3 reasons why partitioning Libya is a bad idea
While the Trump administration so far has failed to present a well-defined policy on Libya, the administration seems to be sending mixed signals.
In their final communique at the end of their two-day meeting in Italy on April 10, the foreign ministers of the Group of Seven yet again expressed their unequivocal support of the Libyan political agreement and its transitional government headed by Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj, while calling on all armed groups in the Libyan capital to “desist from actions that would exacerbate internal division and fuel further conflict.”
The G-7 is a group of major world economies including Italy, Germany, France, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada, after Russia was kicked out because it annexed the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in March 2014.
What is worth noting in the statement on Libya is the clear expression of support to the country’s territorial integrity and unity, which clearly rejects any idea of a possible breakup of the country as a way of stabilizing it, since its quarreling factions have failed to accept any form of a political solution. The statement read, “We reaffirm our commitment to preserving the sovereignty, integrity and unity of Libya.”
The statement came just one day after The Guardian reported April 10 that Sebastian Gorka, an adviser to US President Donald Trump, had actually discussed the idea of dividing Libya into three regions based on the decades-old Ottoman division. The paper quoted well-placed sources as saying that Gorka not only discussed the issue with a European diplomat, but he also drew a map “on a napkin .… that cut Libya into three sections, apparently based on the old Ottoman provinces of Cyrenaica in the east, Tripolitania in the northwest and Fezzan in the southwest."
