Libyan National ArmyEdit

The Libyan National Army (LNA) is one of the principal armed components shaping Libya’s post-revolutionary landscape. Based in the eastern part of the country and led by Khalifa Haftar, it has operated as a de facto military force with its own chain of command, separate from the UN-recognized government in Tripoli for much of the 2010s and into the 2020s. The LNA has framed itself as the defender of national sovereignty, oil wealth, and a centralized state against broader militia networks and extremist groups. Its interventions have been pivotal in the enduring struggle to stabilize Libya, even as they have sparked significant controversy over legitimacy, civilian harm, and the longer-term political settlement of the country. The organization’s presence has become a central reference point in Libyan politics, regional geopolitics, and the broader debate over how Libya can recover from years of factional conflict.

From a regional perspective, the LNA’s rise must be understood alongside Libya’s fractious security environment, competing governments, and the involvement of external powers. While many international actors have supported different Libyan factions at various times, the LNA has consistently emphasized sovereignty, oil revenue security, and the containment of militias that emerged after the 2011 revolution. As Libya’s political map has shifted—most notably with periods of ceasefire and attempts at national reconciliation—the LNA has remained a major actor in determining which institutions hold real power on the ground and how the country’s security and economics are governed.

History

Origins and formation (2014–2015)

The Libyan National Army traces its public-facing existence to mid-2014, when Khalifa Haftar announced a campaign labeled Operation Dignity and formed a general command intended to unify eastern Libyan forces under a single banner. The LNA positioned itself as the regular army for the eastern region, seeking to restore order amid a proliferation of militias that had arisen after the collapse of the Qadhafi-era state.
The organization aligned itself with the Tobruk-based House of Representatives (Libya) and its political framework, presenting itself as the state’s legitimate military organ in the face of competing authorities in Tripoli and other hubs of militia power.

Eastern command, militias, and the battle for legitimacy

Over the ensuing years, the LNA consolidated control over large swaths of eastern Libya and key oil facilities, gaining de facto authority in areas such as Benghazi and parts of the Cyrenaica region. It fought against a range of militias and Islamist-leaning groups, arguing that its mission was to suppress extremism and restore security and constitutional order.
The LNA’s strategy relied on a centralized command culture, heavy air power, and ground operations intended to dislodge militias from urban centers. This approach earned the group both domestic support among segments seeking stability and international attention as a counterweight to destabilizing factions.

The Tripoli campaign, ceasefires, and shifting alliances (2019–2021)

In 2019–2020, the LNA mounted a sustained operation aimed at taking Tripoli, the base of the UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA). The campaign brought major urban combat to the capital but ultimately stalled, prompting a diplomatic stalemate and renewed international mediation efforts.
Following a sequence of ceasefires and negotiations, the political landscape began to tilt in favor of arrangements intended to unify the country’s institutions, though real power remained contested by competing authorities. The LNA retained significant influence in eastern Libya and continued to leverage control of energy infrastructure as a key bargaining chip in national talks.

Ongoing role and the path toward political settlement

In the years since, the LNA has continued to be a central actor in Libya’s security calculus, even as interim authorities and peace talks have tried to forge a unified framework for governance, security sector reform, and the management of oil revenues. The group’s presence has been a constant factor in regional security calculations, affecting neighboring states’ policies toward Libya and energy production.

Organization and leadership

Commander-in-chief: Khalifa Haftar has been the most prominent figure associated with the LNA. His leadership has shaped the force’s doctrine, priorities, and willingness to engage in major operations against rival authorities.
General Command and structure: The LNA operates under a centralized command structure intended to coordinate ground forces, air assets, and security personnel in the eastern corridor of the country. Its organizational framework emphasizes a strong, centralized decision-making process intended to deliver rapid and decisive action when required.
Relationship to Libyan political institutions: The LNA has positioned itself as the guardian of national sovereignty and a stabilizing force for the eastern region, while arguing that a strong, centralized state is necessary to prevent fragmentation, border threats, and the resurgence of militias.
External links and proxies: The LNA’s operations have often intersected with regional powers and external actors disinterested in a monopolized, centralized Libyan state. In some cases, this has included security and military support from foreign partners who view Libya through a lens of regional balance of power and energy security.

Campaigns and operations

Security in the east: The LNA has conducted operations aimed at consolidating control over eastern urban centers, security forces, and critical infrastructure. In this context, its role has been framed by its supporters as essential to neutralizing militias and preventing spillover of violence into neighboring regions.
Derna and Benghazi: Battles in eastern cities such as Benghazi and Derna were central to the LNA’s efforts to reassert state authority. These campaigns sought to reduce the influence of militias and Islamist-leaning groups and to reestablish governance and security parameters in these cities.
Energy infrastructure and oil strategy: The LNA’s control over oil facilities has given it leverage in negotiations with rival authorities and in shaping Libya’s broader economic fate. Its ability to protect or disrupt oil production has at times been a tool in political bargaining and security strategy.

International relations and external support

Regional backers: Egypt and the United Arab Emirates have been among the most vocal regional supporters of the LNA, viewing its centralized approach as a bulwark against instability and extremism on Libya’s doorstep. Their backing has included political support and, at times, military technology and diplomatic leverage.
Global actors: Russia has faced international attention for its reported role in assisting Haftar’s forces, including mercenary or advisory support, which has been cited by observers as contributing to the LNA’s operational capabilities.
Counterparts supporting the GNA: In parallel, Turkey, Italy, and some other Western and regional actors have backed the GNA-based government in Tripoli, focusing on political unity, maritime security, and counterterrorism collaboration. The divergent external commitments have made Libya a focal point of regional competition and international diplomacy.
Arms embargo and sovereignty: The international community has repeatedly stressed the importance of compliance with arms embargoes and the need for a political settlement that respects Libyan sovereignty, while acknowledging that external support for diverse factions has complicated the conflict and the path toward stability.

Controversies and debates

Legitimacy and governance: Proponents of the LNA argue that a strong, centralized authority is necessary to unify Libya, secure its borders, and safeguard its oil wealth. Critics contend that the LNA’s dominance risks entrenching a single power center and undermining democratic processes. In debates about legitimacy, observers weigh the risks of protracted factionalism against the dangers of a weak state perpetually hostage to militias.
Human rights and civilian harm: Various international monitors have reported civilian casualties and human rights concerns linked to armed operations in contested cities. Supporters of the LNA emphasize the necessity of decisive action to address extremism and criminality, arguing that stabilizing security is a prerequisite for any sustainable political order.
Oil politics and national wealth: Control over Libya’s energy sector has been a central driver of the conflict’s dynamics. Critics worry about the concentration of revenue and the potential for weaponization of oil facilities, while supporters argue that a unified state must have secure control of natural resources to fund reconstruction and public services.
Foreign influence and strategy: External backing for multiple Libyan factions has been cited as a major obstacle to peace. Proponents of the LNA contend that foreign actors pursue their own strategic interests, often at the expense of Libyan sovereignty, while supporters of the rival government argue that international cooperation is essential to counter security threats and stabilize the country.
The woke critique and its counterpoints: Critics from some Western liberal circles often characterize the LNA as undemocratic or oppression-favoring. From a perspective that prioritizes state-building, stability, and security of the oil sector, these critiques can overlook the realities of a still-fragile Libyan state where militias and armed groups play a dominant role. Proponents argue that the priority is to restore order, protect civilians from ongoing violence, and create a credible path to political reconciliation, with democracy advanced in the context of a secured, unified state rather than as a premature prerequisite for peace. The argument hinges on policy realism: in a country fractured by years of conflict, a strong, lawful authority can be a prerequisite for durable governance and economic recovery, even if its early steps involve tough decisions and hard power.