Protests break out in Libya as a result of the country's ties with Israel

After her meeting with her Israeli counterpart in an unofficial capacity, the Prime Minister of Libya has decided to suspend his Foreign Minister.

Protests have broken out in the predominantly Arab state of Libya as a result of a meeting between Israeli and Palestinian officials. Libya is a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause.

The Foreign Minister of Israel According to Eli Cohen, the meeting that he had with Najla al-Mangoush was a historic first step in the process of establishing connections.

Israel is making efforts to forge deeper ties with Arab and Muslim-majority countries, despite the fact that these nations do not formally recognize it.

However, Libya's Presidential Council, which is made up of representatives from all three of the country's provinces, stated that normalizing relations with Israel was against the law.

Ms. Mangoush has been charged of high treason by the Speaker's Office in parliament, and Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah has forwarded the matter to the appropriate authorities for inquiry.

Given that Israel was not known to be wooing Libya, a staunch foe and defender of the Palestinian struggle, especially under the former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the disclosure by Israel that conversations had taken place was surprising given that it was not known to be courting Libya. During his reign, numerous synagogues were burned down and thousands of Jewish people were driven from the country of Libya.

The statement was particularly remarkable in the amount of detail it provided, which may have been done with the intention of offsetting any anticipated denial from the Libyan side. Additionally, the statement identified and acknowledged Italian foreign minister Antonio Tajani for hosting the conference in Rome.

An unnamed Israeli official stated to the Reuters news agency on Monday that the meeting took place "at the highest levels" in Libya and that it lasted for more than an hour. This information was provided on Monday.

Mr. Cohen stated in his statement that he had seen Ms. Mangoush the previous week in Rome on the sidelines of a meeting, and that during their conversation they had discussed "the great potential for the relations" between Israel and Libya. The statement was released on Sunday.

According to him, they discussed the necessity of preserving Jewish legacy in Libya, including the renovation of synagogues and cemeteries, as well as Israeli assistance in the management of humanitarian concerns, agriculture, and water management.

However, according to Libya's foreign ministry, Ms. Mangoush turned down the opportunity to meet with Israeli personnel, and what actually occurred was "an unprepared, casual encounter during a meeting at Italy's foreign affairs ministry."

The ministry "renews its complete and absolute rejection of normalization" with Israel, according to a statement that also noted the encounter did not include "any discussions, agreements, or consultations."

Following the news of the meeting, demonstrations took place in several places, including the nation's capital of Tripoli. Although it appears that very few people participated in the demonstrations overall, roads were shut down, tires were set on fire, and demonstrators waved the Palestinian flag.

There has been unrest in Libya for many years, and the country is currently divided between the interim government that is internationally recognized and is based in Tripoli and a rival government that is based in the east.

In the event that a settlement between Israel and Libya were to be negotiated, it would be difficult due to the political divide that has remained between the two countries ever since Gaddafi was deposed 12 years ago.

In the city of Tobruk, located on the eastern coast of Libya, an alternative government is led by General Khalifa Haftar of the Libyan National Army (LNA).

In recent years, Israel has made efforts to establish diplomatic connections with nations in the Arab League with whom it does not already have formal relations. These countries range from moderate states to countries that have been Israel's adversaries in the past.

Since the year 2020, it has negotiated agreements known as the Abraham Accords, which have normalized its relations with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. These agreements were brokered by the United States. The Palestinians are outraged by the accords and have accused the Arab signatories of being traitors. The agreements have been met with indignation by the Palestinians.

On Sunday evening, the Presidential Council of Libya sent a message to the administration asking for "clarification" about what had taken place. The duties of the head of state, as well as those of the commander in chief of the armed forces, are delegated to the Presidential Council.

It was said in a letter that came from the organization that the meeting between the two foreign ministers "does not reflect the foreign policy of the Libyan state, does not represent the Libyan national constants and is considered a violation of Libyan laws which criminalise normalisation with the 'Zionist entity.'"

Additionally, it requested that Mr. Dbeibah "apply the law in the event that the meeting took place."

Yevgeny Prigozhin: Wagner defied Putin and now its leader may be dead

When Yevgeny Prigozhin and his Wagner troops launched their insurrection two months ago, Vladimir Putin made his feelings more than clear. He called it "treachery" and a "stab in the back" of Russia. He promised that the perpetrators would be punished.

So there was incredulity in Russia when they were not. When a deal was cut between Mr Prigozhin and the Kremlin to end the mutiny; when all the charges against the Wagner founder and his fighters were dropped, despite the fact that Russian servicemen had been killed during the murky but brief insurrection.

It made President Putin look weak.

Commenting on the agreed compromise (ending the mutiny in exchange for immunity from prosecution) one Russian newspaper commented: "This kind of compromise is normally made with political opponents. Never with criminals and terrorists. Does that mean we should view Mr Prigozhin now as a political figure?"

Suddenly things look rather different.

Exactly two months on, Mr Prigozhin is presumed dead after his private jet crashed and exploded in a field. Wagner commander Dmitry Utkin was on the same jet.

The Russian elite will shed few tears over Mr Prigozhin's reported demise. That goes for Russia's military leadership, whom Mr Prigozhin had publicly and vocally condemned and whom he demanded be sacked. The Wagner boss claimed that the so-called "March of Justice" (his euphemism for the insurrection) had not targeted the Kremlin but had instead been directed at Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and the Chief of the General Staff, Valery Gerasimov.

In reality, the Wagner mutiny had been a direct challenge to President Putin's authority and a humiliating 24 hours for the Kremlin. Mr Putin himself pointed out that the Russian state had been financing Wagner. Money had clearly not bought loyalty.

If this was an act of revenge by those in power, that sends two clear messages to Mr Prigozhin's loyalists and to anyone else in Russia who may have been contemplating armed resistance:

Don't try

Look what happens to those who do.

That means that President Putin could emerge from these dramatic events stronger domestically.

But what if Mr Prigozhin becomes a martyr? What if those who had pledged loyalty to him - and who are well-trained fighters - call for their own acts of revenge?

Grey Zone, a Telegram channel linked to Wagner, blamed Mr Prigozhin's reported death on "Russian traitors".

It did not clarify who it believed those traitors were and what Wagner's response would be.

If this crash was foul play, that will come as little surprise to many in Russia. Ever since the mutiny there has been feverish speculation about Mr Prigozhin's fate, about whether his actions really would be forgiven.

He must have known that. Yet, in recent weeks, as he jetted around on his private plane he clearly did not view air travel as a danger. Perhaps he believed that he was too powerful, too crucial a figure in today's Russia to be taken out?