How does Haftar's relationship with the US compare to his ties with Russia

Introduction

Khalifa Haftar’s relationships with the United States and Russia are markedly different, with his ties to Russia being significantly stronger and more supportive of his position in Libya.

Relationship with Russia

Haftar’s connection with Russia is characterized by:

Strong Military Support: Russia has provided substantial military aid to Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA), including:

Weapons and military equipment

Deployment of Wagner Group mercenaries

Training for LNA forces

Diplomatic Backing: Russia has shown increasing diplomatic support for Haftar:

High-level meetings with Russian officials, including President Putin and Defense Minister Shoigu

Russia’s insistence that Haftar must have a role in Libya’s leadership

Strategic Partnership: Russia views Haftar as a key ally in its broader geopolitical strategy:

Using Libya as a springboard for power projection in North Africa

Securing access to Libya’s oil reserves and strategic ports

Relationship with the United States

In contrast, Haftar’s relationship with the U.S. is more complex and less supportive

Historical Ties

Haftar had connections with the U.S. in the past, including:

Alignment with U.S.-supported opposition groups in the late 1980s

Residence in the U.S. under a refugee program

Shifting U.S. Stance: The U.S. position on Haftar has been inconsistent:

Initial opposition to Haftar’s military offensive against Tripoli

A sudden shift under the Trump administration, with Trump recognizing Haftar’s role in fighting terrorism

Recent Diplomatic Efforts: The U.S. has made attempts to engage with Haftar:

High-level visits by CIA Director William Burns and Assistant Secretary of State Barbara Leaf

Efforts to persuade Haftar to cut ties with Russia and support elections

Lack of Substantial Support

Unlike Russia, the U.S. has not provided significant military or financial backing to Haftar

Key Differences

Level of Support

Russia provides tangible military and political support, while U.S. engagement is primarily diplomatic.

Strategic Alignment

Haftar’s goals align more closely with Russian interests in the region.

Consistency

Russia has maintained consistent support for Haftar, while U.S. policy has been more erratic.

International Positioning

Russia’s backing of Haftar challenges U.S. influence in Libya and the broader region.

Conclusion

Haftar’s relationship with Russia is characterized by strong, consistent support and strategic alignment, while his ties with the U.S. are more tenuous and marked by diplomatic efforts to reduce Russian influence. This disparity has significant implications for the balance of power in Libya and the wider geopolitical landscape of North Africa.