With elections scheduled for late December, the visit to Israel by Haftar’s son signals the Libyan general’s intent to invest in a partnership with Tel Aviv if he were to become president.
On 7 November, Haaretz reported that Saddam Haftar, the son of Khalifa Haftar, flew on a private French-made Dassault Falcon jet out of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and landed in Israel for a 90-minute visit before returning to Libya.
The purpose was for Haftar and his son to pursue “military and diplomatic assistance from Israel”, according to the report.
With Libya’s elections scheduled for 24 December, this brief landing at the Ben-Gurion Airport was part of Haftar’s electoral campaign. The eastern commander, who led the Libyan National Army (LNA) during Libya’s civil war, wants to differentiate himself from other Libyans seeking to become the country’s head of state.
“It’s a way of distinguishing Haftar from the rest of the candidates and promising something that is supposed to have value in the eyes of the United States, but also in the eyes of other countries that embrace whatever the UAE – the main sponsor of Haftar – has been doing through its activism in the region, which means Egypt, France, Morocco, and you can go down the list,” said Jalel Harchaoui, a researcher at Global Initiative, in an interview with The New Arab.
“It’s a way of Haftar saying ‘If you support me becoming president, here’s one tangible thing that I can deliver for you and no one else can.’”
“By having his son land on Israeli soil, shake hands, and signal a determination to normalise with Israel, Haftar is giving Tel Aviv a vested interest in him becoming Libya’s leader”
The relationship between Haftar and the Israelis dates back to 1987. It is not a new partnership.
“Contacts between Libyans and Israelis have been underway for some time – probably through the Mossad and other organisations – and it is not surprising that they have intensified lately, given the proximity of the elections in Libya,” explained Dr Federica Saini Fasanotti, a non-resident fellow at the Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution.
What made Saddam Haftar’s brief visit to Israel significant was not the substance of the relationship between his father and the Jewish state, but rather the decision to make it known to the whole world rather than concealing it.
Libya’s fractures and divisions
Politically speaking, eastern and western Libya have major differences that are relevant to any discussion of the North African country entering the Abraham Accords. In Libya’s east, political Islam does not exist. In western Libya, political Islam might not necessarily be extremely popular, but it exists.
Whereas eastern Libya is somewhat reflective of the UAE and Egypt’s political systems, the west has much more in common with Tunisia and Algeria, where the Palestinian cause is considered “sacred”, as President Abdelmadjid Tebboune put it. Also, the Turkish influence in western Libya matters too, particularly considering Ankara’s efforts to position itself as a defender of the Palestinian struggle.
Within this context, Haftar being the head of state and deciding to bring the country into the Abraham Accords risks reigniting major tensions in Libya.
“If you broach a topic like normalisation with Israel, you’re going to intensify what differentiates the eastern part of Libya from the western part,” according to Harchaoui. The implications could be toxic from the standpoint of bringing Libyans together in a post-conflict era.
“The western part of Libya is the most populous part, containing even more than two-thirds of the population,” said the Europe-based Libya expert. “When you look at that part of the population and you say, ‘I hereby declare normalisation with Israel’, you go [against] all the [UN-led] efforts…to trying to avoid a partition of the nation, trying to promote unification, reconciliation, and integration.”
US foreign policy implications
Like his predecessor, President Joe Biden and those in his administration believe that adding more Arab countries to the Abraham Accords must be a US foreign policy objective.
A bipartisan consensus behind this stance exists among American lawmakers. Hence it is fair to conclude that Haftar promising to bring Libya into the Abraham Accords could help him out a fair amount in Washington despite condemnations which the eastern commander has received from certain American officials over the years as well as lawsuits filed against him in US courts.
“There are many decision-makers [in the US] who don’t really care about the reality of Libya,” according to Harchaoui.
“They say, ‘If we could have a high-profile leader that embraces Israel, I don’t really care about the details of what happens on the ground. It’s still one step forward.’ It’s basically the same reasoning that led Trump to recognise Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. Like you disregard the consequences of the actual stability on the ground, and you say, ‘it’s a very nice victory from the point of view of acceptance of Israel, and I don’t care what happens on the ground.’ You have a whole faction in Washington, DC that thinks in those terms.”
“Many policymakers in Washington believe in encouraging more Arab countries to normalise with Israel, regardless of the consequences”
Indeed, among US officials there has been a total lack of concern for how the Abraham Accords have played out on the ground in the Arab region. In a Machiavellian manner, many policymakers in Washington believe in encouraging more Arab countries to normalise with Israel, regardless of the consequences.
The fact that the transactional nature of Morocco entering the Abraham Accords in exchange for US recognition of Rabat’s sovereignty over Western Sahara has revived decades-old tensions between Morocco and Algeria doesn’t matter much to Washington.
The same can be said about the tensions which the Abraham Accords have heightened in Bahrain between the government and opposition groups, as well as how the Trump administration’s extortion of Sudan severely harmed the country’s fragile democratic transition.
Israel becoming more and more accepted in the Middle East and North Africa’s diplomatic fold is what matters to officials in Washington and Abu Dhabi. “You have this complacency that leads the Biden administration to support the UAE worldview,” explained Harchaoui. “The UAE worldview, acceptance of Israel – all of these philosophies require you to ignore what goes on in the real world.”
Israeli stakes in Libya
Libya-Israel ties would not only serve the interests of Haftar. Benefits could go both ways. Israel has many interests in Libya, from the North African country’s “highly strategic geographical position to unlimited energy”, explained Dr Fasanotti.
“In this chess game, we must not forget the consistent presence of Turkey in Tripolitania which, given the tense relations with Israel and other countries over the issue of offshore gas in the eastern Mediterranean, certainly plays a primary strategic role.”
In eastern Libya, which is the part of the country closest to Israel/Palestine, there is a security architecture and political order that suits Israeli interests. The absence of any Islamist political opposition or pro-Palestinian/pro-Hamas groups in Libya’s east is satisfactory to Tel Aviv.
It’s safe to bet that the Israelis would take steps to help this Egypt-like order survive over the years by strongly supporting Haftar if he becomes the next Libyan head of state. When asked on i24NEWS English if Haftar is the “Israeli horse in the race”, Michael Oren, the former Israeli ambassador to the US, replied, “Yes, he’s in the race and it’s a track that has been well run”.
“Libya entering the Abraham Accords would further signal success on the part of Emirati activism in Africa following Sudan and Morocco’s normalisation with Israel”
By having his son land on Israeli soil, shake hands, and signal a determination to normalise with Israel, Haftar is giving the Jewish state a vested interest in him becoming Libya’s leader. As Marco Carnelos, a former Italian diplomat, noted, considering Haftar’s health issues he may be looking to establish a family dynasty in Libya that could put his son at the helm down the line.
Therefore, having Saddam Haftar land on Israeli soil could be about making a powerful statement about how much Haftar would like to invest in a partnership with Israel for the long haul if he is to win the 24 December elections.
At stake for Tel Aviv are also “the prestige and this impression of momentum with more Arab centres of power that one by one decide to embrace Israel,” said Harchaoui. “If Israel could actually maintain that narrative of a persistent momentum in that direction of more acceptability it’s a form of a win.”
Libya entering the Abraham Accords would further signal success on the part of Emirati activism in Africa following Sudan and Morocco’s normalisation with Israel last year in deals that the UAE helped push through, plus Tunisia’s 25 July 2021 autogolpe which constituted another win for Abu Dhabi.
A Haftar-led Libya formalising relations with Tel Aviv would serve the interests of the UAE, US, and obviously Israel too. But not all states in the Maghreb would see Libya’s entry into the Abraham Accords as good news. This brings us to a final point that concerns Algeria.
From the perspective of Algiers, the expansion of Emirati influence in North Africa and the trend to normalise with Israel both threaten Algeria’s national interests. A concern among officialdom in Algiers is that Emirati activism in North Africa, specifically Abu Dhabi’s efforts to bring countries in the Maghreb and Sahel into the Abraham Accords, is leaving Algeria in a weaker and more vulnerable position.
“Israel becoming more and more accepted in the Middle East and North Africa’s diplomatic fold is what matters to officials in Washington and Abu Dhabi”
For example, after Rabat normalised with Israel in exchange for Washington’s recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, the Algerian Prime Minister stated that there is a “real threat on our borders, reached by the Zionist entity”.
“Algeria would see any normalisation of ties with Israel by Haftar as evidence of the general’s designs on its stability and a grave escalation on his part,” Sami Hamdi, the Managing Director of the International Interest, a global risk and intelligence company, told TNA.
Indeed, there would be a concern that with both Morocco and Libya locked into diplomatic agreements with Israel, such relations with Tel Aviv could be weaponised against Algeria down the line.
Giorgio Cafiero is the CEO of Gulf State Analytics.