Libya: the dilemma of the December elections
Libya observers at home and abroad are hotly debating whether the nation should hold presidential and parliamentary elections as scheduled on December 24. The international community, including most notably the United States, is eager to see Libyans go to the polls, but some experts and political analysts doubt the timing is right and believe a further postponement is necessary to ensure the vote does not just lead to more fractious politics and an increasingly volatile situation.
While their concerns are valid, the time has come for Libyans to pick their elected officials and influence a unification process that will hopefully bring a decade of civil war to an end.
Libya’s highly polarized political climate, social instability, scant physical security, lack of truly independent media are, surely, among the vulnerabilities that make a December vote risky. Questions over whether authorities have the will and ability to run a free and fair election whose results can be accepted by winners and losers alike also cast a shadow over the exercise’s suitability.
Yet, no reasonable alternative has emerged, and the consequences of even just a delay in the vote may prove worse than a contested, partly delegitimized outcome.
For one, a postponement may ignite the grievances of the many political forces that have made the elections the centerpiece of their programs, and feed into the widespread disillusionment of the Libyan people.
Furthermore, only elections that are held regularly provide fertile ground for the emergence of a skilled political candidate or coalition capable one day of fully stabilizing the country with the help of the international community.
If assessing the practical advantages and disadvantages of a December vote is a complex matter, it pales in comparison to disentangling the interests of Libya’s many political actors beyond their public statements to understand who is truly for or against the elections, and why.
Speaker of the House Aguila Saleh is a case in point. The Eastern Libyan’s everyday actions appear clearly intended to prolong his stay in power, possibly indefinitely. Therefore, one should view his argument that Libya should hold the presidential election in December, but reschedule legislative ones for a later date, under that same lens: Saleh wants time to manipulate the new president into further delaying the parliamentary vote and prioritizing security issues in a manner that would require a further enhancement of his own role.
Regional and international actors involved in Libyan politics display similar ambiguity. United Arab Emirates officials have worked hard to project a benevolent image, presenting themselves as firmly behind the U.N.-led peace process, while systematically pursuing a type of power politics that has seen them support the violent actions of General Khalifa Haftar – the protagonist of repeated attempts to seize power through military force. With minimal differences, other countries like Egypt and France have also behaved in the same way.
Read also: Europe and Libya: between ambitions and illusions
Turkey’s moves in Libya and the Eastern Mediterranean
In this confusing and uncertain context, finally, the first candidates for the next elections were announced. The son of former dictator Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam, the president of the House of Representatives, Aguila Saleh, and General Khalifa Haftar (who in the meantime has self-suspended from his post as commander of the armed forces of the so-called Libyan National Army, a move that can be quickly reversed), have confirmed their willingness to run.
Technical issues also remain.
Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah has been critical of the electoral law, which he says clearly favors some candidates, like Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, Aguila Saleh and Khalifa Haftar, over others.
Authorities also still need to issue detailed rules governing the vote. The electoral law only defines the relevant deadlines but does not clarify how the elections are to be held, and there is no consensus among officials about the appropriate framework. Lack of action on this front over the next few weeks could render the effort to bring Libyans to the polls entirely pointless.
A national dialogue conference to create the foundations of the future Libyan state may help lay the foundations for collective feelings pertaining to national identity, society and political unity. Ideally, this should happen before any national election, although at this point the political momentum makes the December vote a sort of least bad option.
The national dialogue will still be needed, and would include transitional justice procedures to help instill a sense of trust among Libyans through just reparations for the victims. In any case, the upcoming few weeks will determine the future of the country.
