Dr Mohamed Abdelaziem Elchime
Associate Professor of Political Science, Helwan University
The Libyan crisis enters a new and articulated phase with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s announcement that any intervention in Libya has international legitimacy in terms of self-defense in order to protect the western borders of Egypt and support the restoration of security and stability to Libya, and that Egypt is ready to arm and train Libyan tribesmen in eastern Libya And that the arrival of the militias of the Libyan Accord government led by Fayez al-Sarraj, backed by Turkey, to “Sirte and al-Jafra” is for Egypt a “red line.”
President El-Sisi’s statements regarding timing and significance reflect an Egyptian position, perhaps a little late, and came in light of three contexts related to Egyptian national security and regional security, especially for European countries, namely:
First: To prevent Libya from turning into a base for terrorism targeting Egypt, the Libyan scene has constituted a safe haven for Egyptian jihadists with the support of the militias that form the backbone of the Saraj government, and there is a list that goes on targeting jihadist factions of Egyptian security, “Hisham Ashmawi responsible for many of the operations that It was carried out in Egypt under the direction and direction of Libya, the massacre of the Egyptian Copts in Libya by ISIS in February 2015, and numerous attempts to infiltrate terrorists from Libya to Egypt. ”
Second: The international stagnation in achieving a solution to the Libyan issue, and Libya turning into a new Syria by entering regional and international parties that see in the Libyan arena a paper, multiplying the “justifications” of each international or regional party to hold its strings, by investing the state of division between the Libyans, starting with America, Russia and the European Union countries And the lack of clarity of the strategies of these forces towards Libya and its future, including cooperation with terrorist factions in the Libyan West, while the Libyan issue in the regional environment resulted in the depth of internal differences in countries such as Tunisia, against the background of the declaration of the components of the Tunisian state commitment to positive neutrality towards the Libyan parties, while The Brotherhood Ennahda movement, led by Rashid Ghannouchi, supported the Brotherhood’s western allies.
Third: Turkish intervention in the Libyan issue, which seems to have constituted Egypt’s most important motive to hint at the possibility of its military intervention in Libya, and according to the same approaches announced by Turkey in justifying its intervention in Syria and Iraq, this Turkish intervention, which was the common denominator internationally and regionally, from countries neighboring Libya Including Algeria, Egypt, and Sudan, whose goals began to be discovered after the withdrawal of the Libyan army forces from the vicinity of Tripoli, by establishing military bases and announcing the start of exploration for Libyan oil and gas, which is what Europe is aware of, which realizes Turkey’s goals.
The Egyptian threat to intervene militarily in Libya is clear that it raised the concerns of the Tripoli government and with it the Turkish government, whose initial reactions came with signals about accepting a political solution, which was not raised a few days ago, especially since the Egyptian president stressed that there is international legitimacy for this intervention, which is what It raises questions about the Egyptian leadership receiving a green light from international and regional actors by agreeing to this intervention, especially that Turkey’s interference in the Libyan issue militarily and politically constitutes the denominator of the common rejection of these actors, in connection with the exposure of Turkey’s goals and expansionist ambitions.
The Egyptian escalation confirmed the fact that Egypt’s strategy in Libya is not related to the person of the leader of the Libyan National Army, and that eastern Libya is a strategic depth for the Egyptian state, and that the recent military transformations in Libya came on the impact of international competition, especially between America and Russia, in addition to France, and that America wanted to send A strong message to Russia across the Libyan arena, and Egyptian concerns that it might be affected by the results of this competition, which may go to the cooperation of international parties with the Islamic forces of Western Libya.
Nevertheless, scenarios after the Egyptian threat to intervene militarily in Libya will be politically and militarily linked to developments in the Libyan file, and broad or limited military intervention cannot be excluded, but it is likely and strongly that it will not be similar to the Turkish military intervention in Syria, and will put pressure on the Libyan parties And Turkey to accept the principle of negotiation, according to the decisions of Skhirat and Berlin, and according to a major address which is the expulsion of foreign forces from Libya, led by the Turkish forces, especially since Turkey’s approach that its entry was in agreement with the Libyan legitimate government will be the subject of question about Turkish interference in Syria and Iraq, and if it is in agreement With the legitimate governments in Damascus and Baghdad, will the fate of Turkish intervention in Libya be similar to Turkey’s intervention in Sudan?
