By Peter FragiskatosIn Libya, Wednesday should have marked the day that the countrys newly elected assembly, the General National Congress (GNC), chose a new prime minister. While hardly an end point new elections will be held after the GNC drafts a constitution this offered the hope that a new figure would emerge who could unite the country and help it to secure the democratic gains that have been made so far.Instead, it is the senseless killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, and three other embassy staff in the city of Benghazi, that has captured international headlines. The attack appears to have been launched in response to the release of a film depicting the Prophet Muhammad as a child molester, among other things. Yet sources in Libya suggest that the assault was likely preplanned by a militia group known as Ansar al-Sharia (Supporters of Islamic Law), with the demonstration serving as a mere spark that provided the right opportunity (protests in Libya rarely attract the presence of militiamen carrying machine guns, as happened in Benghazi).The group itself has denied involvement, but a branch of the organization the Omar Abdul Rahman Brigade seems to be the actual culprit. In May, they attacked the offices of the International Red Cross in Benghazi and in June they set off an explosive device in front of the U.S. consulate after Abu Yahya al-Libi, a senior al-Qaida member and native Libyan, was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan.Not much is known about Ansar al-Sharia but they appear to be one among several such factions operating in eastern Libya that have carried out attacks on Sufi shrines in recent weeks (Sufis are Muslims whose unorthodox practices they incorporate music into their religious rituals, for example are deemed heretical by ultraconservatives). Their ranks are said to include jihadist fighters with experience in Afghanistan and Iraq, hinting that many probably hail from other Arab countries and not just Libya. Loosely connected, they often operate as small cells and make decisions on their own rather than receiving orders from an official leadership. This might explain why some within Ansar al-Sharia have claimed innocence.Understanding what happened in Benghazi is important and further details will certainly begin to emerge in the next few days. What needs to be recognized, however, is that the presence of groups like Ansar al-Sharia is a symptom of a larger problem with roots in last years rebellion against Moammar Gadhafi.While it began in the eastern province of Cyrenaica, in and around Benghazi, the uprising later shifted after a stalemate prevented forces affiliated with the National Transitional Council the interim governing authority established during the uprising from moving beyond the areas under their control. When this happened, volunteers based in western Libya doctors, taxi drivers, students and professors came together and formed the rag-tag militias that proved so vital in securing victory. Protected from above by NATO air patrols, they were able to capture government-held areas and, eventually, Tripoli.Because the NTC was unable to establish a presence beyond the east (here, too, its strength was limited, as the existence of eastern-based Islamist militias indicates), militias based in places outside of its reach such as Zintan and Misrata established a firm grip over these areas and beyond. Until very recently, for example, there was a strong militia presence in Tripoli. Today, these former rebel groups operate outside of the authority of the GNC, numbering into the low to mid-hundreds, and have come to dominate the country.Their staying power is explained by a host of factors. Some militias like Ansar al-Sharia claim to be motivated by a desire to defend Islam (although its rather difficult to see how their violent actions achieve this). At the same time, there are those who are not interested in religion and instead want to get rich by establishing control over lucrative trading routes along Libyas borders and other realms of the economy (a push that has fuelled fighting between militia groups). Others have come to enjoy their new heroic status while many simply want to maintain security in their areas of origin, something that the resource-strapped NTC couldnt do.The result is that the militias have been given free rein, with troubling outcomes. Aside from using violence to overcome their rivals, they have carried out revenge attacks against communities suspected of being loyal to Gadhafi, have engaged in arbitrary arrests, and operate secret prisons. Such actions threaten to make Libya a state dominated by warlord factions rather than one where the rule of law so vital in securing the sense of order that democracy and economic prosperity depend on is firmly established.During its time in power, the NTC tried to bring the militias under its control but had little success. It will now fall on the new government to change the situation (the vote to select the new prime minister wasnt postponed. Mustafa Abushagur emerged as the winner after defeating Mahmoud Jibril by only two votes. Decisions on cabinet posts will follow).One possible way forward is to tackle the problem of hand-guns, assault rifles and machine guns that exist in huge numbers in Libya some estimates put the number as high as two million. Militia-men control the vast majority of these weapons, a fact that helps explain why they remain so dominant. But getting militia fighters to give up their arms will be a difficult task, especially in a society where the military and police remain weak. Still, creative solutions, which the Canadian government can be a part of, could help to address the problem.When he visited Libya last fall, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird pledged $10 million to the NTC for help in securing, controlling and destroying weapons. While well-intentioned, there is little evidence to suggest that the money has been put to good use.What could prove far more fruitful is precisely the kind of program that gives militia fighters real incentives to hand in weapons. For example, during the late 1990s and early 2000s, serious weapons proliferation problems in Cambodia and Albania were addressed by providing jobs and development projects. If villagers handed in a predetermined number of weapons (based on estimates suggested by state and local officials), schools, health clinics, roads, wells and other basic necessities were built. In return, they were given jobs in the reconstruction.The UN and EU helped fund these projects, which contributed significantly to weapons reduction (in Cambodia, 80 per cent of all weapons were brought under government control within a six-year period). In each case, the programs cost less than $10 million.The details of how such initiatives might be applied to the Libyan case go far beyond anything that can be said here. What is more important to recognize is that while there are bloodthirsty zealots like the thugs who killed Stevens, many of the young men brandishing their weapons in Libya today are not unlike other young men and women in Canada and around the world, worried about their future and looking for meaning and purpose in their lives.Genuine economic opportunities motivate people and have the potential to transform societies. Although the federal government has cut funding to the Canadian International Development Agency the governmental body usually in charge of organizing international development projects it could still raise the idea to its partners in the international com-munity. Doing so would not only help Libya. It might also be a stepping stone in restoring our countrys role dramatically diminished because of limited peacekeeping contributions as a leading promoter of global peace and security. Peter Fragiskatos holds a PhD in international relations from Cambridge University and teaches at Western University in London, Ont. He wrote this for the Ottawa Citizen.
