Russia takes advantage of Libya as US delays action

Thomas Waldhauser believes that instability in Libya and North Africa is one of the biggest short-term threats currently facing the United States and its allies.

Complicating matters further is BroadCast Unitedligence that Russia is helping a former Libyan general in his bid for control of the government. Add to that the fact that a Russian aircraft carrier entered Libya and welcomed its militia leader, General Khalifa Haftar, and things suddenly become even more worrying.

This all happened after Donald Trump ran for president, highlighting the flaws in President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy towards Libya. The US intervention in 2011 meant multiple governments controlled Libya, with the result that the country was completely destabilized and eventually became the “homeland” of the Islamic State.

Despite the many accusations Trump may have made during his campaign, his administration has yet to come up with a policy for Libya. He has said the U.S. may fight ISIS there, but he has also said there is no role for the U.S. in Libya. It’s a confusing message that has given Russia a lot of leverage in the region.

One of the reasons the United States has been so ineffective in executing policy in this regard is that the president has been lacking guidance. Generally speaking, he has had to rely on his instincts, and the guidance of a small group of advisers he trusts. All this is because most of the major foreign policy positions remain vacant (or at least just recently filled).

In addition to the above views, some people believe that interfering in Libya’s affairs would violate many of Trump’s “America First” commitments.

The end result was that no one really understood U.S. policy toward Libya—and that created a huge opportunity for Russia, which it took full advantage of.

Don’t forget, Libya is only 300 miles from Europe, and Russia has managed to gain a great deal of influence in the region. They act as a mediator between the country’s opposing factions, but their influence is much more than meets the eye.

For example, some former European, Libyan, and U.S. officials have claimed that they were involved in arms-for-oil arrangements and even attempted bribes for government defense positions.

Where has the sense of urgency gone?

Trump wanted to intervene in Libya before his campaign, even calling the country a “ruin.”

Initially, this continued into his term, too: U.S. officials in Tunisia, for example, were told that Libya would be a top priority.

Now, however, all that sense of urgency seems to have disappeared. As the crisis drags on, Libya is now a major conduit for human traffickers and refugees, which has undoubtedly caused a lot of anger in some circles. Many are annoyed that the initial measures taken against the country were only intended to appeal to voters, and all that momentum now seems to have completely stalled.

In the case of ISIS, its impact seems to be there for all to see. High-profile terrorist attacks, such as the one in Manchester in 2017, are examples. There have also been bomb blasts at training camps in Libya, where ISIS is now widely believed to be regrouping.

There has been pressure on the US government to increase the number of military advisers in the US, but these calls have fallen on deaf ears. Those who want to make changes, such as Stephen Bannon, who served as Trump’s chief strategist, often resigned quickly. Bannon even announced to the media that he resigned because of the situation in Libya.

Russia and the oil factor

Libya has long been attractive to Russia, which has huge influence in the oil industry and has desperately sought to build a high-speed railway linking Benghazi and Tripoli, allegedly with bribes.

When the above did not happen, the Russians tried a slightly different proposal. They approached a militia leader named Ibrahim Jaslan to try to sell the crude oil on the international market. The Russians would be responsible for marketing the oil, shipping it from Egypt to Russia. The deal centered on what Jaslan would get in return. For facilitating the shipment of the oil, he would be paid in the form of weapons for the first six months of the deal, and in cash thereafter.

It seemed like a smart move for all parties involved, but the Russians soon demanded exclusivity, at which point Jathran chose to walk away from the deal.

The Russians approached Jaslan again in 2015. This time the topic was no longer oil, but they wanted Jaslan’s support for their chosen defense minister (Jaslan happened to be Libya’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia).

It was at this time that Jaslan decided to turn to the West for help. He met with Jonathan Powell, the British envoy to Libya, who advised him not to negotiate with Russia in this way anymore.

However, the story does not end there. In 2016, the Libyan National Army seized weapons, indicating that they were still benefiting from Russian assistance. All of this was done behind Jaslan’s back.

Still, Russia has said it abides by a U.N. ban on sending weapons to Libya. It denies trying to gain more influence over the United States by sending weapons to Libya.

Overall, the general consensus is that Putin is pushing this issue as hard as he can and will continue to do so until someone stops him. He wants the central government to support his economic interests, especially in weapons, energy, and the rail projects that have been discussed.

At the same time, the United States has begun to realize the situation more clearly. In April, the United States announced that it would not participate in rebuilding Libya. Now, the United States plays a “leading role”, which is both related to attacking ISIS and stabilizing the situation in the country. However, while all this is happening, Russia has taken the leading role in the region, and as we have been discussing, Russia does this entirely for its own interests.