Violence in Libya is escalating. At least 30 people were killed and 33 wounded in airstrikes on a military academy in Tripoli earlier this week. Libya has been mired in conflict since a Nato-backed uprising nine years ago toppled dictator Muammar Gaddafi. It is governed by rival authorities in Benghazi and Tripoli, with each relying on militias.
Turkey and Qatar have taken the side of the UN-recognised government in Tripoli, while rebel forces in Benghazi, led by Marshal Khalifa Haftar, are backed by Turkey’s regional rivals: Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Haftar’s army has reportedly also received backing from hundreds of Russian mercenaries, possibly controlled by an ally of President Putin.
There are now fears that fighting in Libya could escalate further after the Turkish Parliament voted last week to authorise the deployment of troops in support of the Tripoli government. President Recep Erdogan has been reviving the old Ottoman idea of the ‘Blue Motherland’, which projected Turkey’s maritime power from the Black Sea to the Aegean.
Its deal with the Tripoli government creates a symbolic strategic corridor between Turkey’s southwest and Libya’s northeast coasts, in the process angering Greece and Cyprus by dividing much of the energy-rich eastern Mediterranean between itself and Libya.
The message from Turkey is clear. If the Mediterranean is to be partitioned, then Turkey and not its enemies should be the draughtsman. It could lead to a Nato member being party to one of the bloodiest Middle Eastern showdowns since the Russian and Syrian governments’ bombardment of Aleppo in 2015-16. Haftar, at the head of a formidable army, is heading towards Tripoli intent on taking the capital. He can count on the support of Russia.
In some ways this is a rerun of the early stages of the Syrian war. We may be witnessing a bargaining process in which Turkey and Russia end up as parts of a duopoly determining the complexion of much of this contested region. The two presidents have been talking several times a month and Putin visits Ankara next week.
Europe has been relegated to the role of onlooker. The United States has bigger fish to fry and quit the Libyan scene in 2011. Germany has invited regional players to a UN-backed conference in Berlin planned for later this month.
Meanwhile, however, plenty of blood will be spilt. Libya’s likely break-up will not be reversed by a Haftar victory. Instead, its disintegration into tribal entities will be hastened. The only question anyone will ask about Libya’s future will be who can one trust to control the flow of its precious oil?
President Erdogan wants to extend Ankara’s influence in the Mediterranean. He knows that Turkey, once the dominant power in the Middle East, has been marginalised. He can salvage its position by shrewd statecraft in Libya. Turkey’s bargaining position with the EU rests on its willingness to shelter some 3.5 million refugees from Syria and North Africa who would otherwise overwhelm Europe.
If Turkey’s influence in Libya grows, then the next big springboard for mass migration to Europe will be under Erdogan’s control too. The threat to turn on the taps of a new wave of migrants will be a way of recovering Turkey’s geopolitical advantage. And another way of using the Mediterranean as political leverage.
Malta, at the centre of this turbulent sea, is in for a stormy ride.