By ABDEL AZIZ ALUWAISHEG, Arab News
Turkey’s intervention in Libya has made the conflict there more intractable and destructive. It runs against UN Security Council resolutions and the UN’s efforts to mediate the crisis. Critics see the move as transparently expedient, as Turkey aims to use Libya’s riches to address its energy dependency and its dangerously deteriorating economic crisis.
In Libya, Turkey is borrowing a page from Iran’s playbook of Middle Eastern interventions, despite international and regional criticism of Tehran’s modus operandi. Turkey has used similar tactics to buttress its meddling in Libya. It has trained and armed local militias, as Iran has done in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. It has brought in Syrian fighters as mercenaries to fight in Libya, similar to Iran’s practice of bringing Afghan and Pakistani mercenaries into Syria. Despite having fewer religious credentials, Turkey, like Iran, has also used religion to cover its Libyan adventure, taking advantage of its close links with Islamist and extremist groups. Within Turkey, the Libyan invasion has been portrayed as a patriotic victory to restore its past glory as a colonial power there.
Until recently, Turkey was thought to be supportive of UN efforts to restore peace, security and stability in Libya. It took part in several important meetings on Libya and made the right statements about the need for a UN-mediated political solution. Last September, Turkey took part in a foreign ministers’ meeting on Libya in New York, which was hosted by Germany and France. That meeting launched the “Berlin Process,” of which Turkey was a part, to mediate the conflict in Libya and support the UN’s role. This remains perhaps the most promising international effort to end the crisis.
Germany’s efforts culminated in January with the Berlin Conference, convened by Chancellor Angela Merkel to “create new political impetus and rally international support for finding a solution to the conflict,” and pave the way for a “Libyan-led and Libyan-owned political process that can end the hostilities and bring lasting peace.” Among those attending were the heads of states and high representatives from 12 countries, including all five permanent members of the UN Security Council, and several international and regional organizations.
The participants, including Turkey, agreed that the conflict could only be ended by a political, rather than a military, solution and they adopted a blueprint prepared by the UN for that purpose. According to documents Germany sent to the UN, they reaffirmed their “strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Libya. Only a Libyan-led and Libyan-owned political process can end the conflict and bring lasting peace.”
They stressed that the conflict in Libya represented a “threat to international peace and security by providing fertile grounds for traffickers, armed groups and terrorist organizations,” including Al-Qaeda and Daesh. The participants committed to “refraining from interference in the armed conflict or in the internal affairs of Libya and urge all international actors to do the same.”
Regrettably, in March, Ghassan Salame resigned as UN mediator in Libya, thus creating a diplomatic vacuum and an opening for Turkey to openly intervene in the Libyan conflict.
Global and regional political competitions are undoubtedly an important factor in Turkey’s Libyan gambit — including competition with Russia, Greece, Cyprus, Egypt and Europe to name a few. Ankara has been humiliated by a defeat in Syria and its inability to crush the Kurds in Turkey or across the border in northern Syria.
However, Turkey’s economic crisis also figures prominently as a motive in Libya. Turkey had been facing an acute economic crisis long before the onset of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). As far back as 2018, Turkey was in the most fragile position of all major emerging markets. That summer, Turkey’s currency accelerated its downward fall and its trade and budget deficits were in the danger zones. It became difficult for Ankara to borrow on the international capital markets as the price of its credit default swaps, which insure against a default on Turkish sovereign debt, rose to its highest level since the global financial crisis of 2008.
After Turkey’s economy took several hits over the past two years, its debt ranked as the world’s fourth-riskiest after Venezuela, Argentina, and Ukraine. COVID-19 has led to additional blows to the value of the lira and the size of Turkey’s foreign revenues, deepening its economic crisis.
While Turkey was scrambling to avoid default earlier this year, international financial markets questioned the credibility of its economic management, as the central bank’s autonomy was compromised and foreign reserves dwindled. They also disagreed with Turkey’s finance minister, who happens to be a son-in-law of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and who appeared to dangerously underestimate the country’s economic crisis; he predicted that Turkey’s economy would grow by 5 percent in 2020, while the IMF expects it to shrink by 5 percent.
The participants, including Turkey, agreed that the conflict could only be ended by a political, rather than a military, solution.
Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg
Turkey also has an energy crisis. In 2019, Turkey imported 99 percent of its natural gas needs and 93 percent of petroleum. About 40 percent of its fossil fuel energy came from Russia. Energy imports represent probably the biggest economic vulnerability of the country. They cost more than $40 billion in 2019, accounting for about 20 percent of the value of its total imports, and are a major contributor to its current account deficit and debt problems.
Libya may have appeared as an ideal target. It is rich in energy and able to finance Turkey’s intervention. However, judging by the earlier failure of NATO to impose a military solution, Turkey may also find out that only a political solution can resolve this conflict. A national, regional and international consensus is needed to advance the cause of peace. Libyans themselves have to decide the future of their country. That national consensus has to be refereed and supported by the Arab League, representing the regional consensus, and the UN as the international arbiter of conflicts. Unilateral moves such as Turkey’s are doomed to fail. They are sure to increase the suffering of Libyans and could cause irreparable damage to Turkey’s standing in the Arab world and the entire rest of the world.
- Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg is the Gulf Cooperation Council’s assistant secretary-general for political affairs and negotiation, and a columnist for Arab News. The views expressed in this piece are personal and do not necessarily represent those of the GCC.
