Libyan Prime Minister Fayez al-Serraj recently performed a complete U-turn and withdrew his resignation as Prime Minister. This means that he will remain in office until the ongoing intra-Libyan political dialog comes to an end.

Last week, Stephanie Williams, the acting head of the United Nations (UN) mission in Libya, presided over a permanent nationwide ceasefire including the exit of all foreign fighters and mercenaries from the nation for a minimum of three months.

The ceasefire includes the full opening of land and air routes, efforts to tackle hate speech, an exchange of prisoners and plans to rebuild the Petroleum Facilities Guard, a militia body and oil company linked to the head of the Libyan National Army (LNA), General Khalifa Haftar.

This Ceasefire Has More Potential to Stick

Although many ceasefires have been agreed and shattered in Libya with frequency, this time it could be different because senior military officers have signed the agreement.

The ceasefire also paves the way for political talks between the Government of National Accord (GNA) and the LNA on future power-sharing arrangements, as well as the future of sovereign institutions like the Central Bank of Libya and the Libyan Investment Authority.

The Libyan Prime Minister’s decision was motivated by the insistence of the High Council of State, which suggested that al-Serraj should remain until a new presidential council is selected to prevent a political vacuum detrimental to Libya’s stability. This just shows how much support the Libyan Prime Minister has at the top and how crucial he is in uniting the opposing sides in Libya’s war.

Al-Serraj Has the Support of the International Community

Al-Serraj enjoys international support. According to al-Jazeera, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas pleaded with the Libyan Prime Minister to remain in his post “in order to guarantee institutional and executive continuity” in the crucial weeks ahead, which is a reference to in-person negotiations due to take place on November 9 in Tunisia, to discuss holding national elections.

Furthermore, the UN recognizes the GNA as the only legitimate governing body in Libya, as does the U.S., Turkey and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, and all of these factors are a significant boost to al-Serraj’s premiership.

Al-Serraj also enjoys support from the GNA as they released their own statement begging for him to remain in office. Because of the domestic and international support that the Libyan Prime Minister has, it is clear that if he did permanently resign, it would have had a detrimental impact on the Libyan peace process. Therefore, al-Serraj is the only Libyan politician capable of ensuring that his country’s latest ceasefire becomes permanent.

The Libyan Prime Minister is capable of building ties with nations that once supported the LNA. Al-Sarraj used a Twitter account that he created recently to thank Egypt for welcoming Libya’s permanent ceasefire. He also told Bloomberg that support from Egypt, the US and Turkey is crucial.

Al-Serraj Must Do All He Can to Make Libyan Peace a Reality

However, Egypt’s support for peace comes at a price. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El Sisi warned during his meeting with Libyan tribal chiefs on July 16 that the Sirte-Jufra red line, which is crucial to both Cairo and the LNA due to its vast oil supplies, must not be crossed. If al-Serraj is serious about remaining in office until the peace process has been completed, these are factors he must take into consideration.

The only country acting as an obstacle to peace right now is the UAE. They could persuade Haftar to disrupt the peace process and push for Turkey to be expelled from Libya. As Tarek Megerisi wrote for the European Council of Foreign Relations, the LNA chief should be threatened with sanctions if he disrupts the upcoming proceedings.

It is a huge relief for all the parties involved in the Libyan ceasefire that al-Serraj has withdrawn his resignation. The world will be watching him closely in the coming weeks.

L'articolo Libya’s PM al-Serraj Withdraws His Resignation – What Impact Will This Have? proviene da InsideOver.

On August 6, Greece and Egypt signed an historical deal in an unexpected move, demarcating their maritime boundaries, and essentially declaring their respective Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ). Several geopolitical factors across the Eastern Mediterranean and the Libyan front have contributed to this development, which could trigger a new round of tension in the region.

A Late But Important Step for Athens

Surprisingly, Greece has been one of the few countries to remain particularly idle in the initial demarcation of the EEZ. In a region where significant energy reserves have been confirmed, Greece has previously omitted to take the necessary steps in order to proceed to exploration and drilling in the respective area in contrast to numerous other countries nearby like Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon and Israel.

Now, the current Greek administration has taken remarkable action in a field that has been lifeless for decades. Last June Greece came to an agreement with Italy with regards to the maritime boundaries in the Ionian Sea and now Athens has signed a very important deal with Cairo. It should be noted here that in the case of Italy the negotiations have started in 1977 and in the case of Egypt in 2004.

Specific terms of each deal seem to be unfavorable for Greece: for instance in the latest one, 56 to 44 percent of territory was apportioned in favor of Egypt instead of following the equidistant principle. However, the current Greek government is seeking out to gain political capital through these moves, emphasizing that a necessary step for the Greek economy and the international standing of the country has been finally taken after such a long delay.

Geopolitical Gains for Both Sides

The Greek-Egyptian deal comes at a moment when both countries have a lot to gain from this development. On the one hand Greece manages to de facto override the so-called Turkish-Libyan MoU, as the coordinates of the deal are covering a major part of the area established in the questionable pact between Ankara and Libya’s Government of National Accord (GNA). Once the deal and the resulting map have been officially published and adopted by the United Nations, then Athens will have also cancelled de jure the Turkish claims.

At the same time, Egypt creates an unwanted situation for both Turkey and the GNA; we should consider here that the ongoing Libyan conflict has gradually developed into a proxy war between Ankara and Cairo, therefore any action that could worsen the Turkish position and standing in the region. This is definitely welcomed by Egyptian President Sisi. The domestic politics of Egypt are also relevant to this decision, considering that several elements of the Egyptian opposition are firmly supported by Turkey. The Muslim Brotherhood, a Sunni Muslim organization with expanded popular support from a part of the Egyptian population, poses a significant internal threat for President Sisi; it is well known that the Brotherhood receives considerable financial, logistical and political support from Turksih President Erdogan. Since the Turkish support is a key factor for the power of the Brotherhood in Egypt, every blow to Ankara’s prestige is a push towards the stability and prevalence of Sisi’s regime.

Turkey’s Angry Reaction

Turkey responded fiercely, shortly after the announcement of the deal. Erdogan stated after Friday prayers that Greece acted in a deceptive way and the that the deal is worthless. The Turkish President also claimed that he backed down after the recent provocative actions in the Aegean Sea as a gesture of good will and just because of the German intervention. He also suggested that new drilling activity will soon start in the suggested area, while Turkish vessels are once again sailing within the Cypriot EEZ now. Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has also used similar rhetoric, describing the deal null and void, with Turkish Press encouraging these claims.

Finally, just after the announcement by the Greek-Egyptian side, the Antalya Navtex Station issued a NAVTEX advising that a region between the Greek islands of Kastelorizo and Rhodes will be used for a Turkish gunnery exercise on August 10 and 11. The Navigational Telex has alerted the Hellenic Armed Forces and has prompted the Hellenic Navy to closely monitor the area.

There Are Potential Issues with the Deal

The agreement with Egypt is being promoted by the Greek administration and most of the major country media as a huge national success. Even though the deal could be perceived as a smart move to essentially cancel the Turkish-GNA MoU, and finally boost the Greek presence in the eastern Mediterranean, the terms and specifics of the agreement raise some substantial concerns.

One is that the deal excludes the area east of the Meridian after 28° East; even though there have been disagreements between Cairo and Athens, and reportedly those disagreements have blocked the two parties from reaching a deal all this time, the main point of concern has been the island complex of Kastelorizo. But surprisingly Athens has also decided to leave out a part of Rhodes, a major Greek island westwards, in the proximity of Turkey.

Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias stated that this move would leave space for further negotiations in the future among Greece, Egypt, Cyprus and ideally Turkey. However the Greek move could be interpreted as a way to achieve a desired balance for the Greek Government. It is a way of cancelling the already disputed Turkish-Libyan MoU, gaining political capital in-country, but at the same time avoiding the area that has been the main friction point with Ankara and therefore indicating that there is the intention to cooperate and work on a possible bilateral agreement with the “troubling neighbor”.

Unintentionally Empowering Turkey?

In potential future talks, this latest move from Athens has actually provided Ankara with an additional negotiating card, since leaving parts of the islands out of the EEZ agreement actually aligns with the Turkish allegation that islands are entitled to limited EEZ rights. Taking this line of thought thought further and keeping in mind the unofficial trilateral meeting among Greece, Turkey and Germany prior to the aimless tension incident of late July, one could say that a pretext for a Greek-Turkish deal could be unofficially already on the table of negotiations, with the surrounding tension being probably used just to manipulate the domestic audiences of each country. The developments to follow in the next weeks and months will confirm or disprove this claim.

L'articolo The Landmark Greek-Egyptian Deal and the Turkish Factor proviene da InsideOver.

Al Jazeera reports that Aguila Saleh, the Speaker of Libya’s eastern-based parliament, has urged Egypt to intervene militarily if the Government of National Accord (GNA) and its allies attack the strategic city of Sirte.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi warned over the weekend that any invasion of Sirte or Jufra would result in the GNA “crossing a red line.”

In a further warning to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, el-Sisi ordered the Egyptian army to be prepared to carry out missions inside or outside of the nation to defend its national security amid tensions over Turkey’s intervention in Libya.

The GNA Believes Egypt Has Declared War

The GNA denounced Cairo’s threat of military intervention in Libya as “a declaration of war.”

Sirte is strategically important to the GNA because it would provide them with access to Libya’s vital oil fields which remain under the control of the Libyan National Army (LNA) led by General Khalifa Haftar. The city has been occupied by them since January.

Since the start of June, increased Turkish support has allowed pro-GNA forces to seize control of northwest Libya, which dealt a significant blow to Haftar’s plan to attack Tripoli. The GNA assault has now halted outside the coastal city of Sirte.

Sirte is a Strategically Key Libyan City

There are other reasons why Sirte is of strategic importance to both the GNA and the LNA. It is a gateway to dominate the ports of Sidra, Ras Lanuf, Marsa al-Brega and Zuwetina, where three gas conduits and 11 oil pipelines reach the Mediterranean coast.

Although Haftar is losing the Libyan civil war, controlling this coastal city provides him with many advantages over the GNA. Sirte is the western gateway toward a 350 kilometer coastal stretch all the way to Benghazi, abounding in pipelines, refineries, terminals and storage facilities. It is also home to 60 percent of Libya’s hydrocarbon riches.

Sirte matters to both Turkey (which supports the GNA) and Russia (which sponsors the LNA). Both Erdogan and Russian President Vladimir Putin have failed to collaborate on a breakthrough to achieve lasting peace in Libya, but they also have military aspirations to establish bases in the war-torn country.

Fehim Tastekin of Al-Monitor argues that Ankara is eyeing al-Watiya and a naval base in Misrata.

Russia wants to establish a military presence in the Mediterranean after acquiring bases in Tartus and Latakia in Syria. They also want to use Sirte as a naval base in addition to al-Jufra.

Sirte has become a bargaining chip for both Moscow and Ankara. The latter could acquiesce to Russian control in al-Jufra in return for Sirte.

Libya’s Fate Depends Upon Sirte

Therefore, Libya’s fate depends upon what happens in Sirte. The Turkish-backed GNA remains confident that it can win this conflict, and it has already acted aggressively toward certain NATO members wishing to intervene in Libya. On June 17th, a French vessel under NATO command conducted a check on a cargo ship believed to be violating a UN embargo by transporting arms to Libya. In retaliation, Turkish ships threatened the French vessel.

Libya as a whole is strategically important to Turkey due to its vast oil fields, and until peace can be achieved, there is no reason why they will not eventually enter Sirte.

The LNA is allies with the USA, Russia, the UAE and Egypt. If the GNA invades Sirte and Egypt follows through with its threat, such a move could trigger a war between Turkey and the LNA’s allies.

The US Must Intervene

This is where the US and NATO have the opportunity to act as honest brokers. Washington should issue sanctions against Haftar and initiate a peace process that involves the Libyan people to prevent a repeat of what happened in 2015. During that year, a peace agreement negotiated in Morocco was viewed as illegitimate due to its lack of consent from Libyan citizens.

But some NATO members, like France, believe Turkey should be tackled before Russia. Meanwhile, the US wishes to see Ankara more involved in the peace process. There would have to be a united strategy among NATO states before they intervene in Libya.

Any future outcome in Libya depends on Sirte. It is vital all sides find a compromise, and fast.

L'articolo Why Peace in Libya Depends on Whether the GNA Invades Sirte proviene da InsideOver.

More than 50 African leaders have been invited to take part in the first Russia-Africa Summit in Sochi.

Co-chaired by Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, and Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, President of Egypt (who also chairs the African Union) the event aims to spotlight “the expansion of the political, economic, technical and cultural cooperation” between Africa and Russia.

The Russian government boasts that the October 24 summit “is the first event of this level in the history of Russian-African relations, with the heads of all states of the African continent invited, as well as leaders of major subregional associations and organisations.”

On October 23, Sochi will also host an economic forum attended by major African and Russian leaders, and representatives of major businesses. Trade, economic and investment agreements are “expected to be signed”.

With roughly 3,000 African businesspersons expected to attend this event, the Russian government has not revealed which businesses will be present.

China, Russia and Japan: Cold War II

Unlike Japan’s strategic policy for African investment, which seeks “Africa’s development’ by strengthening relations between Africa and Japan, Russia’s investment policy bluntly states its plans for African exploitation.

“Economies of most African countries develop progressively, and Africa will play an increasing role in the system of Russia’s foreign economic relations in the long term, as the region becomes more and more attractive for trade and investment,” Anton Kobyakov, Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation, reported.

On the contrary, Japan’s investment policies in Africa are simply euphemisms for its exploitative designs on the continent. The end of the Cold War began a new chapter in Africa’s economy as Russia and other developed countries scaled back their economic support of African governments. The Cold War was fought in proxy on African and South American land, as both the West, China and the USA struggled for global power through neocolonialism.

During the 1990s, many African nations were rife with poverty and political instability, a far cry from the economic and developmental growth that the continent is currently experiencing. As developed nations pulled back their investment and support in Africa after the end of the Cold War in 1991, Japan would launch Tokyo’s International Conference on Africa’s Development (TICAD) in 1993. Under TICAD, Japan granted Official Development Assistance (ODA) to Africa for the continent’s economic development and public welfare.

“It’s clear that TICAD has become more and more business-oriented over the past 10 years. Now the No.1 agenda is how to bring Japanese private-sector businesses to Africa,” said Shinichi Takeuchi, professor and head of the African Studies Center at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

Following Japan’s euphemistic example, Putin said: “I am glad to note the friendly constructive nature of relations between our countries. I am confident that the Russia–Africa Summit as well as the Economic Forum to be held in Sochi in October will contribute to the sound development of these relations and allow us to outline new forms of fruitful cooperation.”

In China, at the 2018 FOCAC (Forum on China-Africa Cooperation) summit, China and Africa agreed to build an “even stronger community” with a “shared future”.

“We agree to strengthen collective dialogue, enhance traditional friendship, deepen practical cooperation, and work together toward an even stronger China-Africa community with a shared future,” the FOCAC 2018 declaration read.

By the next year, Uganda’s auditor-general released a report declaring that public debt between 2017 and 2018 had increased from $9.1 billion to $11.1 billion. With a loan of $3 billion, and conditions which made loans difficult to repay, Uganda’s sovereign assets were threatened with repossession by China.

“China taking over assets? … in Uganda, I have told you, as long as some of us are still in charge, unless there is a catastrophe, and which I don’t see at all, that will make this economy going behind. So, … I’m not worried about China taking assets. They can do it elsewhere, I don’t know. But here, I don’t think it will come,” the country’s finance minister, Matia Kasaija said.

In December 2017, China took over Sri Lanka’s Hambantota Port under a 99-year lease, after Sri Lanka struggled to make repayments. Many other nations, such as Papa New Guinea, Laos, the Maldives, Pakistan, Malaysia and Kenya are, today, struggling to repay China’s multibillion-dollar loans.

L'articolo Sochi Will Host the First Russia-Africa Summit in October proviene da InsideOver.