Why Malta’s Libya peace talks raise hopes, but leave hard questions unanswered

On Monday, Malta hosted landmark peace talks between two opposing Libyan factions, with representatives of the western Government of National Unity (GNU) and the eastern Libyan National Army (LNA) meeting in Valletta under the watchful eye of US envoy Massad Boulos.

The meeting aimed to bring an end to the divide that has reigned across Libya for much of the past decade, ever since the toppling of Muammar Gaddafi threw the country into a prolonged power struggle among warring factions.

The Tripoli-based GNU, led by Prime Minister Abdulhamid Dbeibah, retains international recognition across the western world, while the military bloc directed by Khalifa Haftar holds power in the country’s eastern regions, including Benghazi and Tobruk.

The two factions were represented in Monday’s talks by Ibrahim Dbeibah, senior advisor and relative of Abdulhamid, and Saddam Haftar, son of Khalifa. Abdussalam al-Zoubi, the deputy minister of defence in Dbeibah's GNU, also joined talks in Malta.

Aside from their meetings chaired by US envoy Massad Boulos, Dbeibah and Haftar also held separate meetings with foreign affairs minister Chris Fearne throughout Monday. Fearne is believed to have also met privately with Boulos on the day.

Further discussions between the Libyan representatives are believed to have taken place yesterday in Misurata. 

Haftar’s visit comes just over two months after he previously visited and met with then-Home Affairs Minister Byron Camilleri and former prime minister Joseph Muscat.

Sources close to Monday’s talks told Times of Malta that the two sides had made “a lot of progress” in talks but had not yet succeeded in finalising a deal.

According to sources, Malta is seeking to act as an interlocutor in talks, bridging the two sides. However, Malta is pushing for any prospective agreement to guarantee parliamentary and presidential elections down the road.

Analysts who spoke to Times of Malta said Monday’s talks marked an important step but questions remain over whether a prospective agreement would bring about lasting stability in the beleaguered region.

Mark Micallef, a North Africa focused researcher at the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organised Crime, described the talks as “very significant”, particularly in light of similar previous meetings in Abu Dhabi and Washington in recent months.

Micallef pointed to the feedback from Libyan stakeholders, who speak of “serious traction” in discussions.

“This has not always been the case over the past year or so,” he said.

While “the prospect of unifying Libya’s political structure and economy would be welcome”, the ongoing approach “is not without its flaws or inherent risks”, Micallef says.

Family dynasties

One international affairs expert compared the situation to “the dynasties of centuries ago, when power was divided among a handful of families”.

“This current approach is a deal between two families,” they said, questioning whether this would suffice to satisfy the countless internal factions on the ground in Libya.

“How will all the groups who feel they are not represented within these discussions react to any deal,” one expert asked. “Are they expected to simply fall in line?”

Experts say that, even within the two clans themselves, several fissures exist which could scupper a power-sharing agreement.

Military and political factions in the country’s western regions, in particular, are unlikely to accept a deal at face value.

On Sunday, the Misrata Military Council, a crucial part of Dbeibah’s fragile GNU coalition, rejected the US-led plan for an agreement, describing it as an attempt to legitimise the Haftar family’s political aspirations.

In Misurata, the proposed deal is seen in some circles to “be unfavourable to the city and its constituencies”, Micallef said.

Even the Haftar side “cannot be said to speak for all of the constituencies that make up these vast and disparate territories”, he added.

Whether dissenters can be swayed by the latest round of discussions remains to be seen but experts warn this does not augur well for the stability of any prospective agreement.

The fixer

The nature of the US-led discussions also came into question, with experts saying they risked bulldozing over long-nurtured diplomatic channels.

A United Nations-led effort to end the conflict has yet to yield concrete results but “involves all relevant players”, one expert said.

“Trump being Trump, he sent his fixer to solve the situation, rather than relying on diplomatic channels,” another said, referring to the US envoy, Boulos.

Experts say the US-led approach harks back to a “unipolar world in which the US has supremacy and, if it finds a solution everything will fall into place”.

However, the situation is more delicate than “simple solutions to complex problems”, as being advocated by the US-led approach, they said.

Micallef adopts a more measured view, saying that, although the US-led approach presents “major risks”, it is “not without logic”.

A US-led deal without a robust follow-up mechanism risks yet another betrayal of the Libyan people- Researcher

After all, he said, Libya has been “locked in a stalemate” that is detrimental to its people ever since the end of the Tripoli war in 2020.

“By engaging the actors who can actually make or break a deal, rather than relying solely on formal processes, the US could achieve a breakthrough,” Micallef said, particularly if reports of the deal being tied to an election process prove to be accurate.

However, he admits, this approach relies on the US not losing interest in the affair and ensuring due process is followed, once that breakthrough is achieved.

After all, he says, leading Western countries quickly moved on after the Libyan revolution, “failing to help secure the post-revolutionary period by disarming militias and strengthening state institutions”.

“A US-led deal without a robust follow-up mechanism risks yet another betrayal of the Libyan people,” Micallef said, adding that Malta has a stake in ensuring Libya’s stability and prosperity, as one of its closest neighbours.

Regardless of the outcome of this week’s discussions, key questions will remain over Libya’s future. As one expert put it, “this agreement is being crafted in a bubble. Will it survive a collision with reality?”