Salam to Asharq Al-Awsat: Lebanese State Has Reclaimed Decisions of War and Peace

He spoke of pending issues with Syria and Beirut’s keenness on ties with Riyadh.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam sits down for an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam sits down for an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.
TT

Salam to Asharq Al-Awsat: Lebanese State Has Reclaimed Decisions of War and Peace

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam sits down for an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam sits down for an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam stressed that the Lebanese state has restored the decisions of war and peace.

“These decisions are now being taken in Beirut, at cabinet, not anywhere else,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat in an extensive interview, the first installment of which was published on Saturday.

“No one is making dictates to us, not from Tehran or Washington,” he added.

Moreover, he underlined the right of the people to hold protests – a reference to Hezbollah supporters rallying against the government’s decision to disarm the Iran-backed group and limit the possession of weapons in the country to the state.

Salam said however, that protesters should not block main roads, including the one leading to Lebanon’s only functional airport in Beirut.

Asked if he believed that the Shiite ministers would resign from cabinet in wake of the decision to disarm Hezbollah, which is Shiite, he responded: “The government is united, but that does not mean that all of its 24 ministers share the same opinion over everything.”

If consensus is not reached over an issue, then disputes and differences are resolved through a vote and other constitutional measures, he explained.

“We are not opposed to anyone turning to the streets to express their views. (...) We respect the right to have a different opinion. But we draw the line at blocking roads. It is forbidden to impede the freedom of movement of the Lebanese people, especially in heading to vital areas, such as the airport or international highway,” he said.

Salam noted that several attempts to block the airport road have been successfully thwarted by the army.

Asked if he has been advised in recent weeks to increase his personal security, the PM replied: “I have a deep sense that the majority of the Lebanese people have confidence in our government. I am acting on this trust and my conscience is clear. I believe that any threats are being made by a small fraction of the Lebanese or some unruly people.”

US special envoy Tom Barrack speaks to the media at the Grand Serail during his visit to Beirut on July 21. (AFP)

On US special envoy Tom Barrak’s upcoming highly anticipated visit to Lebanon in wake of the disarmament decision, Salam said the envoy had presented the government with a proposal, which was in turn submitted to cabinet.

“The cabinet actually received an amended version of the proposals – a ‘Lebanonized’ version,” the PM explained. “Not a single patriotic Lebanese citizen can be opposed to the goals listed in the proposal that was adopted by the cabinet.”

He revealed that he along with President Joseph Aoun and parliament Speaker Nabih Berri had direct input in the final drafting of the approved goals.

“No one is opposed to the first article on ending the hostilities immediately. No one is opposed to the complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territories. No one is opposed to the return of the displaced people to their villages in the South. No one is opposed to the release of Lebanese detainees by Israel. No one is opposed to reconstruction and holding an international donor conference,” he stressed.

“Let them stop challenging the government about these issues. You are Lebanese. You have read the proposals. Tell me, what issues do you oppose? Let any Lebanese citizen tell me which articles they oppose. Does anyone oppose the international conference? Does anyone oppose the Israeli withdrawal? Does anyone oppose the return of the detainees or displaced? So why this uproar over the government decision?” he asked.

Asharq Al-Awsat countered that perhaps the uproar stems from removing Lebanon from the military conflict with Israel, to which Salam responded: “Lebanon was supposed to be removed from this equation with the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 1701. That was around 20 years ago.”

The ceasefire agreement last November and the government’s policy statement only consolidate the resolution, he stated.

“Who doesn’t want to get out of the military conflict with Israel? Up until the year 2000, the resistance (Hezbollah), which I salute, was the main actor in this conflict. Before that, other groups were involved, such as the Communist Party and Communist Action Organization in Lebanon.”

“Hezbollah was the main player in making the enemy withdraw from our occupied territories in 2000. Unfortunately, after that, we spent years discussing whether to deploy the army to the South or not. Why should it even be a contentious debate to allow the army to deploy in its land in the South to protect our people?” he wondered.

The deployment was met with objections and then doubts were raised about the army, continued the PM. “This was a wasted opportunity. The same thing happened with the decisions of war and peace. How could a decision be taken to drag Lebanon to a ‘support war’ (with Gaza)? This never should have happened. The state did not have a say in it,” he said.

“The decisions of war and peace have today returned to the state,” he declared. “Only we decide when to wage a war or not. This does not mean that weapons exist outside the authority of the state. We are now concerned with how to have state monopoly over them.”

War and peace

Asharq Al-Awsat said that the state’s reclaiming of the decisions of war and peace effectively means that “Lebanon has been taken out of the (Resistance) axis that has existed for decades.”

“Yes, I know that,” replied Salam. “They used to brag about certain issues, like saying Tehran controls four Arab capitals. I believe that that time is over. Lebanon’s decisions are being taken from Beirut, at cabinet, not anywhere else. No one dictates to us what to do; not from Tehran or Washington.”

“Is that what you told (Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali) Larijani?” asked Asharq Al-Awsat.

“I issued a statement to clarify the discussions that we had. Of course, I strongly reproached him for the Iranian criticism of the Lebanese government’s disarmament decision,” said the PM. “I informed him that balanced relations between countries, especially between us and Iran, should be based on mutual respect and non-interference in internal affairs.”

“We have never allowed ourselves to meddle in Iranian internal affairs. I have never stated that I support one side against the other in Iran. I do not express my opinions on Iranian affairs. I do not express my views about Iran’s defense strategy or internal politics. What I am asking of Iran and any other party is to not meddle in our internal affairs.”

“Statements have been made, and unfortunately, some threatened the government. I told Larijani that this is completely unacceptable in any way, shape or form,” he stressed.

Relations with Washington

Turning to ties with Washington, Asharq Al-Awsat asked if Beirut was receiving the aspired backing from it, to which Salam replied: “Of course not. We had hoped and want to have greater support in making the Israeli enemy withdraw completely from Lebanese territories and stop its daily violations. The United States is the side that is most capable of influencing Israel and it is not doing that enough.”

“I do not feel useless when I hear an Israeli drone flying over Lebanon. I know that today I am incapable of preventing them from flying over Lebanon, but I do not want to embark on a new military adventure. What I can do is garner enough political and diplomatic support to stop these flights and Israel’s hostile acts. We have not reached that goal yet, but more contacts are needed with our Arab brothers, who are effective players on the international arena. Similar contacts are needed with the Europeans and the US,” he added.

He revealed that Barrack’s proposals demand that the US and France pressure Israel to pull out of Lebanon. “This is a positive point that I am revealing for the first time. Israel, meanwhile, has not committed to Barrack’s proposals. We are,” he stressed.

PM Salam meets with Ali Larijani at the Grand Serail in Beirut on August 13. (EPA)

Moreover, Salam stated that the proposals stipulate that Israel would incur some form of penalty if it does not commit to the withdrawal. All parties involved will incur penalties for failing to meet their commitments. For Israel, the penalty would be condemnation by the Security Council, which would be a precedent. The US may actually be ready to condemn Israel for failing to respect its end of the deal.

Asked if Washington had broached the subject of holding negotiations to establish peace between Lebanon and Israel, Salam responded: “Our position is known and clear. The Arab Peace Initiative was adopted during the Beirut summit in 2002. We have no intention of engaging in normalization negotiations or anything of the sort beyond the initiative. This is our plain and simple answer whenever the Americans or others bring up the issue.”

“There is a need, now more than ever, to implement the initiative,” he urged.

Asked about what Lebanon will demand from Barrack during his visit, Salam said he “must guarantee that Israel cease its hostile operations and start withdrawing from Lebanese territories, especially the five points, as stipulated in his proposals.”

The PM added that Speaker Berri was involved in the discussions between him, Aoun and Barrack. “He had reservations about some issues, but was part of the discussions at various points. Aoun, Berri and I introduced amendments to the proposals.”

Relations with Iran

“Do you fear that relations may be severed with Iran?” asked Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Iran is a big country and we boast historic relations with it. I informed Larijani that these relations existed before the establishment of the Islamic Republic. (...) We are very keen on ties between Lebanon and Iran. Iran is among the most important neighbors to the Arab world. We want balanced relations similar to the ones with other neighbors,” Salam said.

Asharq Al-Awsat added: “Iran is the greatest loser with the change that had taken place in Syria. Perhaps it wants to compensate for this loss by maintaining its influence in Lebanon?”

Salam said: “We have an interest in having the best relations with Iran. The other Arab countries share this same interest. Were this not the case, Saudi Arabia would not have reached the Beijing agreement with Iran.”

Pending issues with Syria

Turning to relations with Syria, Salam was asked about his meeting with interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Damascus earlier this year. He replied: “I told him that we have long suffered from Syria’s interference in our internal affairs. We are pleased with the change that has happened in Syria. I am also aware that they have suffered from the meddling by some Lebanese parties in their country.”

“We have both suffered. We are now ready to open a new chapter in Lebanese-Syrian relations based on mutual respect and non-interference in the affairs of the other,” the PM stressed.

The pending issues that exist between the two neighbors can only be resolved through joint efforts between them, he continued. “Progress has already been made over cross-border smuggling, especially the smuggling of drugs and weapons. The drugs were being smuggled to the Gulf, which has tarnished Lebanon’s image.”

He said that “major cooperation” was taking place over this issue and it has been sponsored by Saudi Arabia through a meeting between the defense ministers in Jeddah.

Furthermore, Salam added that efforts were ongoing with Syria over securing their shared border. Other issues remain pending, such as Syrian detainees held in Lebanon. “We are ready to discuss the issue with our Syrian brothers to reach a serious solution to this file. I informed them of this during my visit to Damascus. I reiterated this to Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani when we met in Baghdad on the sidelines of the Arab summit.”

“We are both eager to put this file behind us. There is also the issue of Syria refugees in Lebanon. This should be resolved between us and the Syrians and concerned international organizations,” he went on to say. Tens of thousands of Syrians have already returned home in recent months.

“We have declared that we support their safe and dignified return,” he remarked.

Salam added that he requested from Sharaa any information Syrian authorities have over “internal issues that greatly concern Lebanon,” such as the case of the bombing of two mosques in the northern city of Tripoli in 2013 and the 2020 Beirut Port blast.

“Sharaa was very understanding of the requests. I believe we have a new opportunity with the new rulers in Syria to not just put the old relations between us, but to build a balanced relationship with our Syrian brothers,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Asked about how he felt when he saw Sharaa seated at the presidential palace in Damascus instead of Bashar al-Assad, Salam replied: “I used to be Lebanon’s ambassador to the UN when Assad was in his post. Our position remains the same: We want for Syria what its own people want for it. We support what the Syrian people choose. We want to close the Assad chapter; Lebanon suffered a lot from it.”

Syrian interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa and PM Salam meet in Damascus on April 14. (AFP)

Ties with Saudi Arabia

“What about relations with Saudi Arabia?” asked Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Lebanon and Saudi Arabia enjoy historic relations,” he said, citing its major role in the Taif Accords that helped end Lebanon’s 1975-90 civil war. He also singled out Prince Saud al-Faisal and his role in the Accords.

Ties between the two countries stretch before the agreement. “The issue isn’t just about bilateral relations. The Kingdom is now a major Arab Islamic international player,” stressed Salam. “We are very keen on relations with the Kingdom and are seeking the greatest support from it in terms of pressuring Iran or supporting Lebanon in its reconstruction and attracting investments.”

He hoped that Saudi Arabia would soon lift its ban on its citizens from traveling to Lebanon. “We can’t say that we have returned to the Arab world; the Arab world must also return to Lebanon. The lifting of the ban would be a very significant development.”

The PM also acknowledged the concerns over the smuggling of drugs to Saudi Arabia and the Kingdom’s ensuing decision to bar imports from Lebanon. Salam hoped that this issue would be resolved soon given that authorities have adopted tougher measures at various land and marine crossings.

“We do not want to smuggle captagon or other illicit material. This damages our image before it harms the Saudis and others. Lebanon’s image has already been tarnished. Our country used to export books, ideas and engineers to the Arab world. This is the image that we want to restore,” Salam said.

Turning to the Gulf countries, he stressed that he is proud of the strides they have made and the accomplishments they have achieved, “but at the same time, we lament the opportunities we have wasted.”

“Lebanon can be a natural partner to their rise,” he went on to say. He also noted the vision of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister, who wants to take the Arab world and Kingdom to “not just the 21st Century but its second half through investments in AI and technology.”

“Lebanon, through its universities and human capabilities, is a natural partner to this renaissance project,” he declared.

War on corruption

Returning to Lebanon, Asharq Al-Awsat asked whether the “war on corruption has started.” Salam said it is already underway. Two ministers are being persecuted, and one has been jailed on corruption charges. The other, unfortunately, managed to flee the country.

He noted that former public employees and judges are being persecuted for corruption.

“I am aware of how much Lebanon has suffered in recent years from the looting of public funds and waste that has taken place in several state sectors. We have a project to rebuild the country, which demands a number of issues that are founded on reforms.”

Asked if he regrets becoming prime minister, Salam said: “I have been concerned with public affairs for dozens of years. I grew up in a family that is concerned in public affairs. I have written extensively about reforms in Lebanon. I saw an opportunity and seized it so that I can translate into reality the ambitious reform pledges of this (Aoun’s) term.”

“I was encouraged by Aoun’s swearing in speech. I am today seeking to implement whatever I can,” he revealed.

Asked about online campaigns against him, the PM explained that they are being waged by thousands of bots. “They aren’t even real people. They accuse me of treason and of being a Zionist. Does anyone really believe these claims? Do I need to prove my loyalty to my nation or my stances against Israel? I forgive those making the accusations because they themselves know that they are not true.”

“However, I do not forgive those who are manipulating their supporters with such claims. This is very dangerous, not because of the personal injury to me – I don’t care about that – but because it could lead to civil strife in the country,” he warned.

“Those intimidating us with civil war should first concern themselves with removing the weapons that are the source of this strife,” he demanded.

“I sought last week to defuse tensions, but then came another party to stoke civil tensions by accusing me of being a Zionist and rallying their supporters. Let them cease such behavior, which only pits the people against each other. I am confident that the majority of the Lebanese people agree with me,” he said.



Gaza's Rafah Crossing Reopens, Allowing Limited Travel as Palestinians Claim Delays, Mistreatment

Ayada Al-Sheikh is welcomed by his sister, Nisreen, upon his arrival in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip after returning to Gaza following the long-awaited reopening of the Rafah border crossing, early Thursday, Feb. 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana)
Ayada Al-Sheikh is welcomed by his sister, Nisreen, upon his arrival in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip after returning to Gaza following the long-awaited reopening of the Rafah border crossing, early Thursday, Feb. 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana)
TT

Gaza's Rafah Crossing Reopens, Allowing Limited Travel as Palestinians Claim Delays, Mistreatment

Ayada Al-Sheikh is welcomed by his sister, Nisreen, upon his arrival in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip after returning to Gaza following the long-awaited reopening of the Rafah border crossing, early Thursday, Feb. 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana)
Ayada Al-Sheikh is welcomed by his sister, Nisreen, upon his arrival in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip after returning to Gaza following the long-awaited reopening of the Rafah border crossing, early Thursday, Feb. 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana)

A limited number of Palestinians were able to travel between Gaza and Egypt on Sunday, after Gaza's Rafah crossing reopened after a two-day closure, Egyptian state media reported.

The vital border point opened last week for the first time since 2024, one of the main requirements for the US-backed ceasefire. The crossing was closed Friday and Saturday because of confusion about reopening operations.

Egypt's Al Qahera television station said that Palestinians began crossing in both directions around noon on Sunday. Israel didn't immediately confirm the information, according to The AP news.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to travel to Washington this week, though the major subject of discussion will be Iran, his office said.

Over the first four days of the crossing's opening, just 36 Palestinians requiring medical care were allowed to leave for Egypt, plus 62 companions, according to UN data, after Israel retrieved the body of the last hostage held in Gaza and several American officials visited Israel to press for the opening.

Palestinian officials say nearly 20,000 people in Gaza are seeking to leave for medical care that isn't available in the territory. Those who have succeeded in crossing described delays and allegations of mistreatment by Israeli forces and other groups involved in the crossing, including an Israeli-backed Palestinian armed group, Abu Shabab.

A group of Palestinian patients and wounded gathered Sunday morning in the courtyard of a Red Crescent hospital in Gaza’s southern city of Khan Younis, before making their way to the Rafah crossing with Egypt for treatment abroad, family members told The Associated Press.

Amjad Abu Jedian, who was injured in the war, was scheduled to leave Gaza for medical treatment on the first day of the crossing’s reopening, but only five patients were allowed to travel that day, his mother, Raja Abu Jedian, said. Abu Jedian was shot by an Israeli sniper while he doing building work in the central Bureij refugee camp in July 2024, she said.

On Saturday, his family received a call from the World Health Organization notifying them that he is included in the group that will travel on Sunday, she said.

“We want them to take care of the patients (during their evacuation),” she said. “We want the Israeli military not to burden them.”

The Israeli defense branch that oversees the operation of the crossing didn't immediately confirm the opening.

Heading back to Gaza A group of Palestinians also arrived Sunday morning at the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing to return to the Gaza Strip, Egypt’s state-run Al-Qahera News satellite television reported.

Palestinians who returned to Gaza in the first few days of the crossing's operation described hours of delays and invasive searches by Israeli authorities and Abu Shabab. A European Union mission and Palestinian officials run the border crossing, and Israel has its screening facility some distance away.

The crossing was reopened on Feb. 2 as part of a fragile ceasefire deal to halt the Israel-Hamas war.

The Rafah crossing, an essential lifeline for Palestinians in Gaza, was the only one in the Palestinian territory not controlled by Israel before the war. Israel seized the Palestinian side of Rafah in May 2024, though traffic through the crossing was heavily restricted even before that.

Restrictions negotiated by Israeli, Egyptian, Palestinian and international officials meant that only 50 people would be allowed to return to Gaza each day and 50 medical patients — along with two companions for each — would be allowed to leave, but far fewer people have so far crossed in both directions.

A senior Hamas official, Khaled Mashaal, said the militant group is open to discuss the future of its arms as part of a “balanced approach” that includes the reconstruction of Gaza and protecting the Palestinian enclave from Israel.

Mashaal said the group has offered multiple options, including a long-term truce, as part of its ongoing negotiations with Egyptian, Qatari and Turkish mediators.

Hamas plans to agree to a number of “guarantees,” including a 10-year period of disarmament and an international peacekeeping force on the borders, “to maintain peace and prevent any clashes,” between the militants and Israel, Mashaal said at a forum in Qatar’s capital, Doha.

Israel has repeatedly demanded a complete disarmament and destruction of Hamas and its infrastructure, both military and civil.

Mashaal accused Israel of financing and arming militias, like the Abu Shabab group which operates in Israeli military-controlled areas in Gaza, “to create chaos” in the enclave.

In the forum, Mashaal was asked about Hamas’ position from US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace. He didn’t offer a specific answer, but said that the group won’t accept “foreign intervention” in Palestinian affairs.

“Gaza is for the people of Gaza. Palestinians are for the people of Palestine,” he said. “We will not accept foreign rule.”


Three Deadly Attacks on Health Centers in Sudan's South Kordofan in Past Week, Says WHO

Sudanese families prepare to ride on trucks while on their way to Egypt through the Qustul border, after the crisis in Sudan's capital Khartoum, in the Sudanese city of Wadi Halfa, Sudan May 1, 2023. (Reuters)
Sudanese families prepare to ride on trucks while on their way to Egypt through the Qustul border, after the crisis in Sudan's capital Khartoum, in the Sudanese city of Wadi Halfa, Sudan May 1, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

Three Deadly Attacks on Health Centers in Sudan's South Kordofan in Past Week, Says WHO

Sudanese families prepare to ride on trucks while on their way to Egypt through the Qustul border, after the crisis in Sudan's capital Khartoum, in the Sudanese city of Wadi Halfa, Sudan May 1, 2023. (Reuters)
Sudanese families prepare to ride on trucks while on their way to Egypt through the Qustul border, after the crisis in Sudan's capital Khartoum, in the Sudanese city of Wadi Halfa, Sudan May 1, 2023. (Reuters)

Sudan's South Kordofan region has seen attacks on three health facilities in the past week alone, leaving more than 30 dead, the World Health Organization said Sunday, AFP reported.

"Sudan's health system is under attack again," WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on X, pointing out that, since February 3, "three health facilities were attacked in South Kordofan, in a region already suffering acute malnutrition".


Killing of Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi Raises Succession Questions in September Current

Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi (file photo, Reuters)
Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi (file photo, Reuters)
TT

Killing of Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi Raises Succession Questions in September Current

Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi (file photo, Reuters)
Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi (file photo, Reuters)

Since the killing of Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi, son of Libya’s late leader Moammar Gadhafi, in the western Libyan city of Zintan last Tuesday, urgent questions have surfaced over who might succeed him in leading the political current he represented.

The questions reflect Seif al-Islam’s symbolic status among supporters of the former regime, known as the September Current, a reference to backers of the September 1 Revolution led by Moammar Gadhafi in 1969.

Search for new leadership

Othman Barka, a leading figure in the National Current that backed Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi, said supporters of the former regime had yet to agree on a new leader but retained the organizational and political capacity to overcome the current phase and later move toward an alternative leadership framework.

Barka told Asharq Al-Awsat that ties to Gadhafi and his sons had been both emotional and political, but said that what he described as national work would continue. He said organized efforts would be made to reach a new leadership after the repercussions of the killing were overcome.

It remains unclear how Ahmed Gaddaf al-Dam, the political official in the Libyan National Struggle Front and one of the most prominent figures of the former regime, views the future leadership of the September Current following Seif al-Islam’s killing.

Sources close to him told Asharq Al-Awsat it was too early to speak of a new leadership while mourning ceremonies continued in Bani Walid.

Gaddaf al-Dam limited his public response to reposting a statement by those describing themselves as supporters of the Jamahiriya system on his Facebook page. He stressed unity, saying the killing would not lead to the fragmentation of the current and that September supporters remained a single, solid bloc.

In Bani Walid in western Libya, where Seif al-Islam was buried on Friday, shock was evident in the tone of Libyan activist Hamid Gadhafi, a member of the late leader’s tribe. He told Asharq Al-Awsat that clarity over the future leadership would emerge after about 10 days.

Possible successors

Libyan social media pages circulated the names of potential successors, including Seif al-Islam’s sister, Aisha, and his brother, Saadi. Libyan political analyst Ibrahim Belqasem rejected that view, telling Asharq Al-Awsat that the only remaining driver for supporters of the former regime would be the emergence of an unexpected, nonpolitical figure, describing it as an attempt to rescue the current.

After the fall of Gadhafi’s rule in 2011, following 42 years in power since the 1969 revolution, his supporters reemerged under the banner of the September Current. They are popularly known as the Greens, a reference to the Green Book.

Fragmented components and the absence of unified leadership mark the September Current. Seif al-Islam was widely seen as a central symbol among supporters, as well as among political figures and groups calling for the reintegration of former regime supporters into political life and for the recognition of their rights.

Nasser Saeed, spokesman for the Libyan Popular National Movement, one of the political arms of former regime supporters, said he expected a national political leadership to take shape in the coming phase to continue what he described as national work until the country stabilizes. Libyans can determine their future.

He said the emergence of a new leader or symbol was a matter for a later stage, stressing that the project was ideological rather than tied to individuals.

Saeed told Asharq Al-Awsat that Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi’s legacy lay in a unifying national project that rejected foreign intervention and sought to restore sovereignty and stability. He said Seif al-Islam had represented hope for overcoming the crisis and that his project extended the path of the September Revolution as a liberation choice that still retained supporters.

Structural challenges

Organizationally, the former regime cannot be confined to a single political framework. Its structures and leadership are diverse, including independent organizations and figures.

Among the most prominent are the Libyan Popular National Movement, founded in 2012, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Libya, formed in 2016 by politicians and tribal leaders in support of Seif al-Islam al-Gadhafi.

Their representatives increased their presence after 2020, whether in the Geneva forum that led to the formation of the Government of National Unity or in UN-sponsored structured dialogue tracks, before suspending participation following Seif al-Islam’s killing.

Voices within the September Current believe the killing marked a decisive turning point that cast heavy shadows over the ability of former regime supporters to forge unified leadership, citing structural difficulties rooted in historical disagreements between what is known as the old guard and supporters of change led by Seif al-Islam.

Khaled al-Hijazi, a prominent political activist in the September Current, agreed with that assessment, saying Seif al-Islam’s symbolic role had helped balance internal disputes due to his reformist project before the February 17 uprising.

Al-Hijazi told Asharq Al-Awsat that the loss of that symbolism could revive old divisions and complicate efforts to recreate an inclusive leadership, amid internal and external factors that make unification highly complex in the foreseeable future.

Barka said differences were natural, stressing that the current was not a closed party and believed in democracy and pluralism. He said generational competition did not amount to conflict and noted there had been no violent clashes between supporters of different paths within the September Current.

He concluded by saying that the diversity of approaches served a single goal: the freedom and prosperity of Libyan citizens and the building of a sovereign state capable of overcoming the crisis that has persisted since 2011.