The National Forces Alliance (NFA) has invited all political forces in Libya to participate in a dialogue that might save the country from an endless state of disputes between forces—backed by militias— which have often resulted in violence.
The extent of this violence was particularly evident in the kidnapping of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan last Thursday, an experience he described in a press conference following his release as “political wrangling” and “a coup against legitimacy”.
The National Forces Alliance (NFA) has invited all political forces in Libya to participate in a dialogue that might save the country from an endless state of disputes between forces—backed by militias— which have often resulted in violence.
The extent of this violence was particularly evident in the kidnapping of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan last Thursday, an experience he described in a press conference following his release as “political wrangling” and “a coup against legitimacy”.
The initiative of the NFA was welcomed by the majority of the concerned political powers. Mohammed Sawan, Head of the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Justice and Construction Party, welcomed the dialogue.
Mohammed Sawan, how did you respond to the NFA’s initiative to conduct a national dialogue?
The Libyan crisis, which has had deep impacts on security, oil and government services, has motivated all parties to call for dialogue, which we have repeatedly demanded. It is a praised consensus.
We have welcomed this invitation and would do the same for any similar one. However, there will be discussions about the participating parties, key issues to be raised and the road map of this dialogue. A good plan must be prepared in order for the dialogue to succeed and be fruitful.
The efforts exerted to achieve national reconciliation are thanked, but I hope the dialogue to be conducted by the main concerned political entities and not be turned into a publicity campaign. The NFA is thanked for initiating the dialogue, but it should be sponsored by a neutral body such as the GNC.
Was it necessary for the crisis to escalate before the political powers realized that their only way out was through dialogue?
Perhaps the reason lies in the modernity of the Libyan experience in addition to the vulnerability of its political components. Lack of experience makes each party cling to its opinion and this indeed urges the need for a neutral body that unites all parties involved.
Libya is undergoing a period of great tension as a result of the war and the forty-two years under Gaddafi. It is suffering consequences that includs fatalities, wounded, distressed cities, internally displaced persons, collapsed institutions and other issues. Consequently, each party proposes a different solution. We desperately need an entity that would govern the dialogue and unite the disputing parties since the initiative is less likely to succeed when conducted by a political entity.
Has the government failed to conduct the dialogue?
The government’s call for dialogue is a mistake, since it is part of the problem. The dialogue should be adopted by another neutral body such as the GNC or a political one.
Why do you exclude the GNC as being part of the problem? The government has been chosen by the GNC and was the result of the balances between the political blocs in it.
The GNC is definitely concerned, but it is not a political competitor. The entities involved include parties such as the NFA, Justice, Front and Unity for the Country, in addition to other political blocs with political aspirations.
The GNC is not an executive entity while the government is an executive body and is criticized for such. Therefore, the GNC may be fit to govern the dialogue and we, in the Justice and Construction Party, even asked the Arab League to sponsor the dialogue as a neutral body.
Can you comment on the United States’ kidnaping of Aby Anas Libi?
The U.S. forces or marines kidnapping a Libyan citizen and transporting them outside of Libya is a violation of sovereignty and is unacceptable. There should be a clear position from the government.
The government asked for clarification and John Kerry said the United States will not stop its war against terrorism.
This is a blatant interference in Libyan internal affairs and a violation of its sovereignty. We condemn this act.
Who is responsible for the violation of the Libyan sovereignty?
The government is responsible and it must take clear actions against such violations since Libya is recognized in the international community and has its own sovereignty. The government is the official body that expresses the will of the Libyan people.
Do you imply a desire to overthrow the government since it lost its legitimacy? And what is your part in the rumored desire inside the GNC to withdraw confidence from the government?
The government has not lost its legitimacy as it still derives it from the GNC. However, it did fail and we have clearly stated its failure in running the crisis and identified the reason, which lies in the failure of the Prime Minister himself since he – with all due respect – was not able to manage the crisis evident by the repeated resignations, including two interior ministers in a row, Deputy Prime Minister and the Chief of Staff. All of them said the problem is the Prime Minister who has failed to control the crisis.
We as a political party believe that the problem is the ability of the Prime Minister to run the state. We believe that numerous ministers have proper qualifications and are performing their duties quite well, but the sovereign ministries, especially the Ministry of Security— directly supervised by the prime minister— have failed to run the crisis properly.
If resignation is an evidence of failure, what is your response to the resignation of Abdul Hamid Thaibany, Head of Justice and Construction bloc at the GNC?
It is normal to have resignations within parties as they include tens of thousands of members. We respect all people’s opinions and Thaibany resigned as an expression of his objection to some of the party’s politics, which is his right.
Was his resignation not triggered by a particular incident?
No, there has not been any. He believes that the partisan work is fruitless at the current point where parties are being attacked, and thus the independent work is much more successful.
Do you believe that partisan work before forming the country’s constitution was a mistake?
On the contrary, I believe that political action is definitely based on parties and that if the GNC has not included parties– despite the criticism against them–it would have been divided into tribes and loyalties.
I hoped that the elections would have been held in Libya on the basis of parties where more than 140 seats would be allocated. This is true democracy. I mean the majority winning party would have ruled and taken responsibility to the Libyan people.
However, Libya has not witnessed a partisan experience. The NFA won the elections in the first place followed by the Justice and Construction Party and they both failed to establish a government. Only independent figures have led the government.
Zidane has resigned from his party and he is an independent figure. Thus, the Libyan experience is so far not a partisan one. If either the Justice and Construction Party or the NFA led the government, the people would have a great body to take responsibility. The party does not jeopardize its political future. It has its popularity among the Libyans and is able to solve numerous issues by the help of its staff and experts. It also has a political future as the failure of the party implies the failure of a large segment in society. Thus, it will not accept complacency.
Does, then, failure lie in the Constitutional Declaration?
Yes, the failure lies in the Constitutional Declaration, which allocated only 80 seats for parties and the Independents are actually leading the GNC. Is not Nuri Busahmin an independent figure? Let them show us what they have achieved through the GNC and the government.
How do you respond to accusations of exploiting those who participated in the elections as independents? They cite Nizar Kawan as an example.
When the Supreme Electoral Commission issued its regulations, they were based on entities and individuals, even the word ‘parties’ was not included and the individuals were allowed to establish entities. Ten individuals had the right to form an entity to be named and included in the elections.
Afterwards, the Supreme Electoral Commission issued a decree, of which I have a copy, allowing individuals affiliated to parties to participate in the elections. Unfortunately, this accusation is wrongly echoed in the media as Nizar Kawan and others were allowed to legally participate as individuals affiliated with parties since the word ‘independent’ was not identified.
Here, I could say independents have constituted entities by which they participated. In other words, independents were included as parties while others affiliated to parties were included as individuals. The media is full of fallacies and this is one of them.
