Libya in Modern and ancient times (JR 165)

Libya in Modern and ancient times (JR1650)

Introduction

 Libya is a country in the Maghreb region in North Africa. The country is made of three historical regions: Tripolitania, Fezzan and Cyrenaica. With an area of almost 1.8 million square kilometers   Libya is the fourth largest country in Africa, and is the 16^th largest country in the world. Libya has the 10th-largest proven oil reserves of any country in the world. The largest city and capital, Tripoli, is located in western Libya and contains over one million of Libya's six million people The second-largest city is Benghazi, which is located in eastern Libya. Libya is a member of the United Nations (since 1955), the Non-Aligned Movement, the Arab League, the OIC and OPEC. The country's official religion is Islam, with 96.6% of the Libyan population being Sunni Muslims

The Latin name Libya referred to the region west of the Nile generally corresponding to its central location in North Africa historically visited by many Mediterranean cultures which referred to its original inhabitants as the "Libúē." The name Libyawas introduced in 1934 for Italian Libya, reviving the historical name for Northwest Africa, from the ancient Greek Λιβύη (Libúē),  was intended to supplant terms applied to Ottoman Tripolitania, the coastal region of what is today Libya having been ruled by the Ottoman Empire from 1551 to 1911, as the Eyalet of Tripolitania. The name "Libya" was brought back into use in 1903 by Italian geographer Federico Minutilli.

Libya gained independence in 1951 as the United Libyan Kingdom   changing its name to the Kingdom of  Following a coup d'état led by Muammar Gaddafi in 1969, the name of the state was changed to the Libyan Arab Republic  . The official name was "Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya" from 1977 to 1986, and "Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya from 1986 to 2011.

Geography 

Libya extends over 1,759,540 square kilometres (679,362 sq mi), making it the 16th largest nation in the world by size. Libya is bound to the north by the Mediterranean Sea, the west by Tunisia and Algeria, the southwest by Niger, the south by Chad, the southeast by Sudan, and the east by Egypt. Libya lies between latitudes 19°and 34°N, and longitudes 9° and 26°E. At 1,770 kilometres (1,100 mi), Libya's coastline is the longest of any African country bordering the Mediterranean. The portion of the Mediterranean Sea north of Libya is often called the Libyan Sea. The climate is mostly extremely dry and desert like in nature. However, the northern regions enjoy a milder Mediterranean climate

Natural hazards come in the form of hot, dry, dust-laden sirocco (known in Libya as the gibli). This is a southern wind blowing from one to four days in spring and autumn. There are also dust storms and sandstorms. Oases can also be found scattered throughout Libya, the most important of which are Ghadames and Kufra. Libya is one of the sunniest and driest countries in the world due to prevailing presence of desert environment.

The Libyan Desert, which covers much of Libya, is one of the most arid and sun-baked places on earth In places, decades may pass without seeing any rainfall at all, and even in the highlands rainfall seldom happens, once every 5–10 years. At Uweinat, as of 2006 the last recorded rainfall was in September 1998. Likewise, the temperature in the Libyan Desert can be extreme; on 13 September 1922, the town of  Aziziya, which is located southwest of Tripoli, recorded an air temperature of 58 °C (136.4  F), considered to be a world record.  In September 2012, however, the world record figure of 58  C was overturned by the World Meteorological Organization 

There are a few scattered uninhabited small oases, usually linked to the major depressions, where water can be found by digging to a few feet in depth. In the west there is a widely dispersed group of oases in unconnected shallow depressions, the Kufra group, consisting of Tazerbo, Rebianae and Kufra.  Aside from the scarps, the general flatness is only interrupted by a series of plateaus and massifs near the centre of the Libyan Desert, around the convergence of the Egyptian-Sudanese-Libyan borders.

Slightly further to the south are the massifs of Arkenu, Uweinat, and Kissu. These granite mountains are ancient, having formed long before the sandstones surrounding them. Arkenu and Western Uweinat are ring complexes very similar to those in the Aïr Mountains. Eastern Uweinat (the highest point in the Libyan Desert) is a raised sandstone plateau adjacent to the granite part further west.

The plain to the north of Uweinat is dotted with eroded volcanic features. With the discovery of oil in the 1950s also came the discovery of a massive aquifer underneath much of Libya. The water in this aquifer pre-dates the last ice ages and the Sahara Desert itself. This area also contains the Arkenu structures, which were once thought to be two impact craters

History

The coastal plain of Libya was inhabited by Neolithic peoples from as early as 8000 BC. The Afroasiatic ancestors of the Berber people are assumed to have spread into the area by the Late Bronze Age. The earliest known name of such a tribe was the Garamantes, based in Germa. The Phoenicians were the first to establish trading posts in Libya. By the 5th century BC, the greatest of the Phoenician colonies, Carthage, had extended its hegemony across much of North Africa, where a distinctive civilization, known as Punic, came into being. In 630 BC, the ancient Greeks colonized the area around Barca in Eastern Libya and founded the city of Cyrene. Within 200 years, four more important Greek cities were established in the area that became known as Cyrenaica.

In 525 BC the Persian army of Cambyses II overran Cyrenaica, which for the next two centuries remained under Persian or Egyptian rule. Alexander the Great was greeted by the Greeks when he entered Cyrenaica in 331 BC, and Eastern Libya again fell under the control of the Greeks, this time as part of the Ptolemaic Kingdom.

After the fall of Carthage the Romans did not immediately occupy Tripolitania (the region around Tripoli), but left it instead under control of the kings of Numidia, until the coastal cities asked and obtained its protection. Ptolemy Apion, the last Greek ruler, bequeathed Cyrenaica to Rome, which formally annexed the region in 74 BC and joined it to Crete as a Roman province. As part of the Africa Nova province, Tripolitania was prosperous,^[ and reached a golden age in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, when the city of Leptis Magna, home to the Severan dynasty, was at its height.

On the Eastern side, Cyrenaica's first Christian communities were established by the time of the Emperor Claudius.  ^]It was heavily devastated during the Kitos War^[ and almost depopulated of Greeks and Jews alike.^[ Although repopulated by Trajan with military colonies,  rom then started its decline. ^]Libya was early to convert to Nicene Christianity and was the home of Pope Victor I; however, Libya was a hotbed for early heresies such as Arianism and Donatism.

The decline of the Roman Empire saw the classical cities fall into ruin, a process hastened by the Vandals' destructive sweep through North Africa in the 5th century. When the Empire returned (now as East Romans  as part of Justinian's reconquests of the 6th century, efforts were made to strengthen the old cities, but it was only a last gasp before they collapsed into disuse). Cyrenaica, which had remained an outpost of the Byzantine Empire during the Vandal period, also took on the characteristics of an armed camp. Unpopular Byzantine governors imposed burdensome taxation to meet military costs, while the towns and public services—including the water system—were left to decay. By the beginning of the 7th century, Byzantine control over the region was weak, Berber rebellions were becoming more frequent, and there was little to oppose Muslim invasion.

Libya has been inhabited by Berbers since the late Bronze Age. The Phoenicians established trading posts in western Libya, and ancient Greek colonists established city-states in eastern Libya. Libya was variously ruled by Carthaginians, Persians, Egyptians and Greeks before becoming a part of the Roman Empire. Libya was an early centre of Christianity. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the area of Libya was mostly occupied by the Vandals until the 7th century, when invasions brought Islam to the region. In the 16th century, the Spanish Empire and the Knights of St John occupied Tripoli, until Ottoman rule began in 1551. Libya was involved in the Barbary Wars of the 18th and 19th centuries. Ottoman rule continued until the Italian occupation of Libya resulted in the temporary Italian Libya colony from 1911 to 1947. During the Second World War, Libya was an important area of warfare in the North African Campaign. The Italian population then went into decline.

Libya became independent as a kingdom in 1951. A military coup in 1969 overthrew King Idris I. The "bloodless coup leader Muammar Gaddafi ruled the country from 1969 and the Libyan Cultural Revolution in 1973 until he was overthrown and killed in the 2011 Libyan Civil War. Two authorities initially claimed to govern Libya: the Council of Deputies in Tobruk and the 2014 General National Congress (GNC) in Tripoli, which considered itself the continuation of the General National Congress, elected in 2012. After UN-led peace talks between the Tobruk and Tripoli governments, a unified interim UN-backed Government of National Accord was established in 2015, and the GNC disbanded to support it. Parts of Libya remain outside either government's control, with various Islamist, rebel and tribal militias administering some areas As of July 2017, talks are still ongoing between the GNA and the Tobruk-based authorities to end the strife and unify the divided establishments of the state, including the Libyan National Army and the Central Bank of Libya

Islamic Libya

Under the command of Amr ibn al-'As, the Rashidun army conquered Cyrenaica.  In 647 an army led by Abdullah ibn Saad took Tripoli from the Byzantines definitively. The Fezzan was conquered by Uqba ibn Nafi in 663. The Berber tribes of the hinterland accepted Islam, however they resisted Arab political rule. For the next several decades, Libya was under the purview of the Umayyad Caliph of Damascus until the Abbasids overthrew the Umayyads in 750, and Libya came under the rule of Baghdad. When Caliph Harun al-Rashid appointed Ibrahim ibn al-Aghlab as his governor of Ifriqiya in 800, Libya enjoyed considerable local autonomy under the Aghlabid dynasty. By the 10th century, the Shiite Fatimids controlled Western Libya, and ruled the entire region in 972 and appointed Bologhine ibn Ziri as governor.

Ibn Ziri's Berber Zirid dynasty ultimately broke away from the Shiite Fatimids, and recognised the Sunni Abbasids of Baghdad as rightful Caliphs. In retaliation, the Fatimids brought about the migration of thousands from mainly two Arab Qaisi tribes, the Banu Sulaym and Banu Hilal to North Africa. This act drastically altered the fabric of the Libyan countryside, and cemented the cultural and linguistic Arabisation of the region  Zirid rule in Tripolitania was short-lived though, and already in 1001 the Berbers of the Banu Khazrun broke away. Tripolitania remained under their control until 1146, when the region was overtaken by the Normans of Sicily.^[ It was not until 1159 that the Moroccan Almohad leader Abd al-Mu'minreconquered Tripoli from European rule. For the next 50 years, Tripolitania was the scene of numerous battles among Ayyubids, the Almohad rulers and insurgents of the Banu Ghaniya. Later, a general of the Almohads, Muhammad ibn Abu Hafs, ruled Libya from 1207 to 1221 before the later establishment of a Tunisian Hafsid dynasty^[ independent from the Almohads. The Hafsids ruled Tripolitania for nearly 300 years. By the 16th century the Hafsids became increasingly caught up in the power struggle between Spain and the Ottoman Empire. After weakening control of Abbasids, Cyrenaica was under Egypt based states such as Tulunids, Ikhshidids, Ayyubids and Mamluks before Ottoman conquest in 1517. Finally Fezzan acquired independence under Awlad Muhammad dynasty after Kanem rule. Ottomans finally conquered Fezzan between 1556 and 1577.

Italian Libya (1911–1947) .

After the Italo-Turkish War (1911–1912), Italy simultaneously turned the three regions into colonies. From 1912 to 1927, the territory of Libya was known as Italian North Africa. From 1927 to 1934, the territory was split into two colonies, Italian Cyrenaica and Italian Tripolitania, run by Italian governors. Some 150,000 Italians settled in Libya, constituting roughly 20% of the total population

In 1934, Italy adopted the name "Libya" (used by the Ancient Greeks & Romans for all of North Africa, except Egypt) as the official name of the colony (made up of the three provinces of Cyrenaica, Tripolitaniaand Fezzan). Omar Mukhtar was the resistance leader against the Italian colonization and became a national hero despite his capture and execution on 16 September 1931. His face is currently printed on the Libyan ten dinar note in memory and recognition of his patriotism. Idris al-Mahdi as-Senussi (later King Idris I), Emir of Cyrenaica, led the Libyan resistance to Italian occupation between the two world wars. Ilan Pappé estimates that between 1928 and 1932 the Italian military "killed half the Bedouin population (directly or through disease and starvation in camps). Italian historian Emilio Gentile estimates 50,000 deaths resulting from the suppression of resistance 

In 1934 was created by governor Balbo the political entity called "Libya", with capital Tripoli . The Italians emphasized infrastructure improvements and public works. In particular, they hugely expanded Libyan railway and road networks from 1934 to 1940, building hundreds of kilometers of new roads and railways and encouraging the establishment of new industries and dozen of new agricultural villages. In June 1940, Italy entered World War II. Libya became the setting for the hard-fought North African Campaign \ that ultimately ended in defeat for Italy and its German ally in 1943.

From 1943 to 1951, Libya was under Allied occupation. The British military administered the two former Italian Libyan provinces of Tripolitana and Cyrenaïca, while the French administered the province of Fezzan. In 1944, Idris returned from exile in Cairo but declined to resume permanent residence in Cyrenaica until the removal of some aspects of foreign control in 1947. Under  

 Libya under Gaddafi (1951–2011).

On 24 December 1951, Libya declared its independence as the United Kingdom of Libya, a constitutional and hereditary monarchy under King Idris, Libya's only monarch. The discovery of significant oil reserves in 1959 and the subsequent income from petroleum sales enabled one of the world's poorest nations to establish an extremely wealthy state. Although oil drastically improved the Libyan government's finances, resentment among some factions began to build over the increased concentration of the nation's wealth in the hands of King Idris.

On 1 September 1969, a group of rebel military officers led by Muammar Gaddafi launched a coup d'état against King Idris, which became known as the Al Fateh Revolution. Gaddafi was referred to as the "Brother Leader and Guide of the Revolution" in government statements and the official Libyan press. Moving to reduce Italian influence, in October 1970 all Italian-owned assets were expropriated and the 12,000-strong Italian community was expelled from Libya alongside the smaller community of Libyan Jews. The day became  national holiday known as "Vengeance Day" Libya's increase in prosperity was accompanied by increased internal political repression, and political dissent was made illegal under Law 75 of 1973. Widespread surveillance of the population was carried out through Gaddafi's Revolutionary Committees

Gaddafi also wanted to combat the strict social restrictions that had been imposed on women by the previous regime, establishing the Revolutionary Women's Formation to encourage reform. In 1970, a law was introduced affirming equality of the sexes and insisting on wage parity. In 1971, Gaddafi sponsored the creation of a Libyan General Women's Federation. In 1972, a law was passed criminalizing the marriage of any females under the age of sixteen and ensuring that a woman's consent was a necessary prerequisite for a marriage

On 25 October 1975, a coup attempt was launched by some 20 military officers, mostly from the city of Misrata. This resulted in the arrest and executions of the coup plotters.  On 2 March 1977, Libya officially became the "Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya". Gaddafi officially passed power to the General People's Committees and henceforth claimed to be no more than a symbolic figurehead. The new "jamahiriya" governance structure he established was officially referred to as "direct democracy".

In February 1977, Libya started delivering military supplies to Goukouni Oueddei and the People's Armed Forces in Chad. The Chadian–Libyan conflict began in earnest when Libya's support of rebel forces in northern Chad escalated into an invasion. Later that same year, Libya and Egypt fought a four-day border war that came to be known as the Libyan-Egyptian War, both nations agreed to a ceasefire under the mediation of the Algerian president Houari Boumediène Hundreds of Libyans lost their lives in the war against Tanzania. Gaddafi financed various other groups from anti-nuclear movements to Australian trade unions

From 1977 onward, per capita income in the country rose to more than US$11,000, the fifth-highest in Africa, while the Human Development Index became the highest in Africa and greater than that of Saudi Arabia.  This was achieved without borrowing any foreign loans, keeping Libya debt-free. The Great Manmade Rive was also built to allow free access to fresh water across large parts of the country. In addition, financial support was provided for university scholarships and employment programs

Much of Libya's income from oil, which soared in the 1970s, was spent on arms purchases and on sponsoring dozens of paramilitaries and terrorist groups around the world. An American airstrike intended to kill Gaddafi failed in 1986. Libya was finally put under sanctions by the United Nations after the bombing of a commercial flight killed 270 people.  

2011 Civil War

After the Arab Spring movements overturned the rulers of Tunisia and Egypt, Libya experienced a full-scale revolt beginning on 17 February 2011. Libya's authoritarian regime led by Muammar Gaddafi put up much more of a resistance compared to the regimes in Egypt and Tunisia. While overthrowing the regimes in Egypt and Tunisia was a relatively quick process, Gaddafi's campaign posed significant stalls on the uprisings in Libya. The first announcement of a competing political authority appeared online and declared the Interim Transitional National Council as an alternative government. One of Gaddafi's senior advisors responded by posting a tweet, wherein he resigned, defected, and advised Gaddafi to flee.  By 20 February, the unrest had spread to Tripoli. On 27 February 2011, the National Transitional Council was established to administer the areas of Libya under rebel control. On 10 March 2011, France became the first state to officially recognise the council as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people. Pro-Gaddaffi forces were able to respond militarily to rebel pushes in Western Libya and launched a counterattack along the coast toward Benghazi, the de facto centre of the uprising The town of Zawiya, 48 kilometres (30 mi) from Tripoli, was bombarded by air force planes and army tanks and seized by Jamahiriya troops, "exercising a level of brutality not yet seen in the conflict. 

Organizations of the United Nations, including United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon^[ and the United Nations Human Rights Council, condemned the crackdown as violating international law, with the latter body expelling Libya outright in an unprecedented action urged by Libya's own delegation to the UN

On 17 March 2011 the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973 with a 10–0 vote and five abstentions including Russia, China, India, Brazil and Germany. The resolution sanctioned the establishment of a no-fly zone and the use of "all means necessary" to protect civilians within Libya. ^]On 19 March, the first act of NATO allies to secure the no-fly zone began by destroying Libyan air defenses when French military jets entered Libyan airspace on a reconnaissance mission heralding attacks on enemy targets.

In the weeks that followed, American forces were in the forefront of NATO operations against Libya. More than 8,000 American personnel in warships and aircraft were deployed in the area. At least 3,000 targets were struck in 14,202 strike sorties, 716 of them in Tripoli and 492 in Brega. The American air offensive included flights of B-2 Stealth bombers, each bomber armed with sixteen 2000-pound bombs, flying out of and returning to their base in Missouri in the continental United States. The support provided by the NATO air forces contributed to the ultimate success of the revolution

By 22 August 2011, rebel fighters had entered Tripoli and occupied Green Square, which they renamed Martyrs' Square in honour of those killed since 17 February 2011. On 20 October 2011 the last heavy fighting of the uprising came to an end in the city of Sirte, where Gaddafi was captured and killed. The defeat of loyalist forces was celebrated on 23 October 2011, three days after the fall of Sirte. At least 30,000 Libyans died in the civil war. ^]In addition, the National Transitional Council estimated 50,000 wounded.

  Second Civil War  

Since the defeat of loyalist forces, Libya has been torn among numerous rival, armed militias affiliated with distinct regions, cities and tribes, while the central government has been weak and unable effectively to exert its authority over the country. Competing militias have pitted themselves against each other in a political struggle between Islamist politicians and their opponents. On 7 July 2012, Libyans held their first parliamentary elections since the end of the former regime. On 8 August 2012, the National Transitional Council officially handed power over to the wholly elected General National Congress, which was then tasked with the formation of an interim government and the drafting of a new Libyan Constitution to be approved in a general referendum

On 25 August 2012, in what Reuters reported as "the most blatant sectarian attack" since the end of the civil war, unnamed organized assailants bulldozed a Sufi mosque with graves, in broad daylight in the center of the Libyan capital Tripoli. It was the second such razing of a Sufi site in two days. Numerous acts of vandalism and destruction of heritage were carried out by suspected Islamist militias, including the removal of the Nude Gazelle Statue and the destruction and desecration of World War II-era British grave sites near Benghazi . Many other cases of Heritage vandalism were carried out and were reported to be carried out by Islamist related radical militias and mobs that either destroyed, robbed, or looted a number of Historic sites which remain in danger at present. On 11 September 2012, Islamist militants mounted a surprise attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, killing the U.S. ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, and three others. The incident generated outrage in the United States and Libya.

On 7 October 2012, Libya's Prime Minister-elect Mustafa A.G. Abushagur was ousted after failing a second time to win parliamentary approval for a new cabinet. On 14 October 2012, the General National Congress elected former GNC member and human rights lawyer Ali Zeidan as prime minister-designate. Zeidan was sworn in after his cabinet was approved by the GNC. On 11 March 2014, after having been ousted by the GNC for his inability to halt a rogue oil shipment, Prime Minister Zeiden stepped down, and was replaced by Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thani. On 25 March 2014, in the face of mounting instability, al-Thani's government briefly explored the possibility of the restoration of the Libyan monarchy 

In June 2014, elections were held to the Council of Deputies, a new legislative body intended to take over from the General National Congress. The elections were marred by violence and low turnout, with voting stations closed in some areas. Secularists and liberals did well in the elections, to the consternation of Islamist lawmakers in the GNC, who reconvened and declared a continuing mandate for the GNC, refusing to recognise the new Council of Deputies. Armed supporters of the General National Congress occupied Tripoli, forcing the newly elected parliament to flee to Tobruk.

Libya has been riven by conflict between the rival parliaments since mid-2014. Tribal militias and jihadist groups have taken advantage of the power vacuum. Most notably, radical Islamist fighters seized Derna in 2014 and Sirtein 2015 in the name of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. In early 2015, neighbouring Egypt launched airstrikes against ISIL in support of the Tobruk government.  

In January 2015, meetings were held with the aim to find a peaceful agreement between the rival parties in Libya. The so-called Geneva-Ghadames talks were supposed to bring the GNC and the Tobruk government together at one table to find a solution of the internal conflict. However, the GNC actually never participated, a sign that internal division not only affected the "Tobruk Camp", but also the "Tripoli Camp". Meanwhile, terrorism within Libya has steadily increased, affecting also neighbouring countries. The terrorist attack against the Bardo Museum on 18 March 2015, was reportedly carried on by two Libyan-trained militants.

During 2015 an extended series of diplomatic meetings and peace negotiations were supported by the United Nations, as conducted by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG), Spanish diplomat Bernardino Leon. U N support for the SRSG-led process of dialogue carried on in addition to the usual work of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL

In July 2015 SRSG Leon reported to the UN Security Council on the progress of the negotiations, which at that point had just achieved a political agreement on 11 July setting out "a comprehensive framework…includ[ing guiding principles…institutions and decision-making mechanisms to guide the transition until the adoption of a permanent constitution." The stated purpose of that process was "…intended to culminate in the creation of a modern, democratic state based on the principle of inclusion, the rule of law, separation of powers and respect for human rights." The SRSG praised the participants for achieving agreement, stating that "The Libyan people have unequivocally expressed themselves in favour of peace." The SRSG then informed the Security Council that "Libya is at a critical stage" and urging "all parties in Libya to continue to engage constructively in the dialogue process", stating that "only through dialogue and political compromise, can a peaceful resolution of the conflict be achieved. A peaceful transition will only succeed in Libya through a significant and coordinated effort in supporting a future Government of National Accord…". Talks, negotiations and dialogue continued on during mid-2015 at various international locations, culminating at Skhirat in Morocco in early September.

Also in 2015, as part of the ongoing support from the international community, the UN Human Rights Council requested a report about the Libyan situation and the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, established an investigative body (OIOL) to report on human rights and rebuilding the Libyan justice system. Chaos-ridden Libya has emerged as a major transit point for people trying to reach Europe. More than 700,000 migrants have reached Italy by boat since 2013 In May 2018 Libya's rival leaders agreed to hold parliamentary and presidential elections following a meeting in Paris .In 2019, Libya launched Operation Flood of Dignity, in an offensive by the Libyan National Army aimed to cleanse the western zone from terrorist groups

Libya: 2011–present  

Anti-government protests began in Libya on 15 February 2011. By 18 February the opposition controlled most of Benghazi, the country's second-largest city. The government dispatched elite troops and militia in an attempt to recapture it, but they were repelled. By 20 February, protests had spread to the capital Tripoli, leading to a television address by Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, who warned the protestors that their country could descend into civil war. The rising death toll, numbering in the thousands, drew international condemnation and resulted in the resignation of several Libyan diplomats, along with calls for the government's dismantlement.

Amidst ongoing efforts by demonstrators and rebel forces to wrest control of Tripoli from the Jamahiriya, the opposition set up an interim government in Benghazi to oppose Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's rule. However, despite initial opposition success, government forces subsequently took back much of the Mediterranean coast.

On 17 March, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 was adopted, authorising a no-fly zone over Libya, and "all necessary measures" to protect civilians. Two days later, France, the United States and the United Kingdom intervened in Libya with a bombing campaign against pro-Gaddafi forces. A coalition of 27 states from Europe and the Middle East soon joined the intervention. The forces were driven back from the outskirts of Benghazi, and the rebels mounted an offensive, capturing scores of towns across the coast of Libya. The offensive stalled however, and a counter-offensive by the government retook most of the towns, until a stalemate was formed between Brega and Ajdabiya, the former being held by the government and the latter in the hands of the rebels. Focus then shifted to the west of the country, where bitter fighting continued. After a three-month-long battle, a loyalist siege of rebel-held Misrata, the third largest city in Libya, was broken in large part due to coalition air strikes. The four major fronts of combat were generally considered to be the Nafusa Mountains, the Tripolitanian coast, the Gulf of Sidra,^[ and the southern Libyan Desert.

In late August, anti-Gaddafi fighters captured Tripoli, scattering Gaddafi's government and marking the end of his 42 years of power. Many institutions of the government, including Gaddafi and several top government officials, regrouped in Sirte, which Gaddafi declared to be Libya's new capital. Others fled to Sabha, Bani Walid, and remote reaches of the Libyan Desert, or to surrounding countries. However, Sabha fell in late September, Bani Walid was captured after a grueling siege weeks later,^[ and on 20 October, fighters under the aegis of the National Transitional Council seized Sirte, killing Gaddafi in the process. ^]However, after Gaddafi was killed, the Civil War continued

The National Transitional Council, established in 2011, referred to the state as simply "Libya". The UN formally recognized the country as "Libya" in September 2011, based on a request from the Permanent Mission of Libya citing the Libyan interim Constitutional Declaration of 3 August 2011. In November 2011, the ISO 3166-1 was altered to reflect the new country name "Libya" in English, "Libye (la)" in French  In December 2017 the Permanent Mission of Libya to the United Nations informed the United Nations that the country's official name was henceforth the "State of Libya"; "Libya" remained the official short form, and the country continued to be listed under "L" in alphabetical lists    

Recent developments

On April 4 2019, Libyan strongman Khalifa Haftarannounced in a voice recording circulated online that he was launching a military campaign to take over the capital, Tripoli. His media office then released a video purporting to show tens of armoured vehicles bearing the emblems of Haftar's "Libyan National Army" (LNA) heading towards the Libyan capital. Tripoli would fall in 48 hours, his forces declared.

The Tripoli-based and UN-recognized Government of National Accord (GNA) seemed taken by surprise. It scrambled to mobilise various militias backing it to defend the capital and eventually launched airs attacks against Haftar's forces.

Despite the severity of the situation and the risk of another bloody escalation in the years-long Libyan conflict, the response of the international community was rather weak. The United Kingdom called an emergency Security Council meeting on Friday night, which resulted in a statement calling on Haftar to "halt all military advances", after Russia and France insisted on minimal pressure on the LNA. Meanwhile, the US pulled out some of its troops stationed in Libya.

As the GNA announced a "counteroffensive" on Sunday, the situation in the country remains tense. With conflicting reports coming from both sides, and what appears to be a massive battle of misinformation raging on, it is very difficult to judge what is really going on on the ground. At this point, what is clear is that Haftar has received enough international backing to press on with his operation and its outcome will be determined by what happens in the coming weeks.

An LNA operation to take over Tripoli was always just a question of time. After securingfull control over Benghazi in eastern Libya in 2017, over the past year, Haftar has steadily pressed on to expand the territories under his control, while also engaging in talks with the GNA sponsored by various foreign actors.

In January, his forces launched an operation to take over major oilfields in the south and by the end of the month were able to enter Sabha, the largest city in southern Libya. Having established control, at least nominally, over two-thirds of Libya, Haftar turned his gaze on Tripolitania (western Libya) and the capital Tripoli.

With a UN-led national conference scheduled for mid-April, Haftar hastened to maximise his territorial gains and hence his leverage over his opponents at the GNA. At the same time, the ongoing civil unrest in Algeria gave him a rare window of opportunity to launch a military operation.

Worried about the Libyan conflict spilling over into its territory, the Algerian leadership has been pressing for a political solution in Libya and has hosted several meetings between Libyan actors. For Algiers, the GNA and the Islamist forces in Libya have to be included in any conflict settlement to ensure the stability of the country. It has perceived Haftar's zero-sum games as dangerous and potentially destabilising. Moreover, in its status of North Africa’s hegemon, Algiers sees his Arab allies - Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia - as geopolitical foes.   

Given Algeria's political and military clout in the region, Haftar had avoided moving close to Algerian borders and kept open communication channels with the Algerian leadership until a few months ago. The purge that Algeria's security and military apparatus went through in mid-2018 and the uprising which erupted in February 2019 against President Abdelaziz Bouteflika's rule gave Haftar a unique opportunity to launch his expansionist military campaign, without much backlash from Algiers.

Haftar probably also received the green light from his foreign backers. It is no secret that Egypt, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and increasingly Russia and France, have been providing the LNA with military and political support.

In late March, Haftar travelled to Riyadh to meet Saudi King Salman, which roughly coincided with a visit Abu Dhabi's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed paid to Egypt, where he met Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. It is quite unlikely that Haftar's closest allies were not informed about the planned operation.

The timid response by the international community to his offensive on Tripoli - which was launched as UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was visiting the Libyan capital - shows that many countries consider Haftar as the solution for Libya, not just the UAE, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Haftar is also hoping to capitalise on the increasing discontent among the civilian population in western Libya. The situation inside Tripoli - as in other Libyan cities - has been steadily deteriorating. Crime, insecurity and corruption have been on the rise, while living conditions have markedly worsened as the local economy has struggled and the provision of social and health services has nearly collapsed.

The capital is divided between different militias, and the GNA is itself weak and corrupt. As nostalgia for the Gaddafi era has crept in, Haftar has tried to project himself as a military strongman who could unite the country and bring back stability and order. This self-styled image as Libya's saviour has been promoted by a massive propaganda machine largely backed by the UAE.

The situation on the ground is changing rapidly and is rather unpredictable, but at this point, there are at least three possible scenarios for what happens next in Libya. First, the Tripoli offensive can become a protracted conflict similar to the one that Benghazi witnessed, which lasted three years. This would take a heavy toll on the civilian population and infrastructure, and would spoil Haftar's hopes to enter the capital as a popular and much-awaited saviour. Second, a quick victory is also not out of the question and it would very much depend on whether Haftar is able to win over enough militias that would join his forces and help him take control of Tripoli without a fierce fight. He has been conducting negotiationswith a number of militia leaders already - a strategy that had helped him makes quick territorial gains in his campaign in southern Libya. Striking a deal with armed groups, however, would mean that he will have to guarantee their military and economic interests. This means that the lawlessness which is currently plaguing Libya's west would persist. And if Haftar decides to crack down on militias in the future - as he has promised - he might face a widespread rebellion. Third, a retreat or a consolidation of the new status quo could also take place, where the LNA forces cut their offensive short but retain strategic positions in order to keep the pressure on Tripoli. This may be followed by another round of negotiations, with or without the UN, in which Haftar would have the upper hand.

Whatever scenario unrolls in the following weeks, one thing is for sure: Libya will continue to be an epicentre of the crisis in North Africa and a major source of concern beyond its borders.   Days before Libya's renegade General Khalifa Haftarlaunched an offensive on the country's capital, Tripoli, Saudi Arabia offered tens of millions of dollars to help pay for the operation, the Wall Street Journal has reported. The offer came during a visit by Haftar to the Saudi capital, Riyadh, ahead of his April 4 military campaign, the Journal said on Friday. Citing senior advisers to the Saudi government, the Journal said the offer of funds - accepted by Haftar - was intended to buy the loyalty of tribal leaders, recruit and pay fighters, and other military purposes. The latest conflict in the North African country pits Haftar's Libyan National Army (LNA) against forces allied to the United Nations-backed Government of National Accord (GNA). The GNA controls Tripoli, situated in northwestern Libya, while the LNA is allied to a parallel administration based in the east of the oil-rich country, which splintered into a patchwork of competing power bases following the overthrow of former leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. The United Nations, which had hoped to organise a national conference this month bringing the rival eastern and western administrations together to organise an election, has called for a ceasefire. The United States, G7 bloc of wealthy nations and the European Union have also urged the LNA to halt its offensive. According to the latest UN figures, at least 75 people have been killed in the fighting between the warring parties while 320 others were wounded. Some 9,500 people have also been forced from their homes.  Several Middle Eastern countries including Egypt and the United Arab Emirates have backed Hafter as a bulwark against Islamist groups, notably the Muslim Brotherhood, who took a prominent role in Libya following the 2011 uprising and continued to participate in Libyan politics under the Tripoli government. "There was an increase in support, clearly, but not a change in the political role. I think Saudi Arabia wanted to up its participation in the conflict in Libya and that probably contributed to the visit of General Haftar to the kingdom and his meeting with both King Salman and the Crown Prince," Jahshan said.

Economy

The Libyan economy depends primarily upon revenues from the oil sector, which account for over half of GDP and 97% of exports. Libya holds the largest proven oil reserves in Africa and is an important contributor to the global supply of light, sweet crude. During 2010, when oil averaged at $80 a barrel, oil production accounted for 54% of GDP. Apart from petroleum, the other natural resources are natural gas and gypsum Th  International Monetary Fund estimated Libya's real GDP growth at 122% in 2012 and 16.7% in 2013, after a 60% plunge in 2011

The World Bank defines Libya as an 'Upper Middle Income Economy', along with only seven other African countries.  Substantial revenues from the energy sector, coupled with a small population, give Libya one of the highest per capita GDPs in Africa. This allowed the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya state to provide an extensive level of social security, particularly in the fields of housing and education.

Libya faces many structural problems including a lack of institutions, weak governance, and chronic structural unemployment. The economy displays a lack of economic diversification and significant reliance on immigrant labour. Libya has traditionally relied on unsustainably high levels of public sector hiring to create employment. In the mid-2000s, the government employed about 70% of all national employees.

Unemployment has risen from 8% in 2008 to 21%, according to the latest census figures.  According to an Arab League report, based on data from 2010, unemployment for women stands at 18% while for the figure for men is 21%, making Libya the only Arab country where there are more unemployed men than women  Libya has high levels of social inequality, high rates of youth unemployment and regional economic disparities.  Water supply is also a problem, with some 28% of the population not having access to safe drinking water in 2000

Libya imports up to 90% of its cereal consumption requirements, and imports  of  wheat in 2012/13 was estimated at about 1 million tonnes.  The 2012 wheat production was estimated at about 200,000 tonnes   The government hopes to increase food production to 800,000 tonnes of cereals by 2020.  However, natural and environmental conditions limit Libya's agricultural production potential. Before 1958, agriculture was the country's main source of revenue, making up about 30% of GDP. With the discovery of oil in 1958, the size of the agriculture sector declined rapidly, comprising less than 5% GDP by 2005

The country joined OPEC in 1962.  Libya is not a WTO member, but negotiations for its accession started in 2004  In the early 1980s, Libya was one of the wealthiest countries in the world; its GDP per capita was higher than some developed countries.  

In the early 2000s officials of the Jamahiriya era carried out economic reforms to reintegrate Libya into the global economy.  UN sanctions were lifted in September 2003, and Libya announced in December 2003 that it would abandon programs to build weapons of mass destruction.  Other steps have included applying for membership of the World Trade Organization, reducing subsidies, and announcing plans for privatization.

Authorities privatized more than 100 government owned companies after 2003 in industries including oil refining, tourism and real estate, of which 29 were 100% foreign owned.   Many international oil companies returned to the country, including oil giants S hell and ExxonMobil  After sanctions were lifted there was a gradual increase of air traffic, and by 2005 there were 1.5 million yearly air travellers.  Libya had long been a notoriously difficult country for Western tourists to visit due to stringent visa requirements. In 2007 Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the second-eldest son of Muammar Gaddafi, was involved in a green development project called the Green Mountain Sustainable Development Area, which sought to bring tourism to Cyrene and to preserve Greek ruins in the area

In August 2011 it was estimated that it would take at least 10 years to rebuild Libya's infrastructure. Even before the 2011 war, Libya's infrastructure was in a poor state due to "utter neglect" by Gaddafi's administration, according to the NTC.  By October 2012, the economy had recovered from the 2011 conflict, with oil production returning to near normal levels.  Oil production was more than 1.6 million barrels per day before the war. By October 2012, the average oil production has surpassed 1.4 million bpd.  The resumption of production was made possible due to the quick return of major Western companies, like Total, Eni, Repsol, Wintershall and Occidental.  In 2016, an announcement from the company said the company aims 900,000 barrel per day in the next year. Oil production has fallen from 1.6 million barrel per day to 900,000 in four years of war

Libya is a large country with a relatively small population, and the population is concentrated very narrowly along the coast.  Population density is about 50 persons per km² (130/sq. mi.) in the two northern regions of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, but falls to less than one person per km² (2.6/sq. mi.) elsewhere. Ninety percent of the people live in less than 10% of the area, primarily along the coast. About 88% of the population is urban, mostly concentrated in the three largest cities, Tripoli, Benghazi and Misrata. Libya has a population of about 6.3 million,  27.7% of whom are under the age of 15.  In 1984 the population was 3.6 million, an increase from the 1.54 million reported in 1964

The majority of the Libyan population is today identified as Arab, that is, Arabic-speaking and Arab-cultured. However, according to DNA studies, 90% of that Arab Libyan population consists in fact of Arabized Berbers,  while Berber Libyans, those who retain Berber language and Berber culture, comprise a minority. There are about 140 tribes and clans in Libya.

Family life is important for Libyan families, the majority of which live in apartment blocks and other independent housing units, with precise modes of housing depending on their income and wealth. Although the Arab Libyans traditionally lived nomadic lifestyles in tents, they have now settled in various towns and cities.  Because of this, their old ways of life are gradually fading out. An unknown small number of Libyans still live in the desert as their families have done for centuries. Most of the population has occupations in industryand services, and a small percentage is in agriculture.

According to the UNHCR, there were around 8,000 registered refugees, 5,500 unregistered refugees, and 7,000 asylum seekers of various origins in Libya in January 2013. Additionally, 47,000 Libyan nationals were internally displaced and 46,570 were internally displaced returnees

Local demographics and ethnic groups

The original inhabitants of Libya belonged predominantly to various Berber ethnic groups; however, the long series of foreign invasions – particularly by Arabs and Turks  have had a profound and lasting linguistic, cultural, and identity influence on Libya's demographics. Today, the great majority of Libya's inhabitants are Arabic-speaking Muslims of mixed descent, with many also tracing their ancestry to the Banu Sulaym tribe, beside Turkish and purely Berber ethnicities. The Turkish minority are often called "Kouloughlis" and are concentrated in and around villages and towns  Additionally, there are some Libyan ethnic minorities, such as the purely Berber Tuareg and the Tebou  Most Italian settlers, at their height numbering over half a million, left after Italian Libya's independence in 1947. More repatriated in 1970 after the accession of Muammar Gaddafi, but a few hundred of them returned in the 2000s.

Immigrant labor

As of 2013, the UN estimates that around 12% of Libya's population (upwards of 740,000 people) was made up of foreign migrants  Prior to the 2011 revolution official and unofficial figures of migrant labor range from 25% to 40% of the population (between 1.5 and 2.4 million people). Historically, Libya has been a host state for millions of low- and high-skilled Egyptian migrants, in particular

It is difficult to estimate the total number of immigrants in Libya as there are often differences between census figures, official counts and usually more accurate unofficial estimates. In the 2006 census, around 359,540 foreign nationals were resident in Libya out of a population of over 5.5 million (6.35% of the population). Almost half of these were Egyptians, followed by Sudanese and Palestinian immigrants.  During the 2011 revolution, 768,362 immigrants fled Libya as calculated by the IOM, around 13% of the population at the time, although many more stayed on in the country

If consular records prior to the revolution are used to estimate the immigrant population, as many as 2 million Egyptian migrants were recorded by the Egyptian embassy in Tripoli in 2009, followed by 87,200 Tunisians, and 68,200 Moroccans by their respective embassies. The number of Asian migrants before the revolution was roughly 100,000 (60,000 Bangladeshis, 18,000 Indians, 10,000 Pakistanis, 8000 Filipinos as well as Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai and other workers).  This would put the immigrant population at almost 40% before the revolution and is a figure more consistent with government estimates in 2004 which put the regular and irregular migrant numbers at 1.35 to 1.8 million (25–33% of the population at the time).  

Religion  

About 97% of the population in Libya are Muslims, most of whom belong to the Sunni branch.  Small numbers of Ibadi Muslims and Ahmadis also live in the country. Before the 1930s, the Senussi Sunni Sufi movement was the primary Islamic movement in Libya. This was a religious revival adapted to desert life. Its zawaaya (lodges) were found in Tripolitania and Fezzan, but Senussi influence was strongest in Cyrenaica. Rescuing the region from unrest and anarchy, the Senussi movement gave the Cyrenaican tribal people a religious attachment and feelings of unity and purpose This Islamic movement, which was eventually destroyed by both Italian invasion and later the Gaddafi government,  was very conservative and somewhat different from the Islam that exists in Libya today. Gaddafi asserted that he was a devout Muslim, and his government was taking a role in supporting Islamic institutions and in worldwide proselytising on behalf of Islam.

Since the fall of Gaddafi, ultra-conservative strains of Islam have reasserted themselves in places. Derna in eastern Libya, historically a hotbed of jihadist thought, came under the control of militants aligned with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in 2014  Jihadist elements have also spread to Sirte and Benghazi, among other areas, as a result of the Second Libyan Civil War

There are small foreign communities of Christians. Coptic Orthodox Christianity, which is the Christian Church of Egypt, is the  argest and most historical Christian denomination in Libya. There are about 60,000 Egyptian Copts  n Libya.  Copts in Libya are Egyptian. There are three Coptic Churches in Libya, one in Tripoli, one in Benghazi, and one in Misurata.

The Coptic Church has grown in recent years in Libya, due to the growing immigration of Egyptian Copts to Libya. There are an estimated 40,000 Roman Catholics in Libya who are served by two Bishops, one in Tripoli (serving the Italian community) and one in Benghazi (serving the Maltese community). There is also a small Anglican community, made up mostly of African immigrant workers in Tripoli; it is part of the Anglican Diocese of Egypt. People have been arrested on suspicion of being Christian missionaries, as proselytising is illegal.  Christians have also faced the threat of violence from radical Islamists in some parts of the country, with a well-publicised video released by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in February 2015 depicting the mass beheading of Christian Copts.  

April, 21, 2019: US Policy reversal

A White House statement said Trump and Haftar spoke by phone on Monday "to discuss ongoing counterterrorism efforts to achieve peace and stability in Libya".On April 4, Haftar and his forces launched an offensive against the country's internationally recognised government, which is based in Tripoli. In their phone call, Trump "recognised Field Marshal Haftar's significant role in fighting terrorism and securing Libya's oil resources, and the two discussed a shared vision for Libya's transition to a stable, democratic political system."

Trump's praise for Haftar was seen in Tripoli as a reversal in US policy on Libya, as earlier this month, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo demanded an immediate halt to Haftar's offensive. Al Jazeera's Mahmoud Abdelwahed, reporting from Tripoli, said news of the conversation caused anger in the capital with residents perceiving the call as a show of support by Trump for Haftar's offensive.

"People are very angry, thousands of people have come out here on the main streets and squares especially in Tripoli and they are calling on the international community to stop the military aggression by Haftar forces," he said. At least 2,000 people took part in Friday's protest in Tripoli's Martyrs' Square to protest the push on Tripoli by Haftar's Libyan National Army (LNA). Abdelrizaq Musheirib, a protester criticised Trump's call to the commander, telling Reuters news agency: "The call has no meaning but we will respond to it."

The LNA launched the military campaign against Tripoli on April 4, saying it wanted to "cleanse" the country's western region of "remaining terrorist groups". Analysts say the offensive is threatening to reignite a full-blown civil war in the oil-rich country, which has been mired in chaos since the NATO-backed toppling of longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.

The fighting on the outskirts of the city has killed at least 213 people and wounded more than 1,000 people, the World Health Organization said on Friday. More than 25,000 have been displaced, according to the United Nations. Haftar backs a rival administration in eastern Libya that refuses to recognise the authority of the UN-recognized Government of National Accord in Tripoli, led by Prime Minister Fayez al-Serraj.

Al Jazeera's Rosiland Jordan, reporting from Washington, DC, said the White House's statement on Friday appeared to contradict the stand of the United States's Department of State."Earlier this week, the State Department put out a statement calling on Haftar to stand down, to halt this military offensive and the US has been working with the UN on trying to broker some sort of a peace accord in that country," she said.

"So, it raises the question whether this is a matter of a US president going against its own foreign policy on a critical global issue such as the issue in Libya." Jordan added that it was unclear if Trump had initiated the call. "The White House statement notes that he and Haftar spoke on Monday, it could have been Haftar is looking for some sort of approval on a global stage and made a request to have a conversation with the president," she said. The announcement came a day after both the US and Russia said they could not support a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Libya at this time. Russia objected to the British-drafted resolution blaming Haftar for the latest flare-up in violence, but the US did not give a reason for its decision. The draft resolution would also call on countries with influence over the warring parties to ensure compliance and for unconditional humanitarian aid access in Libya. Meanwhile, countries in Europe and the Middle East were also divided on Haftar's offensive on Tripoli. Italy and France have sparred over Libya in the past, but on Friday foreign ministers of the two countries said they are trying to forge a common strategy on the North African country. Jean-Yves Le Drian, France's foreign minister, speaking to reporters following a meeting in Rome with his counterpart said: "There can be no progress in Libya without a solid Franco-Italian agreement." Enzo Moavero Milanesi, the Italian minister, said lower-ranking ministry officials will meet next week in the Italian capital "to build the path toward a goal that remains a shared one".

Protesters in Tripoli accused France's President Emmanuel Macron of backing Haftar, but the French embassy in Libya tweeted in Arabic that Paris was "opposed to the attack" on the city. Haftar enjoys the backing of Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which view him as an anchor to restore stability in Libya. But Qatar said an existing UN arms embargo on Libya should be strictly enforced to prevent the commander from receiving arms. Also on Friday, the UN refugee agency said it evacuated 163 refugees and migrants from Libya to neighbouring Niger, but more than 3,000 others were still trapped in detention centres affected by clashes between the LNA and GNA forces.  The UNHCR said the refugees from various African nations included dozens of women and children, who had all been held in detention centres near the front lines of the conflict. The agency said it remained "extremely concerned" for the safety of those who remain

Fighting continues: Apr.,21,2019:

Heavy clashes broke out in the southern districts of the Libyan capital, Tripoli, as forces loyal to the country's UN-recognised government launched a counterattack to repel fighters allied to renegade General Khalifa Haftar. Residents of the city said they could hear sustained rocket and artillery fire in several districts of Tripoli on Saturday, after several days of stalemate on the ground.

Haftar's Libyan National Army, which is allied to a rival administration in the country's east, launched an offensive to seize Tripoli more than two weeks ago, but it has been stopped in the city's southern outskirts by forces allied to the Government of National Accord (GNA). The shelling was louder and more frequent on Saturday than in previous days, residents said, and audible in central districts more than 10km away from the front line. Both sides claimed progress in southern Tripoli, but no more details were immediately available. Mustafa al-Mejii, a spokesman for the GNA's military operation, said his forces "have launched a new phase of attack". "Orders were given early this morning to advance and gain ground," he told the AFP news agency.

Colonel Mohamad Gnounou, another spokesman, said Tripoli-allied forces carried out seven air raids against military positions held by Haftar's LNA. They included areas south of the city of Gharyan, 100km southwest of the capital, and an airbase at Al-Watiya, 50km further southwest. Ahmed al-Mesmari, spokesman for Haftar's forces, said Tripoli-allied forces attacked the airbase three times on Saturday . Speaking to reporters in Benghazi, Mesmari confirmed attacks on Gharyan, saying civilians had been targeted. 

"Our airforce is providing fire support to troops on the ground," he said, adding: "The enemy is trying to flank our forces from the back, but they have failed in the face of the strength of our fighters and the experience of our fighters. It's become a war of attrition."

Fighting on Tripoli's outskirts has killed at least 220 people and wounded more than 1,000 others, according to the World Health Organization, while the International Organization for Migration said more than 25,000 people have been displaced.

The offensive, which Haftar said was aimed at cleansing Libya's western region of "remaining terrorist groups", has raised fears of a full-blown civil war in the oil-rich country, which has been mired in chaos since the NATO-backed toppling of long-time ruler Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. For years now, Libya has been split between the Tripoli-based GNA in the west and a rival administration in the east allied to Haftar.

Saturday's clashes were "the fiercest fighting yet", said Al Jazeera's Mahmoud Abdelwahed, reporting from Tripoli. GNA-allied forces "say they have gained more ground against Haftar's forces, and are determined to re-take control of Tripoli's unused international airport," he said  While GNA forces claim Haftar's fighters were on the retreat, the battle would not be easy, Abdelwahed said, "because Haftar's forces are supported by regional powers, like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates

Libya civil war: Apr.,24.2019: Refugees and migrants trapped in a detention centre on the front line of conflict in Tripoli for weeks say they were shot at indiscriminately on Tuesday by fighters aligned with eastern forces advancing on Libya's capital. At least 10 people were seriously wounded by gunfire, detainees said. "Right now they are attacking the centre, shooting more people … They are shooting us directly," an Eritrean man told Al Jazeera through the messaging service WhatsApp. "We need medical treatment right now because the people with us, their injuries are really a lot." Four people in the detention centre in Qasr bin Ghashir, 25km south of Tripoli, said the fighters that attacked them were aligned with the Libyan National Army led by renegade commander Khalifa Haftar whose forces attacked Libya's capital on April 4.  More than 100 women and nearly 50 children are among the 728 refugees and migrants in the detention centre, according to the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR)  Attempts by Libyan authorities to move the detainees in Qasr bin Ghashir, after a week of clashes, had failed. "People are bleeding a lot; now, I need emergency assistance. Please share for us to the world," said another man, using a hidden phone. He said soldiers had already taken mobile phones from many of the people with him. "Please, please, please, dear, we are in danger." The refugees and migrants refused to be taken to a detention centre in Zintan, 170km southwest of Tripoli, where they worried they would have little access to international organisations. They said there was a high death rate because of poor conditions and a lack of medical care.  After the failed attempt to relocate them, Qasr bin Ghashir's detainees, most of whom have been locked up for months after years with smugglers, said Libyan guards told them they were leaving them on their own. "They didn't leave [us] anything to defend ourselves," one man messaged Al Jazeera on April 13. There are roughly 6,000 refugees and migrants currently being held in detention centres under the control of the Libyan Department for Combatting Illegal Migration.More than 2,700 are in areas affected by clashes, according to the UN.

Hafttar offensive: May, 5, 2019:

 Haftar offensive after a month has stalled, little has changed. Although the war has escalated, the front lines have not shifted dramatically, and if anything, Haftar’s assault seems to be faltering. This was not the war that either he or his foreign backers had envisioned. With a treacherous supply line that snakes through more than 1,000 kilometers of harsh Libyan desert, and a limited amount of men in the west of the country who are willing to fight on his behalf, Haftar is being forced to rely increasingly on outside help to maintain his edge. This is a dangerous trajectory for Libya and forces the conflict onto a regional level. The more the UAE and Egypt get involved, the more it will attract opposing powers such as Turkey—and the more Libya risks becoming a Syria-style proxy-war at the center of the Mediterranean.

The prospects for a negotiated solution look dim. Haftar has gone all-in on this assault, since any failure would be devastating for his reputation and jeopardize the integrity of his Libyan National Army, to say nothing of his hopes of assuming absolute power. Haftar’s various opponents are also avowedly disinterested in diplomacy at the moment. Political entities, including the internationally recognized government in Tripoli, feel betrayed by an international community that has appeased Haftar’s aggression and coerced them down a political track that steadily lost its integrity and led to the current military onslaught. Other militias that have joined in to fight Haftar and his forces see a lucrative future for themselves if they not only deal Haftar a decisive defeat, but claim a slice of Tripoli for themselves in the process.

Where does this leave the Libyan people? As ever, they have no one offering a constructive vision for their country’s future. They are fed-up with the corrupt and unruly status quo that U.N.-backed Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj has presided over since 2015. Yet they feel existentially threatened by the kind of military dictatorship that Haftar promises, modeled on President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi’s repressive regime next door in Egypt

Meanwhile, the U.N. and its special representative to Libya, Ghassan Salame, appear helplessly stuck between familiar discord in Libya and obstructively partisan international actors. The U.N. can’t compel the warring parties to the negotiation table, let alone try to force a peace deal. Haftar’s offensive has inspired opportunism from a range of states and shattered the facade of a cohesive international policy in Libya, mediated by the U.N. with the goal of some kind of political power-sharing deal

Russia was the first country to break ranks. Despite maintaining a message that it communicates with all sides in Libya in the hopes for a negotiated solution, Moscow blocked early attempts at the U.N. Security Council to call for a cease-fire or pass a resolution that may have hindered Haftar’s assault in any way. Perhaps more significant was the about-face in American policy. Following years of steady, if not active, support from the State Department for the U.N.’s mission in Libya, including regular condemnations of violence and advocacy for a political process, the U.S. all but gave Haftar a green light to take Tripoli. Apparently under heavy lobbying from Egypt’s Sisi and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed of the UAE, the Trump administration threw its support to the would-be strongman, undercutting American diplomats in Libya. The administration addressed Haftar as “field marshal” in a public statement and praised his “significant role in fighting terrorism,” thus openly undermining the Sarraj government and endorsing Haftar’s own rhetoric for his offensive. Although this major outside support is unlikely to translate into military interventionism in Haftar’s favor, it ensures that the U.S. and other powers won’t be wielding tools of international leverage, such as sanctions or enforcing an already existing arms embargo, to compel Haftar to stand down.

Europe is well aware of the consequences of prolonged warfare in Libya, given the risks of more refugee flows and instability across the Mediterranean. This probably explains the continued push for a cease-fire by the United Kingdom at the Security Council, and, within the EU, Italy’s insistence that “a military option cannot be a solution.” Yet positions within Europe are hardly cohesive. France, which has long been a key backer of Haftar, may have scaled back its public support for him amid a diplomatic backlash since his offensive. But France won’t burn its bridges with Haftar, especially with no clear endgame in sight. It’s a position that sums up the current dilemma in Libya. Stakeholders, both in Libya and internationally, are all hedging their bets given the uncertainty and unrest. But the inability of countries like the U.S. and France to clearly reject one outcome—in this case, Haftar’s militarism—forecloses the space for an alternative diplomatic solution. The fate of Libya remains beholden to a crude and clumsy game of real politik. The only certain outcome involves the Libyan people, whose suffering will worsen and whose aspirations for a new state will be more elusive than ever.

Libya Civil War: May 5, 2019: At least nine soldiers have been killed in an attack claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, or ISIS) targeting forces loyal to renegade commander Khalifa Haftar, officials said. ISIL claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement distributed through social media, saying it had targeted "Haftar's heretical militia" and freed prisoners held on the base.  Sebha - like much of the south and its oilfields - is controlled by Haftar's Libyan National Army (LNA), and is 650km south of the capital, Tripoli, where the renegade general's forces are currently fighting to take control from militias affiliated with a UN-backed government. However, the campaign has not breached the city's southern defences

In a statement, the Tripoli-based Government of National Accord (GNA) said Haftar shouldered "direct responsibility for the reemergence of the Islamic State organisation; for [its] terrorist activities and its return to the scene ... after the GNA had been successful ... in destroying" the armed group. "Ever since the offensive against Tripoli, we have warned that the only beneficiaries ... are the terrorist groups and that what is happening will offer them a fertile ground to restart their activities".

Meanwhile the UN's mission in Libya, UNSMIL, said on Twitter it "strongly condemns the terrorist attack in Sebha, which was claimed by [ISIL] and resulted in a number of Libyan casualties". "Perpetrators, organisers, financiers and sponsors of terrorist activities must be brought to justice," UNSMIL added. In recent months, ISIL fighters have staged several hit-and-run attacks in southern Libya. The armed group retreated to the south after losing its stronghold in the central city of Sirte in December 2016. Meanwhile, the ongoing fighting in Tripoli has killed at least 392 people and wounded 1,936 others, the UN's World Health Organisation said on Friday.  More than 55,000 have been displaced as a direct result "of the intensifying armed conflict in Tripoli", according to another UN body, the Organisation for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Haftar enjoys the backing of Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which view him as an anchor to restore stability in Libya. But Qatar said an existing UN arms embargo on Libya should be strictly enforced to prevent the commander from receiving arms. The battle for Tripoli could ignite a civil war on the scale of the 2011 uprising that toppled and killed Libya's longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi. Since Gaddafi's removal, Libya has been governed by rival authorities in the east and in Tripoli, in the west, each backed by various militias and armed groups fighting over resources and territory

                                                                                                                       

Civil war: June, 8, 2019: War has been raging on in Libya for more than two months. What was supposed to be a quick operation for renegade general Khalifa Haftar's forces to take over the Libyan capital Tripoli has now turned into a battle of attrition. Over 600 people have been killed, more than 3,000 injured and some 90,000 displaced from their homes. Thousands of residential buildings have been damaged or destroyed due to the indiscriminate shelling. Nearly three million people remain besieged in the capital, forced to spend the holy month of Ramadan in fear and shortages of basic goods. So far there has been no clear winner. Factions aligned with the Government of National Accord (GNA) have managed to stop the advance of Haftar's forces and killed his hopes for a quick victory in Tripoli.

The United Nations has issued a number of statements calling on the two sides to halt hostilities, but they have all fallen on deaf ears. Neither the GNA, nor Haftar are willing to back down or agree to a ceasefire. The UN Security Council has also been unable to reach consensus on any resolution that would end the fighting and restart the negations process. This is because the international community remains divided on Libya, with regional and world powers backing each of the two sides and further fuelling the conflict.

Over the past four years, the UN has put a lot of effort in trying to bring the ongoing civil war in Libya to a peaceful resolution. Even as Haftar moved his forces towards Tripoli, UN representatives still insisted that a political solution must be pursued. Haftar's forces launched their offensive just days before the National Conference was scheduled to be held the Libyan city of Ghadames. As a result of the attack, the conference, which had been in the making for months, was cancelled and the UN mediation efforts severely undermined. Now two months later, it seems quite clear that the peace process the UN had worked so hard to kick-start is dead.

Meanwhile, positions on both sides of the war have hardened significantly. Fayez Serraj, head of the GNA, has gone as far as saying that he had been "stabbed in the back" and that it was a mistake to have trusted Haftar's intentions in all the meetings he had with him previously. He now insists that the renegade general can no longer be a partner in any peace talks.

Haftar, on the other hand, is also adamant in his stance and says that he is not ready to commit to any ceasefire or political process, whether backed by the UN or any other political actor. He seems bound on continuing his assault on Tripoli. "Of course, the political solution is still the goal. But to get back to politics, we must first finish with militias," he told a French newspaper late last month. By now, it appears that a political solution to the conflict is very much unlikely. The only way the fighting can come to an end is if one of the sides achieves a conclusive military victory.

It is not only the two sides to the conflict which seem to be betting on a military solution. Various regional and international players are intervening in Libya with the hope of securing a victory for the side they favor. Fresh deliveries of advanced weapons and ammunition have been made to both camps, which in effect is only prolonging the war. Despite the fact that the supply of arms is in clear violation of the UN arms embargo, there has been little public condemnation of these actions.

There are two possible outcomes of the ongoing war: Either Haftar would eventually succeed in taking over Tripoli and removing the GNA from power or the GNA would be able to push his forces out of the capital and launch a counteroffensive. In the first case, Libya would be doomed to a one-man military rule. If Haftar takes the capital, he would effectively have control over Libya's three most important strategic assets: the political centre of the country, its key institutions, and most of its oil. These would help him solidify his grip on power and impose a Gaddafi-style regime backed by the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

In the second case, the country would still have a chance to pursue a political solution. If the forces loyal to the GNA manage to overrun Haftar's positions in the west and south, this would significantly weaken him, both politically and militarily. A defeat would most likely mean his exclusion from any future political dialogue. Given that he has been one of the biggest obstacles to achieving permanent peace and stability in Libya, his elimination as a political factor would bode well for the future of the country. 

The problem with "waiting" for a military solution to the conflict in Libya is that it will cost the country and its civilian population dearly. As UN special envoy Ghassan Salame pointed out recently, the fighting around Tripoli is "just the start of a long and bloody war". The death and suffering of Libyan civilians is very much preventable, if only the international community would find the political will to act.

Update: July, 29, 2019: Libya now has two governments and has long since ceased to be a state. One in the east, in Tobruk, supports Haftar, a 75-year-old former colonel who once helped Gadhafi organize the coup that brought him to power. After falling out of favor with Gadhafi, Haftar lived in the United States for nearly two decades and is rumored to have occasionally worked for the CIA. After Gadhafi's fall, Haftar returned to Libya and since 2016 has given himself the title of field marshal.

The rival government in the west, the Government of National Accord (GNA), is led by Prime Minister Fayez Sarraj in Tripoli. It's recognized by the United Nations and the European Union, but not by the elected parliament, which has fled to the east. The GNA is largely powerless, relying on the support of the militias, who are the de facto rulers of Tripoli.

Amid all this chaos, thousands of migrants from sub-Saharan Africa are stranded here on their long trek to Europe. Many have been interned by the militias in brutal torture camps, kept in slave-like dependency and are in some cases conscripted into military service. More than 50 people died during an air raid on a refugee prison in Tripoli on July 3.

It is the tragedy of a country that could be the richest on the continent, with the world's ninth largest oil deposits. But after Gadhafi bled the country dry for 42 years, he left behind a power vacuum that imploded after he was killed, and an ongoing struggle erupted among cities, tribes and their militias over power and access to wealth.

Already in December 2011, in a bid to secure its power base, the interim transitional government had begun to pay the militias that had helped to overthrow the dictator. Many more paramilitary groups ended up on the government payroll. It was the most fatal error of the post-Gadhafi era. The groups rapidly proliferated. When oil production stabilized in 2012, billions of government dollars were diverted to the militias. If they received too little or the money came too late, they set up roadblocks in front of ministries or stormed offices. Many of them still control key ministries and banks. On the other side of the front too, there are militias: Haftar's LNA is a loose alliance of tribes and cities, mainly from the east and south.   out," Aweeb tells his men.

It's another reason why the militias from Misrata deployed their forces to the capital in April to support Sarraj's GNA in the fight against Haftar: They are also defending the interests of their hometown here in Tripoli. After over three months of fighting for control of the Libyan capital, the situation escalated. On the ground, Haftar's LNA found itself on the defensive, but now has increasingly relied on airstrikes and state-of-the-art weaponry it receives from its allies. "I feel no sense of satisfaction when we push back our enemies a few kilometers," says Aweeb. "On both sides, young Libyans who should be rebuilding their country are dying."  

On the way to downtown Tripoli, away from the front, normal, everyday life continues. The coastal road is lined with small amusement parks. Merry-go-rounds, slides and cotton candy stands, colorfully lit every night. Traffic is backed up on the main streets and backgammon players gather in the cafes on Algeria Square in the evenings. Paralyzed by the heat and almost indifferent, people listen to the detonations on the front lines, the heavy, dull explosions from the air raids and the mortar shells.

Local residents don't run into the streets and take up arms. It's as if they do not care who rules the country, just as long as some semblance of peace eventually returns to their lives. "It was like that back in 2011,The day before the liberation by the revolutionaries, the city was full of Gadhafi flags, but 24 hours after he fled, the revolutionary flag hung everywhere."

Unlike Benghazi, located a thousand kilometers to the east, the Libyan capital doesn't have a homogenous demographic structure. During more than 40 years under Gadhafi's rule, many residents of small towns in western Libya moved to the burgeoning city, which now boasts a population of over 2 million people. Many militias in the capital have two headquarters -- one in Tripoli and another in their hometowns, such as Zaviya and Zlitan.

But the tribes and cities of the east have been hostile to the western part of the country ever since the Italian occupation over 100 years ago. The colonial rulers interned between 100,000 and 120,000 civilians in camps in the eastern part of the country. Western Libyan troops helped the Italians with the occupation. With Haftar's offensive, Libya's old east-west conflict has reemerged. "The oil,finances the entire war. The money is funneled to both sides, east and west, through the central bank in Tripoli."

A period of hope had followed Gadhafi's death, but after the first free parliamentary election, the country became increasingly fragmented. To this day, the conflict is attracting countries that are waging a proxy war in Libya. Most Western countries back the unity government under Sarraj, which reportedly receives weapons from Qatar and Turkey. Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt are apparently supplying Haftar with weapons, in violation of the 2011 UN arms embargo. Saudi Arabia and Russia also support the LNA. French special forces have collaborated with Haftar on attacks against suspected terror groups in the Sahara. And in late June, weapons were found in one of the warlord's camps that the U.S. had earlier sold to France, fueling suspicions that Paris may have resold them to Haftar. U.S. President Donald Trump has also verbally sided with Haftar and spoke with him on the phone as recently as April.

If you talk to his supporters in Tripoli -- doctors, businessmen and police officers - for them the lesser evil is a military strong man. Wherever Haftar is in control, says a doctor who works with the UN Development Program in the south of the country, crime has gone down. Haftar is also intent, the doctor says, on breaking up the centralism that was cultivated under Gadhafi. The east has never received much of the country's oil revenues.

The Libyans, a businessman in Tripoli says, only understand the use of force, and only a strong hand can keep the country together. "If you don't bring a solution with the gun, there will be no solution," he says. Many of Haftar's supporters consider it impracticable to conduct elections under the current militia-based rule, citing the need for stability before Libyans can go to the polls.

Haftar styles himself as a secular bulwark against Islamism -- but he has welcomed many Madkhali Salafists into the ranks of his LNA. Military governors reign in all areas that he controls. It is a return to the militarization of the state, to the police state of the Gadhafi era. Many Libyans, out of sheer desperation, would prefer this to war and anarchy. Standing on  

Despite all the misery and suffering, he hopes that everything will be better after this war -- that the militias from Misrata will gain control over the local militias, that there will be a constitution, elections and, yes, even peace. Haftar's attack on the city has united the deeply divided militias of western Libya. This is a ray of hope, but how long will the alliance hold? Will the militiamen from Misrata turn around and behave like the militias who now rule Tripoli?

US Paradoxical Ties with Pakistan By Sajjad Shaukat (JR 164 SS 43)

US Paradoxical Ties with Pakistan By Sajjad Shaukat (JR 164 SS 43)

Daniel Markey, a longtime observer of US-Pak relations, wrote in his book, “No Exit from Pakistan: America’s Tortured Relationship with Islamabad”, that “despite all the problems and trust deficit that the US had with Pakistan and its military–the answer lay in managing the problems rather than finding a solution. Why managing problems and why not a permanent solution? It’s because the US civilian leadership thinks differently from Pentagon. The recent example of Pentagon managing the damage caused by Trump’s anti-Pakistan tweets is illustration of the same complexity. US establishment understands that for gaining headway in Afghanistan, support from Pakistan and her Army is a must as Pakistan is the most affected neighbour and partner in War on Terror. Hence it is worthwhile that the US establishment and the political government should start thinking alike to have a long lasting trust-worthy relationship with Pakistan instead of a mixture of love and hate, if they seriously believe that peace without Pakistan in the region would not be possible”.

However, it is due to the US paradoxical ties with Pakistan that confused in their goals, sometimes, US high officials praised Pakistan’s sacrifices regarding war on terror, sometimes, admitted that stability cannot be achieved in Afghanistan without the help of Pakistan, sometimes, presumed that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are not well-protected, sometimes, realized that US wants to improve its relationship with Pakistan, but at the same time, they blame Islamabad for safe havens of militants in the country. While in connivance with India and Israel, America has been continuing its anti-Pakistan activities by supporting militancy in Pakistan and separatism in Balochistan province.

Reality is that the US, India and some Western countries are acting upon the Zionist agenda to ‘denuclearize’ Pakistan, as the latter is the only nuclear country in the Islamic World.

Nevertheless, in the recent years, unbridgeable trust deficit existed between Pakistan and the United States because of America’s double game with Islamabad. But, President Donald Trump’s flawed strategy in South Asia, based upon anti-Pakistan and pro-Indian moves, had taken the Pakistan-US ties to point of no return.

It is mentionable that during the heightened days of the Cold War, despite Pakistan’s membership of the US sponsored military alliances SEATO and CENTO, including Pak-US bilateral military agreement, America did not come to help Pakistan against India which separated the East Pakistan in 1971.

After the end of the Cold War, America left both Pakistan and Afghanistan to face the fallout of the Afghan war 1. By manipulating the nuclear programme of Islamabad, the US imposed various sanctions on Pakistan.

But, after the 9/11 tragedy, the US, again, needed Pakistan’s help and President George W. Bush insisted upon Islamabad to join the US global war on terror. Pakistan was also granted the status of non-NATO ally by America due to the early successes, achieved by Pakistan’s Army and country’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) against the Al-Qaeda militants.

Within a few years, when the US-led NATO forces felt that they are failing in coping with the stiff resistance of the Taliban in Afghanistan, who are fighting for the liberation of their country, they started accusing Pak Army and ISI of supporting the Afghan Taliban. US top officials and media not only blamed Islamabad for cross-border terrorism in Afghanistan, but accused that safe havens of Al-Qaeda exist in Pakistan. They constantly emphasized upon Pakistan to do more against the militants and continued the CIA-operated drone attacks on Pakistan’s tribal areas by ignoring the internal backlash in the country.

In his speech on August 21, 2017, President Donald Trump announced the US new strategy regarding Afghanistan as part of the policy in South Asia. Using tough words against the US ally Pakistan, Trump revived the old blame game of regarding the cross-border terrorism in Afghanistan and threatened to target the terrorists’ sanctuaries in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Trump stated, “We have been paying Pakistan billions of dollars, at the same time, they are housing the very terrorists we are fighting...that must change immediately.”

As regards Pakistan’s regional rival India, Donald Trump added, “We appreciate India’s important contributions to stability in Afghanistan…We want them to help us more with Afghanistan.”

Meanwhile, on January 5, 2018, the US suspended $255 million of military aid to Islamabad as a condition to do more against terrorism.

Taking note of Trump’s policy, Pakistan’s civil and military leaders, including all the mainstream political parties united against the US aggressive stance against the country and offered a stark response to Trump’s false accusations.

The then Defence Minister Ghulam Dastagir stated: “After 16 years of fighting terror, the US owed Pakistan $23 billion…of this amount, Pakistan has been paid $14bn and an amount of $9bn is pending.” The then Chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan said, “Just as India blames Pakistan for the indigenous Kashmiri uprisings when these are a result of its own failed policy of repression in the Indian Occupied Kashmir...So the US again blames Pakistan for its deeply flawed and failed Afghan policy stretching over a decade…We must also reject being made scapegoats for the policy failures of the US and India…The new US policy is aimed at de-nuclearising Pakistan…India’s major role in Afghanistan as per Trump administration’s new strategy for the region will have adverse impacts on Pakistan…Trump undermined the country’s major contributions towards that war. It seems Trump has no knowledge of this region. He does not know the dynamics of over a decade-old war the US has been fighting in Afghanistan…Trump’s new strategy will further weaken the US government and its economy…If you want peace in Afghanistan, you need Pakistan. More troops and money will not serve the purpose.”

The then Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif remarked, “Terrorist sanctuaries are present in East Afghanistan. It is from these safe havens inside Afghanistan that terrorist attacks are being launched on Pakistan…The claim by Trump regarding the funds, if we account for it, they include reimbursements too for the services rendered by Pakistan…Our land, roads, rail and, other different kinds of services were used for which we were reimbursed.”

According to the statement of DG of the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), Maj-Gen. Asif Ghafoor, “Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) General Qamar Javed Bajwa stated that “Pakistan was not looking for any material or financial assistance from USA but trust, understanding and acknowledgement of our contributions…peace in Afghanistan is as important for Pakistan as for any other country.”  In another statement, Maj-Gen Ghafoor said: “Pakistan had done enough and it was time for the United States and Afghanistan to do more.” He also urged the US to “check India’s anti-Pakistan role not only from inside of Afghanistan, but also through the enhanced and increased ceasefire violations along the Line of Control and the Working Boundary”.

In this respect, a few days after the US cancelled USD 300 million in military aid (The so-called Coalition Support Funds) to Islamabad, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the former CIA chief had arrived on a visit to Islamabad. He met with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan, Army Chief, Gen. Qamar Bajwa and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi on September 5, 2018. Mr Pompeo conveyed the US desire to work with Pakistan in furthering the shared objectives of peace and stability in Afghanistan.

Notably, international community knows very well that Pakistan’s Armed Forces have successfully broken the backbone of the foreign-backed terrorists by the military operations Zarb-e-Azb and Radd-ul-Fasaad. Army and top intelligence agency ISI have broken the network of these terrorist groups by capturing several militants, while thwarting a number of terror attempts. Peace has been restored in various regions of Pakistan, including Karachi and Balochistan province.

Although Pakistan’s security forces have eliminated terrorism, yet, in the recent past and during the election-campaign of 2019, blasts in Balochistan and other regions of the country showed that the US-led India, Afghanistan and Israel have again started acts of sabotage especially to weaken Pakistan and to damage the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) which is part of China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative or BRI. Washington and New Delhi has already opposed this project. Foiled terror attack on the Chinese consulate in Karachi on November 23, last year was part of the same scheme. Likewise, bomb blast in Quetta-the capital of Balochistan on April 12, this year killed at least 20 people and injured 48 individuals. On the same day, at least two persons were killed and 13 others wounded in an explosion on Mall Road in Balochistan’ Chaman city. Balochistan is the focus of projects in the $57 billion CPEC, a transport and energy link planned to run from western China to Pakistan’s southern deepwater port of Gwadar which is located in Balochistan. Therefore, well-entrenched in Afghanistan, America CIA, India RAW and Israeli Mossad are assisting the separatist elements of the Balochistan province to thwart the CPEC project.

Nonetheless, now, again, American approach towards Pakistan has become very positive, as Islamabad who succeeded in bringing the Taliban to the negotiating Table, is playing a key role in the talks, being held between the US negotiators and the Taliban in the Doha-the capital of Qatar. Despite hurdles, these dialogues are making progress gradually. Zalmay Khalilzad, the US special envoy to Afghanistan who repeatedly visited Pakistan and met the civil and military leadership, including country’s Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Quershi, admired Pakistan’s role in the US-Taliban peace talks.

In fact, US forces have decided to leave Afghanistan within five years under a Pentagon plan offered as part of a potential deal with the Taliban to end the nearly 18-year war. Notably, the war in Afghanistan is America’s longest military intervention which has cost Washington nearly US $.1.7 trillion. Hence, positive shift in America’s policy towards Islamabad, seeking cooperation and re-establishing the association can be seen at present.

It is notable that in the aftermath of Pulwama terror attack in the Indian Occupied Kashmir and escalation of tension between Pakistan and India, on February 28, this year, US President Trump said that Pakistan-India tension would de-escalate soon—the United States had been mediating between the two sides and trying to have them stop. Trump also acknowledged that Washington has improved her relations with Islamabad shortly. Especially, American State Department deputy spokesperson Robert Palladino stated on March 5, 2019 that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo played an essential role in de-escalating tensions between India and Pakistan. The fact is that Washington knows that a war between two nuclear countries will also eliminate India.

It is worth-mentioning that the incoming Commander of the United States Central Command (US CENTCOM) General Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. called on Prime Minister Imran Khan at the Prime Minister House on April 8, this year. The two dignitaries discussed the Pak-US relations and the ongoing Afghan peace talks, among other matters. One day ago, General McKenzie Jr. met with Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff General Bajwa. The two top commanders discussed the geo-strategic environment and regional security. The discussion also included Afghanistan and the recent standoff between the Pakistani and Indian militaries.

The meeting with Gen. Bajwa is important from two perspectives. One, it is important that America’s new military leadership interacts with its Pakistan counterpart. Pakistan and the US military feel pride on carrying personal ties and direct communication lines which have served well in the past. Second, Pakistan and the US’s military to military ties remain significant when it comes to the US and Pakistan’s bilateral relationship. Even when the America’s political leadership targets Islamabad, the US military is believed to have retained different policy towards Pakistan. For instance, it has been reported that Trump’s decision to stop Pakistan’s military training program was disapproved by the Pentagon. However, the high level meeting shows that the US considers Pakistan a strategic actor in Afghanistan and South Asia. Pakistan should use such meetings to make its position clear on India’s efforts to destabilize the region.

Despite improvement in the Pak-US relations, Pakistan cannot trust on America on permanent basis, as the US is still pursuing paradoxical policy in connection with Pakistan by preferring New Delhi at the cost of Islamabad.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Indian False Strategic Narratives: Pakistan-India Tension Still Remains By Sajjad Shaukat (JR 163 SS 42)

Indian False Strategic Narratives: Pakistan-India Tension Still Remains By Sajjad Shaukat (JR163SS42)

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said on April 7, this year: “Pakistan has credible intelligence reports that India is planning another act of aggression against it between 16th and 20th of this month”. He elaborated that in order to justify its military action and to increase diplomatic pressure against Pakistan; India can create a new drama in Occupied Kashmir on the pattern of Pulwama. He further said that in view of these facts, “the Foreign Office immediately invited the ambassadors of permanent members of UN Security Council and apprised them of Pakistan’s apprehensions on developments, taking place in the neighboring country” and added that “country’s Foreign Secretary impressed upon them that international community should take notice of this dangerous development and stop India.”

Taking note of Indian prospective attack, Indian Deputy High Commissioner was summoned to Foreign Office in Islamabad to warn his country against any misadventure targeting Pakistan.

Very tension escalated rapidly between India and Pakistan when on February 27, this year, in response to the Indian so-called pre-emptive air strike near the town of Balakot, close to the border with Pakistan’s sector of Kashmir, Pakistan Air Force (PAF) shot down two Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter jets and launched aerial strikes at six targets in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IoK).

Addressing a press conference on the same day, Director General of Pakistan Army’s media wing, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), Maj-Gen. Asif Ghafoor said that Pakistan Air Force have conducted aerial strikes across the Line of Control (LoC) from Pakistani airspace and shot down two Indian aircraft. One of the two Indian air force pilots was taken into custody.

Regarding Indian surgical strike, Maj-Gen. Asif Ghafoor explained: “There are only mud-brick homes. There is no madrassas. There isn’t even a concrete house…Two of the dried mud structures were damaged in the explosions…No one has been killed, no one has been seriously hurt…Indian planes crossed into the Muzafarabad sector of Pakistani-side of Kashmir…Pakistan scrambled its warplanes and the Indian jets released their payload in haste near Balakot.”

Afterwards, journalists visited the targeted site of Balakot and Islamabad also released a video which exposed the false statements of New Delhi that IAF fighters targeted the camp of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) and killed 350 militants.

Following the false flag Pulwama terror attack in the Indian Held Kashmir (IHK), which killed 44 Indian soldiers—Islamist militant group JeM claimed responsibility soon for the car suicide attack, New Delhi provoked Islamabad through the so-called surgical strike.

Without any investigation and evidence Indian high officials and media started accusing Islamabad, saying that the attackers had come from Pakistan to stage the assault.

However, various contradictory developments and reports proved that Pulwama terror attack was a false flag operation, conducted by New Delhi to malign Islamabad in order to obtain various anti-Pakistan designs.

During the press briefing on February 26, 2019, India Foreign Secretary Vijay Keshav Gokhale called the strikes on Pakistani soil “non-military preemptive action”. He refused to answer questions by the media, as he could not show any proof in this respect.

Western media disclosed that India failed in providing any evidence or video in relation to her claim of killing 350 militants inside Pakistani side of Kashmir. While Islamabad acted responsibly by releasing Indian captured pilot as “a gesture of peace”, as stated by country’s Prime Minister Imran Khan.

It is mentionable that India’s 21 opposition parties and famous figures, chief ministers of Delhi, Bengal, puppet chief minister of IoK, civil society groups and artists criticized the Prime Minister Narendar Modi for continuing his scheduled public events, including an election rallies, while staying mum amid a major military stand-off with Pakistan. However, it shows Indian diplomatic defeat. Besides these internal entities of India and even the leaders of extremist ruling party-Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and other similar outfits severely criticized Modi’s false strategic claims regarding Pakistan.

Meanwhile, in a rare joint press conference by the top brass of the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force on February 28, 2019, the top military officers also presented evidence that Pakistan had AMRAAM missiles mounted on its American-made F-16 fighter jets to target Indian military installations. Concealing ground realities, the press briefing by the Indian military’s high officials appeared to be an apology of the highest order, clueless and confused. They had no answers to the questions of the journalists and even no proof of claimed damage in Balakot strike was presented. They could not supply any evidence of JeM camp and killing of 350 terrorists. The air force officer stated that he cannot comment on it and left it to the civil government. Similarly, no evidence of Pakistani F-16 which they claimed was shot down could be presented in the briefing. While, they confirmed aerial strikes of Pakistan on the Indian Controlled Kashmir by displaying fragments from a missile they claimed matched the Pakistani F-16 fighter jet that purportedly crossed into Indian airspace and was shot down.

Pakistan was quick to claim that it did not use F-16s in the attack and that it had lost no aircraft. Nevertheless, one of the pictures released by Pakistan showed wreckage of the MiG-21 fighter.

Failed in providing any proof, New Delhi has continued false strategic narratives that IAF shoot down Pakistan’s F-16 during aerial fight. In this regard, Indian military shared radar images, asserting that it has “irrefutable evidence” of shooting down F-16. Indian air force’s much-anticipated press conference failed to present “irrefutable evidence” which could challenge Islamabad’s firm stand about Pakistan’s F-16.

On the other side, ISPR spokesman invited America to send a team to count the number of F-16 aircraft, which would expose Indian false strategic narrative.

Nonetheless, the gist of the conference was IAF’s claim that they have the ‘evidence’, but they cannot share it, expecting people to take their word for it.  This indicates that the press conference was less about providing evidence and more about fighting the war of narratives that ISPR is currently winning.

While, the fact is that the Pentagon and the US Department of Defense never categorically refuted Islamabad’s claim which means that India did not score a hit. The real war now is the war of narratives and India is desperately trying to cover its embarrassment. Moreover, as to why India did not ask the Pentagon (Pakistan has lot of haters there) that the US did not carry out a count of Pak F-16 fleet?  All the articles coming out of major American policy and news outlet indicate that the US establishment is not endorsing P.M Modi false strategic narratives.  

It is expected that the ISPR will share some hard evidence anytime soon to decimate India’s data on the paper and embarrass India further. It will have serious implications on Indian politics; Modi’s bid to get elected, civil military relations in India and the country’s image abroad.

It is of particular attention that Indian Prime Minister Modi’s extremist party BJP had got a land sliding triumph in the Indian elections 2014 on the basis of anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan slogans. Therefore, since the Prime Minister Modi came to power, he has been implementing anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan agenda with the support of fanatic coalition outfits.

Now, again, Modi is creating war hysteria and jingoism among the Hindus against the Muslims and Pakistan as part of the BJP strategy to win the Indian general elections 2019. In this connection, assaults of Hindus on the Muslims and violations of LoC by shelling inside Pakistani side of Kashmir have been accelerated.

Taking cognizance of Indian war-mongering diplomacy, Pakistan’s armed forces are on high alert especially along the LoC and are prepared to deal with any Indian aggression.

We can conclude that so as to divert the attention of the international community from the Indian security forces’ state terrorism which have been intensified on the innocent Kashmiris and to avoid the settlement of Kashmir issue with Pakistan and as part of the election-strategy, P.M. Modi can take the risk of conventional war with Pakistan, which could be culminated into nuclear war.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic @yahoo.com