Libya fragmentation deepens as Haftar camp divides

Libya’s political fragmentation is becoming increasingly pervasive, with internal divisions emerging within both centers of power in the east and west of the country.

According to Libya Observer on 9 April, a growing rift has emerged within Haftar’s inner circle, with Khaled Haftar openly criticizing the US-backed initiative led by presidential adviser Massad Boulos. Khaled reportedly described the proposal as operating “outside the framework of legitimacy,” warning against foreign-driven arrangements that risk prolonging the crisis.

The dispute appears to center on competing ambitions within the Haftar family itself. While the US plan reportedly envisions Saddam Haftar taking a leading political role, potentially heading a new Presidential Council, Khaled Haftar has positioned himself against the initiative, highlighting what observers describe as an escalating intra-family power struggle.

Tensions, however, are not limited to the Haftar camp. Following its presentation on 5 April to the High Council of State (HCS), the Boulos 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. The US initiative aims to merge Libya’s rival administrations into a unified executive authority by redistributing power among key political actors.

The emergence of internal divisions, both in the east and west, suggests that even actors traditionally seen as cohesive are becoming increasingly fragmented. According to The New Arab disputes have expanded beyond the traditional east-west divide, spreading within each camp, and thereby challenging the American plan led by presidential advisor Masad Boulos.

The US approach to Libya extends beyond political mediation. Washington is also focusing on economic governance, particularly public spending and control over energy revenues.

This strategy includes efforts to promote a unified national budget and coordinate financial institutions, as part of a broader attempt to stabilize the country while increasing influence over key economic sectors. Such initiatives, however, have also generated tensions among Libyan actors, as disagreements over representation and control of economic processes continue to fuel internal rivalries.

International organizations have repeatedly warned about the lack of progress in Libya’s political transition, noting that the country remains politically stalled despite renewed diplomatic efforts. The UN Security Council has similarly urged Libya’s rival leaders to work toward unity, emphasizing the need for coordinated and inclusive political solutions.

Recent analyses confirm that Libya’s political stalemate is deepening rather than easing. Competing agendas, both domestic and international, continue to prevent meaningful progress toward reunification.

The divisions within the Haftar camp illustrate this broader dynamic. Rather than acting as a unified bloc, key actors are increasingly competing for power and influence, often aligning with different external stakeholders.

Taken together, these developments highlight a central paradox: while international efforts to unify Libya are intensifying, the country’s internal fragmentation is becoming more pronounced.

The power struggle within the Haftar family is not merely a personal or factional dispute; it is emblematic of a wider political system in which authority is contested, alliances are fluid, and external initiatives struggle to produce lasting results.

Libya Observer, The New Arab, Maghrebi.org