History books mention that Caliph Omar ibn al-Khattab removed Khalid ibn al-Walid from commanding the army despite his military success. When asked why, he said: Including the meaning so that the soldiers do not believe that the victory is from Khaled. This was an important lesson in building a military institution in which loyalty is to the state and not to the people.
Therefore, states have been keen to build their military institutions on the doctrine of loyalty to the state and not to individuals. and to establish armies and security forces, And the exact on this understanding, Not to be founded on loyalty to persons, Or that the brigades be based on religious and sectarian affiliations.
Appeasement rather than adaptation
Since the Government of National Unity and the governments before it came to power, It worked to appease the leaders of the armed militias with money, And appointing those affiliated with its current in embassies and important jobs, Until these militias are fighting among themselves over their areas of influence inside the capital, Or even on the leading positions in the state that these militias see as within their influence, This policy has resulted in the inflated “ego” complex of the leaders of these militias, Battalions under the Ministries of Defense and Interior became “nominally” only and received their salaries from them, named after certain people.
It has also become common for people to name the neighborhoods of the capital after the leader of the militia that controls them. The soldiers of these formations even derive their military and police status from their affiliation with the militia commander. Instead of being affiliated with the police agencies in which they work, or the military battalions to which they belong, Rather, the phenomenon and policy of appeasement made the militia princes bigger than their regular leaders, The Chief of Staff of the Army has become like a civil society organization whose goal is to exert efforts to resolve the conflict between its battalions, The same applies to the Ministry of the Interior.
Clash of Wednesday and deterrence
Deterrence is one of the most important militias in the capital, It was founded on a sectarian background so that its leader is called the Sheikh instead of the commander as is customary in the army and police corps, And deterring a “hater” does not hide his religious orientations, He even entered into armed conflicts because of sectarian differences with armed formations that differ with him in sectarian orientation.
Hamza founded battalion (444). After being released from deterrence in mid-2020, Hamza, despite his young year and relatively small military rank, swelled with the inflation of his battalion, which gradually turned into an army within an army, The kidnapping of Hamza, commander of the four and its leader from Mitiga airport, constituted the fall of the concept of the state, Police and judicial work with the “deterrence” militia, which has no authority over anyone except the sheikhs of their sect.
And with the spread of the news, These militias revealed their ugly face, and entered into armed conflict within residential neighborhoods without any regard for the state, Nor to the humanitarian aspects, Nor to the rules of engagement recognized in professional military institutions that respect their citizens and adhere to the state system.
The government’s joy at fragile peace
The position of the Government of National Unity is no different from that of any foreign government, or the position of the UN mission at the time of the outbreak of armed clashes, This attitude is not surprising from a government that has been blackmailed more than once. She sees nothing wrong with succumbing to extortion or buying receivables, It has no governmental authority _almost_, Except for Tripoli services company Which after every war inside the capital is directed by the prime minister to clean the places of clashes, Perhaps the prime minister does not realize that this is at the heart of the company’s daily work and does not need instructions from its president, with the owner of the prime minister.
And also, The speech of the Prime Minister of the Government of National Unity reflected his policy in managing the country, He praised the conflicting parties, And he looked at the half full of the cup, He did not cry over the blood of those who fell as a result of this bloody conflict, Let this armed conflict end as other conflicts ended without igniting those who caused it to the arenas of justice and the rule of law, to receive his punishment.
The bottom line: The repercussions of this bloody conflict
It will be difficult to deter any adventurer from fabricating another battle inside the capital after this bloody battle. Which turned its two sides into heroes !! , This bloody battle also sent a message to all adventurers throughout the country motivating them to take irresponsible actions, As long as the last battle of the capital ended without criminal liability, Not even a legal conviction, And as this battle proved that weapons are not in the hands of the state, Even if its holders belong to the Ministries of Defense and Interior.
And here a logical question comes to us, Can this government supervise parliamentary and presidential elections? And weapons are in the hands of militias that are not subject to their authority?? , To branch out from this question another question, Is the government taking advantage of these events to prolong its life??
It makes no sense to ask them to hold elections at gunpoint!!.