What is the Libya model?
What is the Libya model?
The agreement between Libya and the West, which is now 22 years old, has once again become a topic of discussion as Iran and the United States approach negotiations regarding the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. Libya has become a negative example and cannot persuade other countries, like Iran and North Korea, to follow its path. This was stated by Muammar Gaddafi, the leader of Libya, in an interview with CNN in 2005, without knowing what fate awaited him. At that time, about two years had passed since his agreement with the United States and Britain, but he was deeply dissatisfied with the West because he had not benefited from the advantages of the agreement. However, a while later, the United States removed Libya from the list of state sponsors of terrorism and resumed diplomatic relations with the country.
22 years have passed since this agreement, but the fate of the Libya model is still a hot topic in international forums. Now that Iran and the United States are on the verge of talks for a potential agreement regarding Iran’s nuclear program, some in Iran warn against using this model for Iran, while some politicians propose it for an agreement with Tehran.
Among them is Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel. Mr. Netanyahu, who, according to Israeli media reports, was surprised on April 7 by the news of the planned meeting between Iranian and American officials, said in a video message before leaving Washington that an agreement with Iran could only be made if it were similar to the Libya model. Meanwhile, Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s Foreign Minister, reacted the previous day to the remarks of an American senator who preferred the Libya model agreement with Iran by saying, ‘They can dream about it.’
What is the Libya model?
The United States and Britain had been negotiating with Libya for some time to limit its nuclear program and the production of weapons of mass destruction, a program that began in the 1970s and had many ups and downs. Libya signed the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) in 1975 and the Biological Weapons Convention in 1982, but it was always suspected of attempting to produce these weapons. The narratives of Western diplomats about which country, Britain or the United States, initiated these negotiations are contradictory.
However, these narratives do not change the outcome of the negotiations.
Under the leadership of Muammar Gaddafi, Libya agreed in 2003 to denuclearization, handing over its chemical weapons stockpile, and limiting its missile range to below 300 kilometers.
As part of this agreement, Libya not only allowed American and British inspectors to enter its facilities but also accepted the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
From that time, activities related to inspecting the facilities began under the guidance of the International Atomic Energy Agency and American and British experts, and a large portion of the equipment and documents related to Libya’s nuclear program were transferred to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.
The removal of Libya’s produced nuclear materials and chemical weapons continued for years, and the last stage of this process was completed after the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi.
And contrary to what Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, says, no facilities were blown up during this process.
Why did Libya accept this model?
At the time of announcing the agreement with Libya in 2003, some American and British officials speaking to reporters mentioned that Libya’s nuclear program was close to producing a nuclear weapon. However, in the following years, after examining various aspects of this program, some analysts concluded that Libya’s distance from the bomb was much greater than previously thought.
Malfrid Braut-Hegghammer, a Norwegian researcher in non-proliferation who has written a book on the subject, said in a 2017 lecture at the Woodrow Wilson Center that even Libyan officials, including Saif al-Islam, the son of Muammar Gaddafi, had a similar perception to Western officials and thought they were about five years away from acquiring a nuclear bomb.
In addition to the issue of Libya’s distance from a nuclear bomb, two other motivations are cited for the country accepting this agreement: the pressure of extensive sanctions that had crippled Libya’s economy and the United States’ military attack on Iraq a few months before reaching the agreement. However, analysts do not agree on the extent of these two factors’ influence.
The Libyan government, at the time of announcing the agreement, stated that it accepted this agreement of its own free will.
However, George W. Bush, the then President of the United States, said, ‘We have made the options clear to our enemies in words and deeds.’
When leaders make wise and responsible decisions, abandon terror and weapons of mass destruction, as Colonel Gaddafi did, they work in favor of their people and help ensure the security of all nations.
Which Libya model: 2003 or 2011?
In 2018, John Bolton, on the verge of being appointed as the National Security Advisor to the White House, in response to a question about the possibility of starting negotiations between the United States and North Korea, said that these negotiations would be short and would follow the Libya model. Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang was highly agitated by these remarks, and Donald Trump said the United States was not seeking such a model for North Korea, and ‘he’ (the North Korean leader) would remain there, leading his country, and North Korea would become very wealthy.
The reference by the President of the United States was to the fate that befell Muammar Gaddafi eight years after Libya’s agreement with the West.
Libya, which was gradually returning to the international community in the years following the agreement, was subjected to events with the onset of protests known as the Arab Spring, which eventually led to Western countries attacking it, the overthrow of the government, and the killing of Muammar Gaddafi.
Critics accused Mr. Trump of misunderstanding the Libya model and said Mr. Bolton’s reference was to Libya’s denuclearization and had nothing to do with the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi’s government.
However, many observers in the years following the overthrow of Libya’s government and the killing of Muammar Gaddafi have emphasized that this fate has overshadowed the initial success of the Libya model and cannot be used as a roadmap for other countries, including Iran.