Mediaboss Marketing

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov (R) meets with Libyan Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj in Moscow, March 2, 2017(photo byREUTERS/Sergei Karpukhin)

Author:Vasily Kuznetsov Posted March 5, 2017

The head of Libyas United Nations-backed government, Fayez al-Sarraj, undertook an official visit to Moscow to meet with top Russian diplomats and officials March 2-3. Russia has been stepping up efforts in Libya, which seems baffling outside the wide regional context. There is a popular opinion that Russian foreign policy, including planning in the Middle East, may sometimes be tactically impeccable but lacks strategic thinking. Some believe that unpredictability has been a hallmark of the Kremlin's foreign policy.

Russias revived interest in the Middle East goes back to Vladimir Putins second presidential term (2004-2008), and for a long while the authorities have focused on economic development and the need for most diversified economic ties. Their attitude has been typified by blunt pragmatism.

The well-known discordin 2011 between Dmitry Medvedev, who was then president, and Putin, who was then prime minister,over UN Security CouncilResolution 1973 on Libya may also be illustrative of Russia's pragmatic stance. Russia then abstained from the vote in the Security Council, thus avoiding the image of being the dictator's benefactor and of being engaged in the conflict. At the same time, Putin called the Western policy "a new crusade" while referring to US damage inflicted on Iraq, which was consistent with the assessments that pervaded Russian society.

Neither the Kremlin reshuffle nor the Arab Spring drove Russia to refrain from its reserved pragmatism. Even the 2012-13 rule in Egypt of Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization declared extremist in Russia, did not stand in the way of stronger bilateral ties, even at the top level.

Following the notorious events in Ukraine, which led to a further escalation of tensions with the West, politics and security began to prevail over the economy for Moscow. Still, it failed to devise any clear foreign policy strategy except its own pivot to the East.Even the start of the military operation in Syria in September 2015 did not clarify whether Moscow aspires to replace the United States as a new Middle East hegemon or just uses the region in its contest with Washington. It was a head-scratcher.

The missing strategy seems to be a conscious choice of the ruling political elite rather than a sign of its confusion. Postmodernity is characterized by the absence of a reliable strategy. The United States and Europe's numerous failures in the Middle East testify to the fact, while the ill-fated, futileand disastrous Libyan venture in 2011 is its graphic illustration.

Therefore, the abolition of strategic objectives requires a new analysis of the values and principles of world politics and Russia's place in the world.

Since the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, the Russian political establishment has strongly distrusted the West, as the latter has been manipulating human values to its advantage. The mistrust along with the elite's idiosyncrasy to any ideology thatwas bred in the late Soviet era has conjured up an image of a profoundly cynical capitalist world.

However, the ensuing confrontation with the West, whose leaders turned their back on Russia, and the need to identify Russia as an alternative project rather than part of the West have led to deliberations over world politics premisedon Russian historical experience. Theapproach of these deliberations seems to be based on seven principles: Security prevails over development;only stability can provide both security and development as revolutions are always destructive;stability is based on strong state institutions;institutions cannot be imposed from outside, socio-political engineering is inefficient;only a strong sovereign state can deliver security and development;unilateral steps on the world stage are destructive; andinternational law is the only means of creating a sustainable world order.

Looked at in this light, Russia is largely pursuing national security interests in the Middle East. Meanwhile, the events in 2015-17 showed that steps driven by the need to ensure security could produce new interests, with a new stable regional system of international relations being the major one.

This allows for an understanding of both the causes of Russias stepped-up efforts to deal with Libya and Moscows approaches to settling the countrys conflict.

Even though Russias existential interests are not at stake in Libya, one can emphasize four contexts providing rationales for its moves.

First, the list includes Moscows general line aimed at stabilizing the region. Not only does the policy contribute to Russias security, but it also throws into sharp relief its effective and attractive methods.

Second, add to the mixture Russian-Egyptian relations, which requirespecific measures totransform mutual affinity into a solid alliance, with Egypts regional position being strengthened. A weak Egypt, Moscow argues, will further destabilize the Middle East, as historical, geographical and demographic forces have predetermined the countrys key role. Assisting Egypt in handling Libya constitutes a means of bolstering Cairos regime.

Third, the agenda encompasses Russias Mediterranean policy and the countrys ties with European Unionmember states. According to aninformed source, Europe has but once given signals to the Kremlin that the refugee-affected countries are seeking Russias active involvement in Libyas affairs, which in the long run could improve relations between Moscow and Brussels.

At the same time, a friendly or loyal regime in Libya could emerge as part of the Russia-dominated axis of Damascus, Cairo and Tripoli.

Fourth, economic interests of Russian businesses striving to gain a foothold in new markets must also be considered.

All these factors may account for Moscows interest in Libya rather than its marked bias in favor of Gen.Khalifa Hifter. Given the particular episodes in the commanders biography, which should instill mistrust among Russias policymakers, their sympathetic attitude towardHifter is especially awkward.

Yury Barmin, an analyst ofRussias foreign policy in the Middle East,suggests the Kremlin perceives Hifter as a new Col. Moammar Gadhafi. Although Barmin may have a point, the two leaders and the surrounding contexts are strikingly different. Gadhafi hasnever had to forcibly unite the country, with his political system originally resting upon the then most popular ideology in the Arab world. Gadhafi, along with his young supporters, articulated the interests of the most modernized groups of generally traditional society. (Now it is much more modernized.)This does not play into Hifters hands.

Nevertheless, the Libyan marshal may have been chosen as an ally by Cairo rather than Moscow. In this view, it is the dialogue with the former that represents the latters paramount interest. Hifters and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisis ideological affinity, which concentrates on confronting the Muslim Brotherhood, makes them even more attractive to Moscow.

Finally, the Kremlins willingness to act as appropriate, thus refusing to impose its own will, gives another explanation for its focus on Hifter. Indeed, the marshal has objectively proved to be Libyas most powerful figure. Amid the chaos, his personified power makes him more appealing, with individual groups being unreliable and weak. Fierce opposition to Hifter and prioritizing the Government of National Accord mean standing in the way of natural processes and fueling the ongoing war. It is the Wests ideologically driven policies and its reluctance to recognize the imperfect world thatcause Moscows considerable irritation.

However, this does not imply that Russia intends to ignore other Libyan actors. Amid the lack of developed institutions and overmilitarized society, the establishment of a resilient system entails a necessary broad consensus. Given the Syrian experience and Moscows general approaches, one can assume that as a mediator in Libya, the Kremlin will follow a regional track of the conflict resolution involving Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria as the key players.

Read More: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/03/russia-libya-sarraj-foreign-policy-putin-hifter.html

Visit link:
What is Russia's thinking on Libya? - Al-Monitor

CAIRO The number of bodies washing up on Libyan shores is escalating as the refugee crisis worsens. But migrants also are facing perils even before they step into a boat.

On Thursday alone, Italys coast guard reported that about 970 people were rescued off the Libyan coast. Since January, more than 13,400 have landed on Italys shores, roughly a 50 percent increase over the same period last year.

Judging by the increase in the number of trips made by migrants, we can affirm that the crisis has worsened this year, said Mohammed al-Mosrati, a spokesman for the Libyan Red Crescent. This is all because of the intolerable economic, security and political conditions faced by those migrants in their countries.

An estimated 487 migrants have died crossing the Mediterranean, most of whom departed from Libya, according to the Missing Migrants Project run by the International Organization for Migration. That is a 13 percent increase from last year, when an estimated 425 deaths occurred over the same period.

The deaths this year include at least 74 migrants whose bodies washed ashore last month on a beach near the city of Zawiyah in western Libya. More than 4,500 people drowned last year on the smuggling routes between Libya and Italy a record number, according to the European border-management agency Frontex. The United Nations Childrens Fund estimates that 700 of the victims were children.

[Where the worlds refugees live]

The Central Mediterranean from North Africa to Europe is among the worlds deadliest and most dangerous migrant routes for children and women, Afshan Khan, a senior UNICEF official working on migrant and refugee issues, said in a statement this week. The route is mostly controlled by smugglers, traffickers and other people seeking to prey upon desperate children and women who are simply seeking refuge or a better life.

Efforts by European nations to close the migrant sea routes between Greece and Turkey are believed to have played a role in the growing flows to Italy from Libya, particularly from its western shorelines, which are less than 200 miles from the Italian coast.

Smugglers are increasingly packing migrants into smaller, weaker boats to make more money, according to Frontex, adding that it expects drownings to increase this year as a result.

Meanwhile, children and women are routinely becoming targets of sexual violence and other abuses along the route from northern Africa to Italy, UNICEF warned in a report this week. During the journey, many end up in crowded detention centers in Libya, where they often also are denied access to medical care and legal assistance, and endure poor sanitation and a lack of nutritious food.

Some detention centers are run by Libyas U.N.-backed government, while others are controlled by armed militias.

Three-quarters of children interviewed said that adults had beaten or harassed them. Nearly half the women surveyed said they had been raped or sexually abused. The abuses were occurring in part because many children and women were under pay as you go arrangements with smugglers, leaving them in their debt and vulnerable to abuse, abduction and trafficking, the report said.

Children should not be forced to put their lives in the hands of smugglers because there are simply no alternatives, Khan said.

But any hope for alternatives is slim. The multibillion-dollar smuggling networks thrive on the chaos that has followed the ouster and death of Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi during the 2011 populist uprising, a chapter of the Arab Spring revolutions that swept across the Middle East and northern Africa.

That chaos shows no sign of disappearing. The oil-producing nation is riven by militias competing for oil, territory and influence. There are three competing governments, all of which say they are the legitimate authority in the country. Different regions are controlled by rival militias who make their own laws and regulations, control border crossings and exploit migrants at will.

That has brought obstacles for the Libyan Red Crescent and other humanitarian aid agencies. The fact that there are multiple authorities in Libya requires that we get permissions from different ones to even be able to perform our jobs, said al-Mosrati. It is crippling us.

The Libyan Red Crescent is already hard-pressed for funding and resources, and it runs itself largely with a volunteer force to assist migrants, said al-Mosrati. While a few international organizations provide some funding and aid, We do not get any support from the Libyan authorities, he said.

Add this to the increasing number of migrants, and you will understand how the situation has worsened, said al-Mosrati. Numbers are increasing, and we cannot assist the new immigrants. We fail to give them food, shelter or even the medical care they need.

The crisis will keep on worsening so long as there is no aid to humanitarian groups to face these challenges and provide the needed help to the migrants, he said.

Heba Mahfouz contributed to this report.

Read more:

The Waypoint: A visual journey through Lesbos, the gateway to Europe

Todays coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

Read the rest here:
Migrants face abuses in Libya even before they risk death at sea - Washington Post

The Libya Observer

Fuel smugglers from Russia and Ukraine released from Libya The Libya Observer The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry declared on Friday that 4 of its nationals have been released from Libya. The ministry said in a statement that 4 crewmembers of the Temeteron tanker were released by Libyan authorities on Thursday and they had returned ... and more »

The rest is here:
Fuel smugglers from Russia and Ukraine released from Libya - The Libya Observer

The Libya Observer

Uganda nationalizes Libya's share in UTL The Libya Observer The Ugandan government has taken over Uganda Telecom Limited (UTL), the country's national fixed line, mobile and internet provider, in which Libya a majority shareholder. Libyan Ambassador to Uganda Fawazi Abu Katif said the Ugandan government ...

Read this article:
Uganda nationalizes Libya's share in UTL - The Libya Observer

John Wight has written for newspapers and websites across the world, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal. He is also a regular commentator on RT and BBC Radio. John is currently working on a book exploring the role of the West in the Arab Spring. You can follow him on Twitter @JohnWight1

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrovs meeting in Moscow with Fayez al-Sarraj, prime minister of the Government of National Accord of Libya, reminds us that security and stability has yet to be restored in the war-torn country.

Though it may have slipped off the radar of global consciousness, Libyas central importance when it comes a region that has been mired in conflict and chaos over the past few years cannot be overstated. The countrys destruction and societal collapse will forever stand as a withering indictment of Western foreign policy towards the region and NATOs role, not as a defender of democracy, peace, and stability, but as an instrument of Western imperial power. The savage murder of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi at the hands of a NATO-supported mob in October 2011 was a ghastly and despicable crime, one that stands comparison with the legal lynching of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2006.

This is without factoring in the refugee crisis that erupted in the wake of Gaddafis overthrow, the worst such crisis the world has seen since the end of World War II. It involved untold thousands of men, women, and children attempting a perilous journey across the Mediterranean to Europe. According to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), over 5,000 perished in 2016 alone while attempting to cross the Mediterranean, evidence that this ongoing human catastrophe shows no signs of improving.

Perhaps the most grievous aspect of the military campaign in support of regime-change in Tripoli was the fact that for most of the previous decade, Libya under Gaddafi had been an economic and strategic partner of the West, ending decades of enmity and isolation, with Western oil companies in particular benefiting from Gaddafis volte-face where Western governments were concerned.

Writing in the Boston Globe in April 2011, writer and academic Alan J Kuperman reveals how President Barack Obama grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya. Later in the same article, he writes, It is hard to know whether the White House was duped by the rebels or conspired with them to pursue regime-change on bogus humanitarian grounds. In either case, intervention quickly exceeded the UN mandate of civilian protection by bombing Libyan forces in retreat or based in bastions of Khadafy (sic) support, such as Sirte, where they threatened no civilians.

Meanwhile, on the question of the character of the so-called revolution in Libya, as far back as August 2011, the BBC was reporting, Islamists have played an important part in the uprising against Col Muammar Gaddafi, sparking concern about what role they will play in the new Libya.

The BBC, one of the prime culprits among Western news organizations in making the case for humanitarian intervention in Libya in 2011, was more accurate than it could ever have imagined in reporting the danger of Islamist involvement and influence in this revolution.

Fast-forward to 2017, and the countrys predicament could not be grimmer. ISIS and Al-Qaeda retain a strong foothold in the country, to the point where both groups, though former enemies, are now actively cooperating in Libya on plans to mount a fresh wave of attacks this year. In this they are taking advantage of the lack of a strong central government and any semblance of stability in a country that was turned from a functioning state into a failed state as a direct result of the NATO-supported regime-change in 2011.

It is all a far cry from 2010, when Libya enjoyed the status of a High Development Country in the judgment of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). In concrete terms, this status translates to a life expectancy of 74.5 years, a literacy rate of 88.4%, and foreign assets worth over $150 billion, among other favorable developmental and social indices.

This brings us back to the talks recently held in Moscow between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Mr. al-Sarraj. In advance of them taking place, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, Russia is interested in Libya finally becoming a working state after this barbaric intervention that was conducted from outside, that led to catastrophic consequences from the point of view of the Libyan state and the future of the Libyan people.

Though Mr. al-Sarraj heads one of three competing authorities currently established in the country that are vying for legitimacy, his Government of National Accord is currently the only internationally recognized one, a fact emphasized by his visit to Moscow.

On a wider note, Russias role in Syria since 2015 has brought with it requests from governments and leaders across the region for diplomatic support. In recent months, the Kremlin has hosted talks between the Hamas and Fatah Palestinian factions, out of which emerged a commitment to forge a unity government, while the Astana talks on Syria in Kazakhstan in January saw Russia sit down with Turkey, Iran, and representatives of the Syrian government and Syrian opposition to try and make diplomatic progress in resolving the conflict.

In Washington, meanwhile, the circus that is US democracy seems unrelenting, what with newly elected President Trump at war with the media and elements of the intelligence community, and a political establishment that appears to be a model of dysfunction and paralysis.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

See the rest here:
Why Libya's cry for justice must be heard - RT