Libya: US push to merge rival governments

According to Libya Observer,on 5 april, the High Council of State (HCS) head, Mohammed Takala, presented a controversial proposal attributed to the adviser to the US president, Massad Boulos. The initiative aims to end Libya’s political division by merging the rival governments in the east and west. Reports also indicate that UN envoy Hanna Tetteh may support the proposal if consensus is reached among Libyan parties.

The proposal reportedly envisions a redistribution of key positions between eastern and western factions, in an effort to break the current political stalemate. However, the plan has already faced significant opposition. Libya’s HCS rejected the initiative, warning that it risks bypassing established political processes and imposing an externally driven solution on Libyan actors.

Any attempt to unify Libya’s political system must contend with the structural nature of its instability. Libya remains split between rival governments in Tripoli and the east, each backed by competing political bodies and armed groups. This fragmentation has produced parallel institutions, contested legitimacy, and a persistent inability to establish a unified national authority.

The US initiative is not limited to political reconciliation, but is part of a broader strategy targeting Libya’s economic governance and energy sector.

Between March 24 and 26, the Chargé d’affaires of the U.S. Embassy in Libya, Jeremy Berndt, held a series of meetings with representatives from both the western-based government and eastern authorities. Washington is increasingly focusing on public spending mechanisms and control over financial flows, areas that have long been sources of contention between rival authorities.

But the US interests are also focused on gaining a more direct role in overseeing Libya’s oil revenues and financial institutions. Given that energy exports remain the backbone of Libya’s economy, influence in this sector translates into significant political leverage.

The international dimension of the crisis is also evident in the reaction of multilateral actors. Te United Nations has expressed concern that Libya remains politically stalled, despite renewed diplomatic efforts.

The UN warning reflects a broader skepticism: externally driven plans, however pragmatic, risk failing if they do not address underlying legitimacy issues or include key domestic stakeholders.

On one hand, the US proposal represents a pragmatic attempt to overcome years of political paralysis by forcing a power-sharing arrangement. On the other, it risks reproducing the very dynamics that have sustained Libya’s instability: elite bargaining, fragmented authority, and limited public legitimacy.

Ultimately, the success of any unification effort will depend not only on institutional design, but on whether it can reconcile competing interests, both domestic and international, while restoring a minimum level of trust in the political process.

Until then, Libya’s “unity” may remain more a negotiated balance of power than a genuine foundation for stability.

Libya Observer, Maghrebi.org