The European Union has announced the launch of an alternative naval operation to Operation Sofia in the Mediterranean to monitor the United Nations arms embargo on Libya since 2011.
After the decision, the reactions rejecting which consider it as unfair, and an argument to besiege the GNA, as some have seen, and there are questions about how the European Union will monitor the land borders with Egypt from which arms flow to Hifter.
Foreign Ministry rejects
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs rejected the European Union’s decision to start a naval and air mission in the eastern Mediterranean to monitor the arms embargo on Libya
In a meeting with Al-Jazeera, Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohamed Alqiblawi said that the European Union should monitor the sea and land borders of Libya, because the weapons reach Hifter militias across the border with Egypt.
Justice and construction Party Chairman Mohamed Sawan said that the European Union’s decision to start naval and air missions to monitor the arms embargo is a suspicious decision, because it will only tighten the screws on the GNA, while weapons flow to Hifter militias across the land borders with Egypt.
Sawan added that the European Union ignores what is most important, which Hifter’s refusal to sign the ceasefire, which he personally announced in the first response to the Security Council’s decision to continue his military operations against the West of Libya without any consideration of the Council’s decisions.
Sawan asked why the European Union is taking this step while monitoring can be carried out by the United Nations only, stressing that monitoring should include land borders as well.
An incorrect approach
For its part, Turkey announced that the European Union’s approach to Libya is not correct, explained through a press conference held by the spokesperson for the Justice and Development Party, Omar Chilk, that there are some countries known to support Hifter forces from the air and the ground.
Chlik stressed that conducting a military surveillance operation at sea only would lead to tie the hands of one of the warring parties in Libya, while the other would be left free in the field of armaments, adding that the United Nations, not the European Union, should oversee the ban on sending weapons to Libya
The question that imposes itself is why did the European Union act with such speed and power after more than ten months of aggression launched by Hifter and his gang on the capital of a country, with the support of several countries, including a European state that is a member of the European Union?