild’ through Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which was an utter failure.
Prior to the war, Libya was not doomed to be a debtor nation. In fact, it was quite the opposite and the post-colonial Libyan government played a key role in eliminating poverty and developing social infrastructure. It is nothing short of a bitter irony that after the confiscation of Libya’s huge oil wealth and overseas assets, the international donor community has pledged to lend the money back to Libya under the garb of its post-war reconstruction. In the meantime, it is the Libyans who severely bear the damages from the constant shelling or air strikes.
Dialogue with International Community: Struggle for Peace in Libya
The longer the political, security, and economic crisis lasts, the more difficult it will be to establish a more effective State and cohesive society. Finally, offers have popped up from international community like IMF and the World Bank for helping with aid and assistance to Libyan people and stop abundant migration to other countries. It is apt in case of Libya, “Without peace, there is no development and without development, there is no peace”.
As the country faces humanitarian crisis, Libya should meet and engage in developing an effective financial policy, to meet the needs and reorient its economy. Assistance in forms of loans plus hard negotiations with IMF and World Bank could support debt-revamping and procure thousands of billions of dollars to reshape its institutions and economy.
With protracted conflict and the absence of an effective state, there has been a surge in irregular and undocumented migration. Since 2014, there has been a surge in those trying to reach Europe with 22,156 people arriving in Europe from Libya and 412 dying at sea in June 2017. Although there is no precise data, migrant smuggling is now a multi-billion-dollar industry. Libya has become nothing short of a ‘fragility trap’, a condition in which the dynamics people have developed to survive insecurity and instability effectively deepens their fragility.
As shown in the graph, a maximum of 8.3 index points was observed in 2017. The higher the value of the Refugees Index, the higher the refugee and displaced persons flow in Libya.
In November 2017, CNN released a video of Sub-Saharan African migrants being sold off in auctions in Libya. This is not a recent phenomenon and has caused outcry in the international community to deal with human trafficking rings. Thus, Libya needs support from the international community to provide basic services and livelihood options to migrants, because the country is already struggling to meet the need of Libyans themselves. Libyans see migrants as taking up what economic opportunities exist and overstretching limited basic services.
A number of international players remain active in Libya but not always working toward the same ends, often backing opposing sides in the Libyan military and political struggle. With respect to an international armed conflict, that is hostilities between states, fighting between Libyan armed forces and those acting under the SC Resolution 1973 is governed by the ‘laws of war’. The International Law applicable here, thus, includes the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and customary laws of war.
The main goal of the recent Berlin Summit was to stop foreign powers from wielding their unnecessary influence (either through finance, weapons or troops) and prevent them from interfering in the ongoing war. However, after the UN-sponsored talks, the intensity of fighting increased manifold and both sides (the LNA and the UN-recognised Government of National Accord, based in Tripoli) repeatedly breached a UN arms embargo first imposed in 2011.
The UN Security Council is working on a resolution demanding that the ceasefire is respected, albeit rather slowly. It is still unclear as to when the gap between the two sides would be bridged, pertaining to the removal of heavy weaponry and reducing terrorism. One thing is clear: the international community must strive hard to turn a nominal truce into a lasting and sustainable ceasefire.
According to Heiko Maas (German foreign minister, quoted during the Berlin Summit 2020 to end the Libyan conflict), “We have to make sure that Libya doesn’t become a second Syria!”. It is true how foreign interference can merely provide some ‘placebo effect’ in the short-term, but Libya needs foreign interference to stop in order to focus on rebuilding its own economy as the stakes are getting higher.
Libya’s foreign policy is largely hegemonic by the ‘crisis and survival’ model and we observe how political elites often adopt the ‘survivalism’ dogma. According to the English School Theory, ‘balance of power’ is not a mechanical outcome, rather it a deliberate result of the State’s actions and policies. Political life is a gladiatorial arena where the strong subdue the weak and obtain preferential access to the limited number of goods. Thus, due to the persistent conflict in Libya, the men in power need to spare the oil resources to avoid devastating consequences for the economy. This would make sure that the Libyans are not passive subjects to supranational laws.
Currently, Libya is facing the risk of its oil production heading towards zero, if a blockade of its export terminals and several fields continue in 2020. According to Mustafa Sanalla,“The international community must be worried about any disruption to oil exports from Libya, as this could lead to oil prices rising on the global market. We have to solve our problems and look to our future generations”.
If prompt action is not taken, the oil sector collapse along with COVID-19 would have devastating consequences for the global economy, leading to worsening of the Libyan humanitarian crisis. Therefore, failure to make progress due to weak enforcement of embargo in Libya could undermine the whole process of securing its oil wealth and would lead to high oil prices in the global market.
Due to the twin revolution consisting of rapid technological advancements and geo-strategic change, it is well observed how the balance of power is radically changing in Libya and other war-torn nations. The question, then, arises as to what vision would fuel our future world of eradicating terrorism beyond borders? Would we observe a world, wherein ‘might is right’ and the big fish conveniently gulps down the smaller fishes? Or we would be fortunate to witness an alternative vision, wherein the world is multi-polar, integrated and interdependent?
Simran Massey completed her Bachelor’s in Economics from St. Stephen’s College, Delhi in 2018 after which she decided to pursue her Master’s in Public Policy (MPP) from St. Xavier’s College, Bombay. She has been conferred with the ‘Young Leadership’ award by the Women Economic Forum (WEF 2019) and is an honoured member of Harvard Business Review’s Ascend Select. Currently, Simran is the recipient of the ‘Think Swiss Scholarship Asia-Pacific 2020’ among international researchers and is interested to explore the intersections of international law, economics and development theory for innovating effective policy solutions in Geneva.