The positions and orientations of Libyan politicians have intersected since the political crisis has become more complex, in a way that “prolongs the impasse instead of getting to the core of the dispute.”
Since the signing of the “Skhirat” agreement at the end of 2015, up to the “4+4” mechanism, the constant feature amidst this confusion remains the ability of some influential forces to obstruct “any entitlement that threatens their interests,” which forces Libya and its people to remain in a vicious circle, and hostage to the calculations of “those obstructing the solution,” according to what analysts see.
Before those gathered at the UN Security Council, on Wednesday, the UN envoy to Libya, Hannah Tetteh, addressed the “obstructors of the solution,” in her talk about those who agreed and objected to the “4+4” agreement, signed at the end of last August between representatives of eastern and western Libya, and said: “I would like to stress again that Libya cannot allow the obstructionists to obstruct this process.”
The envoy was referring to the position of the Supreme Council of State, headed by Mohamed Takala, on the agreement. She explained, “What is regrettable is that the rejection of the agreement still reflects the limited willingness of some members to engage constructively in this process.” Noting that “a number of members of the Supreme Council of State expressed their willingness to engage in the agreement, and requested more time to consult among themselves regarding moving forward with the process.”
Libyan politicians and diplomats believe that the intersection of interests and orientations keeps Libya “hostage to the obstructionists” of the political solution, which requires the international community to deal seriously with the crisis, away from threatening sanctions, since the signing of the “Skhirat” agreement in Morocco in late 2015.
The former Libyan ambassador to Syria, Muhammad Shaaban Al-Mardas, said that there is a movement in Libya that “always plays the role of obstructing the solution.” We call them the Rawafid Party.”
He pointed out in a statement to Asharq Al-Awsat that the movement of Al-Sadiq Al-Gharyani, the Mufti of Western Libya (who was removed from Parliament), “took the opposition approach to engage in any political process, so that those who agreed would pay attention to them.” This process succeeded with them in the Skhirat Agreements and in Geneva with the intention of obtaining political gains.”
Al-Mardas believed that the UN initiative “has become a reality and is binding,” expecting that “those obstructing the political solution will remain silent, led by Ghariani and Takala, in light of the Security Council threatening to impose sanctions on the obstructionists.”
Tetteh, who briefed the Security Council on developments in the political process, promised that she would “provide more details about the results of communication with members of the Supreme Council of State, and the next steps proposed by the mission in my next briefing to the Council.”
It also indicated that it “will conduct further consultations with the parties to the Committee (4+4) during its meeting with them, scheduled to be held later this month.” “Including examining the option of working on a (national mechanism) with broad representation, in accordance with what is stipulated in Article (5) of the agreement.”
The international and international threat to punish those who obstruct the solution to the Libyan crisis is an old method, but its effectiveness has not been proven in terms of moving the political process. The UN Security Council had previously threatened to impose sanctions on anyone who obstructs the completion of the implementation of the “Skhirat” agreement, which was reached by the UN envoy at the time, Bernardino Leon, to form a “national unity” government.
Libya is being subjected to a succession of political agreements and projects, while it suffers from a governmental and political division between the west and east of the country. Richard Norland, the American ambassador and special envoy to Libya, had hinted in more than one event at the possibility of his country punishing those obstructing political solutions.
Talk about imposing sanctions on Libyan figures remains a “message of intimidation” that was repeated by several international parties, including the “International Follow-up Committee” on Libya, which hinted during a meeting held in Berlin on June 20, 2025, to “hold accountable those obstructing the political process,” without any change occurring in the general scene.
In parallel with what is happening, the Supreme Council of State called on Tetteh to correct its position regarding the outcomes of the “4+4” committee meeting, and to include “his objections and constitutional and legal supports” in its upcoming briefings, refusing to interpret his reservations as “a retreat from engaging in the political process.”
The Supreme Council of State's angry speech came about what Tetteh addressed in her briefing on his position. The Council said, in a statement on Wednesday evening, that its refusal “is not due to abandoning political participation, or opposing a peaceful solution, but rather is related to the extent of the legitimacy of the process and its legal outcomes,” stressing that “adherence to constitutional references represents a guarantee of the safety of any political consensus, and does not constitute an obstacle to achieving it.”
Libyan political analyst, Hossam Al-Fneish, read the Security Council session on Libya as “reflecting an international trend towards moving from the stage of political understandings to the implementation stage, with the emergence of the American role as a major pressure factor to push the (4+4) agreement towards completing the international road map.”
In a post on his Facebook account, Al-Fanish said, “The American intervention, with the signs it included, reflected the importance of the agreement and the threat of holding obstructionists accountable, a desire to raise the cost of disrupting the political process,” and he saw that this move “paves the way for moving to the most important goal in the next stage, which is restructuring the executive authority and unifying state institutions.”
The UN mission said, on Thursday, that the Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Stephanie Khoury, met with the Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Al-Taher Al-Baour. The two sides exchanged views on the latest political and economic developments, “and the necessity of moving forward with a comprehensive political process to address the multiple challenges facing Libya.”
Amid demands to “expand political participation in the country,” political parties and forces welcomed Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s confirmation “not to prejudice the constitution,” while opponents expressed their “hope for a future political breakthrough.”
Al-Sisi had confirmed that “Egypt has a constitution that has been approved, and no one will touch it.” Al-Sisi’s assertions came during the educational symposium in the armed forces on Wednesday evening, in the context of his talk about “attempts to target Egypt from within, and to spread a psychological war targeting Egyptians’ confidence in state institutions.”
Al-Sisi’s talk about the “Egyptian Constitution” also coincided with growing proposals to amend it, especially since the Egyptian president’s current term is his last, ending in 2030.
Al-Sisi pointed out that “the amount of work and achievement that has taken place in Egypt since 2014 could not have been completed in less than thirty years,” stressing that he will “continue working until the last day of his term in office in 2030.”
The Civil Democratic Movement, the largest opposition group in the country, expressed its “strong satisfaction” with Sisi’s speech, and saw it as “a positive step that enhances respect for constitutional texts.”
The movement affirmed in a statement, on Wednesday evening, that “the real bet for achieving a political and social breakthrough is respecting the constitution, activating it, and the peaceful transfer of power, which is the basic approach to opening the lungs of society, and expanding the public sphere for parties, unions, media, and civil society organizations.”
The “movement” confirmed that it “looks forward to seeing Sisi’s speech turn into a practical commitment that opens the door to a new phase, in which Egyptians feel that they are true partners in shaping the future of their country.”
The general coordinator of the civil movement, Akram Ismail, told Asharq Al-Awsat on Thursday that the movement “seeks to obtain a greater freedom of political and partisan action and expand public participation.”
For his part, Professor of Political Science at Cairo University, Tariq Fahmy, considered Sisi’s speech “direct and frank.” He told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The speech means that the president’s decision has been decided politically, and that there is no amendment to the constitution.”
Fahmy expected that the speech would create “political momentum in the country during the coming period,” which requires all political forces and parties to “reassess their strength and status, and present new proposals, policies, and perceptions to deal with the stage and expand political participation with new alliances.”
He also believes that President Sisi has decided on the political dimension of amending the constitution, but “the matter in the end is not in the hands of the president alone; There are other institutions in the state where the legislative authority can adopt an amendment to the constitution,” stressing that “Sisi’s decision will not stop those calling for amending the constitution.”
In the context of its affirmation of “welcoming” Sisi’s speech, the “Dustour” Party expressed in a statement, on Wednesday evening, its hope that these statements would represent “a positive step towards a new stage in which respect for the Constitution is not only by preserving its texts,” but also by “full implementation of its provisions,” and that they would be “an entry point to broader steps toward opening the public sphere, enhancing political pluralism, and providing the opportunity for parties, political forces, and civil society to carry out their roles freely and responsibly.”
Deputy Director of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Amr Hashim Rabie, touched on the direct implications of Sisi’s speech, stressing that the speech “politically means that we are on a date with a new president after the end of Sisi’s term in 2030 unless something else happens.”
He told Asharq Al-Awsat, “President Sisi is serious and sincere in his announcement of his refusal to amend the constitution, but we may witness political movements from parties that see the need for amendment through demonstrations or political activities.”
He expected that the coming period would witness “political momentum in the country and party movement,” but the problem in his opinion is that “the parties have not prepared for this moment, and they have no alternatives.”
