Italy’s pragmatic diplomacy in Libya echoes France’s realpolitik for strategic gains

Amid Italy’s renewed diplomatic engagement in Libya, there are indications that the country is positioning itself to leverage the ongoing conflict in Libya for its own benefit, akin to the approach taken by France. While Italy’s involvement is ostensibly framed within the context of promoting stability and pursuing economic interests, there are underlying dynamics that suggest a broader strategic calculus at play.

Italy’s intensive visits by high-ranking officials, including Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, underscore a proactive effort to assert influence and secure advantageous partnerships within Libya’s evolving political landscape. These efforts align with Italy’s historical ties to Libya and its strategic interest in maintaining its diplomatic and military presence in the region, particularly given its proximity to Europe and its implications for issues such as migration and security.

However, observers note parallels between Italy’s approach and that of France, which has been criticized for pursuing its own interests in Libya, often at the expense of broader stability and reconciliation efforts. Like France, Italy’s engagement with various factions and leaders in Libya appears driven not only by genuine concerns for stability but also by a desire to advance its economic agenda and secure access to valuable resources, such as oil and gas.

The signing of significant agreements, such as the gas deal with the National Unity Government, underscores Italy’s economic interests in Libya. While framed as efforts to support the country’s reconstruction and development, these agreements also serve to advance Italy’s strategic position and economic prospects in the region.

Moreover, Italy’s interactions with key players like Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar raise questions about the extent to which Italy is willing to engage with actors associated with the conflict, potentially at the expense of broader peace initiatives. Haftar’s military prowess and control over key territories make him a significant power broker in Libya, and Italy’s engagement with him suggests a pragmatic approach that prioritizes strategic interests over ideological considerations. This approach mirrors France’s stance, as France has also been criticized for patronizing Haftar’s rule despite the United Nations’ refusal to recognize him as a legitimate Libyan leader.

This pragmatic approach, akin to France’s realpolitik stance in Libya, underscores Italy’s readiness to exploit the complexities of the conflict to its benefit. While Italy may publicly advocate for peace and stability, its actions suggest a pragmatic acknowledgment of the strategic opportunities inherent in the conflict, mirroring France’s approach.

In this context, Italy’s diplomatic maneuvers in Libya acquire heightened significance, reflecting not just a desire to influence the country’s trajectory but also a calculated effort to maximize Italy’s sway and interests in the region. As Italy endeavors to establish itself as a pivotal player in Libya’s post-conflict landscape, scrutiny of its actions and motivations becomes imperative, especially considering the parallels with France’s contentious involvement in the conflict.