Position paper
The change in the Egyptian position on the Libyan crisis (the dialectic of interest and power)
A. Alaa El-Din Hassan Bin Dardaf
Political Science Researcher
In mid-2014, after the launch of the so-called Operation Dignity in eastern Libya, which adopted the slogan of fighting terrorism, eliminating chaos, and building a national army in the wake of the state of chaos and the collapse of institutions in the country, and the subsequent assassinations of many figures in the country, in which the parties leading the scene exchanged accusations and narratives about them. The Egyptian government entered the line, in clear support for the forces of Operation Dignity in the east of the country, and this support took political and media means, as well as military support.
All of this coincided with a state of division prevailing in the country, represented by the National Salvation Government and the General National Congress in the capital, Tripoli, while the interim Libyan government was formed in the city of Al-Bayda, and the members of the House of Representatives supporting Operation Dignity took the city of Tobruk as the headquarters for their sessions.
While Egyptian warplanes carried out airstrikes targeting sites belonging to the “Libya Dawn” forces in the capital, Tripoli, and the western region in August 2014.
Egyptian forces also carried out repeated airstrikes on the city of Derna, which remained outside the control of the Dignity Forces until mid-2018.
The Egyptian position remained generally politically and militarily supportive during the Dignity Forces’ attack on the city of Tripoli on April 4, 2019.
The political division in Libya has severely damaged Egyptian interests; Egyptian exports to the Libyan market have decreased by about a quarter, and approximately 70% of Libya’s population is concentrated in the western and central regions, most of which are under the authority of the Government of National Accord.
While Libya is a geostrategic depth for Egypt; as they share a common border of 1,200 km, in addition to economic interests, and the tribal population overlap spread along the Libyan-Egyptian border, which has tribal and population extensions reaching the borders of Alexandria.
The Turkish competitor entered the scene:
The Egyptian position witnessed a major change following the signing of a military agreement by the Government of National Accord and another to demarcate the maritime borders with Turkey on November 27, 2019.
This agreement, under which Turkey entered into military support for the Government of National Accord, made the military balance tip in its favor, and the “Government of Accord Forces” were able to reclaim the entire western region from the Dignity Forces launched from the east of the country. Due to this field superiority of the Government of National Accord forces, the chances of a military resolution declined and both parties accepted a ceasefire.
The signing of the maritime agreement between Turkey and the Government of National Accord had escalated the existing differences over the geopolitical field between Turkey on the one hand and Greece, Egypt and Israel on the other hand. In addition, the Russian military intervention alongside the Dignity Forces came at the expense of the Egyptian role, which later became clear from the crystallization of bilateral Turkish-Russian understandings on the Libyan file, of which Cairo was not a part.
In such a situation, Cairo fears that the settlement process in Libya without its presence in the scene will lead to the loss of its influence and the decline of its regional role and geopolitical weight in the region, if it relies on one party that has begun to take its turn to decline.
It has also become clear to the world that the Libyan crisis is an international crisis, not only because of external proxy interventions, but also because of the absence of public appearance of the roles of actors “under the state” such as terrorist organizations, unofficial armed formations, and media and political parties with unclear orientations and goals.
The Geneva Agreement (February 2021) and the exchange of positions:
On February 5, 2021, the influential parties in the Libyan political scene met in Geneva under the auspices of the United Nations, and 75 participants participated in this agreement, including tribal and legal figures, and representatives of political trends, and the agreement ended with the selection of three people representing the historical regions in Libya (Barqa, Tripoli, Fezzan) with a prime minister, in an attempt to provide the greatest possible representation of the complex Libyan reality.
A presidential council was elected consisting of a president, two deputies, and a prime minister. This agreement received widespread international support and backing, and it seemed that the United Nations was serious about sponsoring the new government, establishing a ceasefire, and removing militias and mercenaries. American and European pressures also contributed to reducing the Russian and Turkish presence in Libya.
It appeared that Egypt began to abandon its position in favor of military escalation after realizing the difficulty of this choice and considering the change in the balance of power in favor of the new government formed in Geneva.
The Egyptian position and re-emphasis:
On December 27, 2020, a delegation of a diplomatic intelligence nature arrived in the capital, Tripoli, consisting of the Undersecretary of the General Intelligence Service (Ayman Badie), the official responsible for the Libyan file at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador (Mohamed Abu Bakr), and diplomatic and security figures, after six years of estrangement. They visited the new government, and the Egyptian delegation’s talks focused on specific issues, namely:
– Activating the Libyan-Egyptian economic agreements signed since the 1990s.
– Resuming flights.
– Reopening the Egyptian embassy in Tripoli and a consulate in Benghazi.
– The Egyptian role in reconstruction was also discussed.
The Egyptian delegation called for activating previous agreements related to the four freedoms between the citizens of the two countries: the right to reside, the right to work, the right to move, and the right to own property.
Thus, the Egyptian side sent a clear message that it now stands at an equal distance from all parties, while trying to positively modify its position towards the new government, and trying to get out of the influence of some Gulf countries that insist on pushing towards armed conflict to the maximum extent.
The visit of the Egyptian delegation came to indicate that Cairo is not about to enter into a direct clash with the forces of the Government of National Accord and behind them Turkey, or to slide towards comprehensive involvement in the Libyan conflict, and there is no doubt that the Egyptian position has changed based on New data including:
– Expect new regional changes in the region after the US elections and the victory of President (Joe Biden), and perhaps the geopolitical changes that will follow in the Middle East region. Also, the policy of the new US President (Biden), which will focus on reducing Russian expansion in the region.
– Egypt’s need for oil and energy in light of its large debt also played a role in this change.
– The issue of reconstruction in Libya, which is expected to reach $ 700 billion.
– The flexible Turkish position towards Egypt and its desire to dismantle its alliance with Greece and Cyprus was also a tempting factor for the Egyptian position; as the Egyptian delegation met the same Libyan officials who were met by the Turkish Minister of Defense (Hulusi Akar) one day after this visit, which suggests a kind of mediation, and media signals from Turkey appeared on December 30, 2020 that there was a security dialogue between Turkey and Egypt of an intelligence nature.
Thus, the Egyptian position changed from supporting one Libyan party towards another Libyan party, to mediating between the parties, to recognizing a new government with which it would establish more equal and beneficial relations for both parties. This is politics: mutual, changing and surprising positions according to changing interests and changing balances of power.
