Earlier this month, the UN support mission in Libya (UNSMIL) extended an invitation to the various political factions in the country to go to Oslo to hold a dialogue over Libya's future. UNSMIL spokesperson Radiya Ashouri said that that the mission had “facilitated arrangements for the Libyan political players to hold unofficial consultative meetings in Norway at the beginning of the last week of November.” She said that the arrangements were a response to the desire voiced by political parties and civil society organisations in recent communications and meetings with the mission and that the purpose of holding the meetings outside Libya was “to give the parties the opportunity to speak openly and at ease and to devote themselves to a discussion of aspects of the democratic transformation in Libya.” She also noted that the list of attendees had not yet been finalised, as some parties had still to make up their minds over whether or not to attend. UNSMIL seeks to support democratic transformation in Libya through the provision of consultative services and technical assistance in the processes of electoral elections and drafting a new constitution. Informed Libyan sources told Al-Ahram Weekly that a central purpose of the invitation extended by UNSMIL was to minimise the militia factor behind the participant parties in order to avert a repetition of the tragedy of the political isolation law. Passed by the country's General National Congress (GNC) in May, this law was pushed through virtually at gunpoint by militias that had laid siege to a number of ministry buildings and GNC headquarters. According to these sources, security officers associated with the former regime led by former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, tribal leaders and other political and social figures are expected to attend the Oslo meeting in the hope of mending the rifts between the various components of Libyan society. Nevertheless, some Libyan factions have already announced their rejection of the UNSMIL invitation. They have claimed it lacks transparency and may be biased in its intent, citing rumours to the effect that the UN mission has coordinated with affiliates of the former regime in order to include them in the dialogue. Both the Justice and Construction Party, the political wing of the Libyan chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the National Front to Save Libya have turned down the invitation. So too have some GNC members, notably those hailing from Misrata, such as Abdel-Rahman Al-Soweilhi and Salah Badi who control sizeable militias which are said to have been at the forefront of the siege intended to bend the GNC to their will. On the other hand, the liberAl-oriented National Forces Alliance, which consists of more than 60 political parties and civil society organisations along with other non-Islamist parties have accepted the invitation. Spokespersons for these parties have said that the invitation comes at a time when Libya is in dire need of dialogue, especially in view of the severe deterioration in the state of security in the country and the looming threat of civil war against the backdrop of the tribal and regional conflicts that have intensified in western Libya in particular. Commenting on the UNSMIL invitation, political analyst and researcher at the Ain Studies and Research Foundation Hisham Al-Shalwi told Al-Ahram Weekly that “on the whole, I believe that UNSMIL is not a neutral party because it espouses the outlook of a particular party for a resolution to the political crisis. That party is the National Forces Alliance and a group of businessmen in the GNC whose interests are linked with the movement led by Prime Minister Ali Zeidan.” To Al-Shalwi the invitation to Oslo is reminiscent of the invitation that Italy extended to Libyan political players following the outbreak of the Libyan Revolution to convene a dialogue in Rome. That initiative had “aimed to bridge the gap between the revolutionaries and certain individuals associated with the former regime”, he commented. Al-Shalwi, who is opposed in principle to the idea of holding talks abroad, held that “any national dialogue in Libya must proceed from the basis of the principles established by the 17 February Revolution. To me, any return to the discourse of the old regime or to its security and executive figures is a red line.” “Libya has space enough to hold its own political dialogue, while choosing Norway, the sponsor of the Oslo negotiations, as a venue stirs up doubts and suspicions. Moreover, to exclude the revolutionaries will not help the dialogue progress as they are the shield that safeguards the Revolution and prevents the betrayal of its principles.” “As for the claim that persons representative of the old regime will not be present, this is a pure deception. The problem does not reside in the physical presence in the meetings of such persons, but rather in the presence of their basic ideas.” Al-Shalwi said that an inclusive national dialogue was essential, as long as it was conducted without preconditions and in accordance with a comprehensive framework of principles aimed at safeguarding social peace and establishing the structures of an institutionalised government based on the peaceful rotation of power. “I do not shrink from saying that the National Forces Alliance and those who revolve in the orbit of the prime minister are responsible for driving the crisis to its furthest limits with the aim of obtaining gains by undermining the political process. [These forces] primarily aim to exclude the revolutionaries from participation in the national polity and to shake, indeed, topple the GNC, which is the last link in the interim phase as established by Article 30 of the Constitutional Declaration,” he said. “In addition, this scheme aims to strike at the moderate, centrist Islamist trend that believes in the rotation of power through the people's election of their representatives and rulers. Finally, it seeks to rattle the general public's confidence in the mufti, Sheikh Al-Sadeq Al-Gharyani, who, regardless of how we might differ with him with respect to many of his political ideas, remains the conscience of the collective mind and a symbol of the 17 February Revolution.” However, Mahmoud Shammam, chairman of the board of directors of the Wasat newspaper, strongly urged the idea of holding a dialogue conference abroad. This did not necessarily have to take place in Oslo, he said, since it could also take place in Sanaa as had been the case with the warring Lebanese factions during the 1980s. Dialogue abroad was more appropriate now that the domestic climate in Libya was not conducive to any types of talks, especially in view of the intermittent eruption of violent clashes that were claiming dozens of lives and hundreds of wounded, he said. Shammam said that he believed that only by meeting on neutral territory abroad would the Libyan factions be able to sit together and focus on the issues, free from regional, tribal and ethnic pressures and, more importantly, free from the logic of armed force, which had become the most salient feature of their interaction and which was available to all the political players in Libya. The Weekly has learned from reliable sources in Libya that, in view of the current resistance among some quarters to the meeting in Oslo, UNSMIL has put its invitation on hold for the time being. However, it is still working with Libyan parties in Libya and abroad to arrange a dialogue in Norway or any other country which, according to these sources, would probably have to be a European one, as the Libyan factions would be less likely to reach an agreement over an Arab country. The sources added that UNSMIL was still keen to go ahead with plans for the Oslo dialogue, which it now plans to hold at the outset of the new year.
