Libyans hope Syrians fare better than they did

This aerial view shows traffic around the New Clock Tower along Quwatli Street in the Shayah district of Homs on December 16, 2024. (AFP/File)
Short Url
Updated 17 December 2024
Follow

Libyans hope Syrians fare better than they did

  • Ten years after the downfall and death of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, the country remains plagued by division and instability

TRIPOLI: Libyans watched the fall of Syria’s Bashar Assad with a mixture of apprehension and hope, wishing “their brothers” in the Levant a better outcome than their own.

Ten years after the downfall and death of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, the country remains plagued by division and instability.

“It’s now been 14 years since the people of Syria have been waiting for their turn to come,” said 47-year-old history and geography teacher Al-Mahdiya Rajab.

“Their Arab Spring was stopped in its tracks” in 2011, she said.

“At last, they have been delivered from more than half a century of tyranny.”

After a lightning 11-day offensive, a coalition dominated by Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham group in Syria swept into Damascus to end more than 50 years of rule by the Assad clan.

As in Libya in October 2011, when the death of Qaddafi was announced after he had ruled for 42 years, Syrians took to the streets to celebrate the “victory of the revolution.”

Residents of Libya’s capital, Tripoli, like 55-year-old activist Sami Essid, drew comparisons between Syria and the first days of the post-Qaddafi era.

“In the beginning, there was hope,” he said.

“The people were satisfied, peaceful, and happy.”

In 2012, Libya held its first-ever free election, choosing 200 national congress members or parliament members. This was followed in 2013 by municipal elections. Both polls were considered to have been a success. 

But then, in August 2014, after weeks of violence, a coalition of militias seized Tripoli in the west of the country and installed a government, forcing the elected parliament into exile in the east.

Despite Fayez Al-Sarraj being appointed premier in December 2015 under a UN-mediated deal, the east-west split only deepened.

In parallel, armed militias and foreign interference mushroomed.

Essid said the main thing Libya and Syria have in common is “the people rising against injustice, tyranny, and dictatorship.”

But in Libya, he said: “We discovered that the struggle for power and the country’s riches were the objective all along.”

“We hope we will not see division and militias emerge in Syria, as in Libya,” he said.

“The danger in Syria is that there are different faiths, and this can lead to power struggles and communities being divided.”

Today, Libya has two governments. It is divided between a UN-recognized government based in Tripoli and a rival administration in the east, backed by Khalifa Haftar, who also controls the south.

“Now we know the outcome of the revolution in Libya,” Essid said.

“But no one knows what will happen in Syria after the revolution there.”

However, for civil society member Motaz Ben Zaher, “although they both aimed to overthrow a regime, there is no real common ground between the Libyan and Syrian revolutions.”

“The contexts differ profoundly, whether in terms of the scale of international intervention or geography,” said the 50-year-old.


Trump says ‘someone from within’ Iranian regime might be best choice to lead once war ends

Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

Trump says ‘someone from within’ Iranian regime might be best choice to lead once war ends

  • Trump had earlier called on Iranians to “take over your government” once the war US-Israel strikes end
  • He now appears to drift away from the idea of putting an end Iran's theocratic rule
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump on Tuesday said that “someone from within” the Iranian regime might be the best choice to take power once the US-Israel military campaign is completed — but said “most of the people we had in mind are dead.”
The president, who four days ago had emphatically called on Iranians to “take over your government” once the US-Israel bombardment ends, appeared to drift further away from the idea that the war presents an opportunity to end the theocratic rule that has been in place since the country’s 1979 Islamic revolution.
Trump said that many Iranian officials his administration had viewed as potential new leaders for the country had been killed in the US-Israeli campaign that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and many other top officials.
Trump has not publicly identified anyone whom he views as a credible future leader for Iran. And it’s unclear what, if any, outreach the White House had with Iranian officials since the war started.
“Most of the people we had in mind are dead,” he said in an exchange with reporters in the Oval Office. “Now we have another group, they may be dead also, based on reports. So you have a third wave coming. Pretty soon we’re not going to know anybody.”
Trump said Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran’s last shah who is trying to position himself for a return should Iran’s Shiite theocracy fall, is not someone that his administration has considered in depth to take over leadership in Iran.
“It would seem to me that somebody from within maybe would be more appropriate,” Trump said, adding that it may make sense for “somebody that’s there, that’s currently popular, if there is such a person” to emerge from the power vacuum.
Trump’s comments came as he hosted German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for his first in-person engagement with a foreign leader since the US and Israel launched the war against Iran.
Trump said he wanted to avoid a “worst case” scenario where “somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person.”
“That could happen. We don’t want that to happen,” Trump added. “You go through this, and then in five years you realize you put somebody in who was no better.”
The White House is trying to counter criticism
The White House has stepped up its push to counter criticism that it moved unnecessarily quickly to launch a war of choice against Iran.
Trump’s decision to strike last week followed lengthy negotiations by the president’s envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner with the Iranians — talks the US increasingly viewed as an effort to stall any progress.
After the most recent round of discussions in Geneva, Switzerland, last week, Witkoff and Kushner told Trump that reaching a nuclear agreement similar to one that former President Barack Obama struck in 2015 was possible, according to a senior administration official.
The official, who briefed journalists on condition of anonymity, described it as a potential “Obama-plus deal” and Witkoff and Kushner believed such an agreement would take months, but was possible.
Still, even as they expressed their willingness to pursue diplomacy and “fight for every point that we can” if that’s what Trump wanted, the negotiators stressed to the president that the Iranians were not willing to make a deal that would be satisfactory to the US
Trump snaps at the UK, Spain over lack of support
Meanwhile, Trump sharply criticized Britain and Spain for their reluctance to aid the US-Israeli strikes on Iran.
“This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with,” Trump fumed about British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
Starmer had initially blocked American planes from using British bases for the attacks on Iran that started on Saturday. He later agreed to let the United States use bases in England and on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to strike Iran’s ballistic missiles and their storage sites, but not to hit other targets.
Trump also said he was going to “cut off all trade with Spain,” the day after Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said his country would not allow the US to use jointly operated bases in southern Spain in any strikes not covered by the United Nations’ charter.
Trump disputes that Israel forced his hand
The president also sought to push back on criticism from some of his staunchest allies over the decision to go to war — questions that grew louder after Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Monday that the US had decided to strike because “we knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.”
“And we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,” Rubio said.
But Trump rejected the notion that the White House had been dragged into the conflict by Israel. “We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack,” Trump said. “If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”
Rubio on Tuesday echoed Trump’s insistence that the decision to attack Iran was made independent of Israel.
Merz said during his visit with Trump at the Oval Office that Germany is “looking forward to the day after” the Iran war is over.
He said Berlin wants to work with the US on a strategy for when the current Iranian government no longer exists.
“We are having a high interest in common approach and common work and what we can do,” Merz said. “And this is this is important not just for the Americans,” he said. “This is extremely important for Europe and extremely important for Israel and their security.”
Merz also noted surging oil prices were damaging the world economy, laying down an argument for finding a quick endgame to the conflict.
The president acknowledged that oil and gas prices were going to rise as the US remains engaged in the strikes — yet argued it would be fleeting.
“We have a little high oil prices for a little while, but as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe, lower than even before,” Trump said.
The average price for a gallon of gasoline in the US jumped 11 cents overnight Tuesday to about $3.11 in the United States, according to the AAA.