We Don't Want to Be Like Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan

Two Western officials have suddenly visited Tripoli, Libya: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Tripoli on Oct. 18. One day earlier, British Foreign Secretary William Hague also visited Tripoli.

Clinton affirmed that the priority in Libya is to establish security and stability to prevent the country from slipping into civil war in the post-Gadhafi era. In that context, Clinton emphasized the importance of unifying the armed militias under the national command. The secretary of state promised $40 million in aid to support the security program in Libya. Meanwhile, William Hague promised 42 million pounds in aid for Libya’s economic development and stabilization fund.

Nowadays, the security issue in Libya and North Africa seems to be the priority for Western countries, especially the United States. The West indicates that Libya cannot successfully go through the process of transition from dictatorship to democracy without first establishing security and stability. The West realizes that without adequate stability and central government control, Libya may become an easy target for al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Up to recently, former Libyan ruler Moammar Gadhafi, often threatened to cooperate with AQIM to attack Western interests in Libya and North Africa.

The United States apparently learned a lot from its experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq, neither of which have security and stability to this day. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States simply formed a government without further considering whether the government would have broad popular support. As a result, the new governments in Baghdad and Kabul exercised weak governance, resembling puppet governments highly dependent on the U.S.

The West realizes that it needs to exercise greater responsibility so that the scenario in Iraq and Afghanistan will not be repeated in Libya. The West is responsible for everything that happens in Libya because of the strong intervention of NATO in overthrowing the Gadhafi regime.

Meanwhile, recent developments in Libya have not always led to a positive outcome. The post-Gadhafi era has been characterized by a battle between Islamist and nationalist camps over power, which has been raising serious concerns.

The weakness of the National Transitional Council (NTC) causes people not to adhere to its policies and worsens the situation in Libya. The NTC disarmament program in Tripoli has not worked. The leader of the NTC, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, had difficulties persuading the armed factions in Tripoli to unify under the command of Abdul Hakim Belhaj, the NTC military commander who freed Tripoli from the Gadhafi regime on Aug. 23.

Even the chairman of the executive board of the NTC, Mahmoud Jibril, revealed in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper in early October that he had already offered his resignation to Mustafa Abdul Jalil. The resignation will take effect after the liberation of the city of Sirte. Jibril insisted that his resignation begin after the release of the entire region of Libya from Gadhafi loyalists; it is known that the city of Sirte is the last holdout of Gadhafi loyalists.

Jibril admits that the ultimate ruler in Libya now is not the NTC but the armed militias that often force the NTC to accept their decisions. According to Jibril, many NTC decisions are only on paper because they are often ignored by the armed militias.

Political conditions and internal security in Libya after Gadhafi are still fragile. That caused Hillary Clinton and William Hague to pour financial support substantial enough to develop solid stability in Libya and so avoid repeating the scenarios in Afghanistan and Iraq.