By: Hosam Al-Wheshy*
Between two opposites, neither is right, lies the unrealistic crisis
that breaks any accord under glossy vague slogans that infect visions with hemiplegia, one demands all ministries at the basket, the other demands all parties around the Presidential Council (PC) table to give up all ministries.
What is their definition of reconciliation, regardless of the government? Will this government be adopted? Or will we return back to square one and see another faction council or return to square zero where salvation conflicted with interim and remaind the current division with the cessation of public secession? Or will we see “schism”, or military victory in favor of one faction after fierce civil war from which the Islamic State could be the only conqueror, despite that one faction prevail over the other?
If the member of the PC, Omar Al-Aswad’s concept of reconciliation is that all rivals give up their political gains, then why all that armed clamor for more than a year, if others around the Presidential Council table think the same?
Thinking the same as Omar Al-Aswad, basically, ends all reasons for the agreement process, compatibles don’t have dispute points foremost. And if the deputy chief of the PC, Ali Al-Qatrany’s definition of consensus means acquiring, as much political gains as possible, but even his definition is based in eliminating all other parties and gets them out of the political scene worthless, then why all that gratification and controversy supported by arms across wide fronts all over Libya?
Such definition only leads to sole road, which is “premeditation and intransigence non- consensus”. Participating in a dialogue process dreaming that others will follow virtue and asceticism as a caliber means that you are a foul. Participating in a dialogue seeking to acquire all portfolios to distribute them between affiliates means you are a fool too, or in another words, ignorant.
The only fruitful controversy not that evolving around the two disturbed definitions of consensus, but around the erect concept stating that the dialogue is a process that puts all contradictions in a singular mold, when all parties to the previous conflict and recent peace leaning parties understand that the country can afford them all without living through idealism or extremism that doesn’t recognize others, with taking into account the current circumstances the country is going through.
Fruitful controversy should be based on realistic background that no one is capable of controlling the other’s territories, and that continuity of bloodshed will increase the space under control of that common enemy, who seeks to end them all. Prolific controversy should consider that the Libyan economy is collapsing, and people are suffering, social fabric is disturbed and can afford no more tampering.
Productive argument means all those gathered inside the Presidential Council chamber should be aware that their country’s future depends on them, without wading into idealism, which is outside politics frame, and without exclusion.
*A Libyan Writer and Journalist