Order Code RL33142
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Libya: Background and
U.S. Relations
Updated January 25, 2006
Christopher M. Blanchard
Analyst in Middle Eastern Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Libya: Background and U.S. Relations
Summary
The relationship between the United States and Libya has been strained and
hostile for much of the last 35 years, but has recently shown signs of improvement.
Following the Libyan government’s December 2003 decision to eliminate its
weapons of mass destruction and long range missile programs, a number of bilateral
diplomatic exchanges have taken place, and the termination of U.S. economic
sanctions on Libya has paved the way for a renewal of investment by U.S. oil, gas,
and energy service firms in Libya’s under-capitalized energy sector. Several visits
to Libya by Bush Administration officials and Members of Congress since 2004 have
raised expectations of a formal reestablishment of normal relations between the U.S.
and Libya in the near future, including the removal of the last remaining sanctions
associated with Libya’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism.
Bilateral intelligence and counter-terrorism cooperation has contributed to a
gradual U.S.-Libyan re-engagement on security matters since late 2001. However,
continuing U.S. concerns thus far have delayed the recision of Libya’s designation
as a state sponsor of terrorism. The designation remains the most significant obstacle
to the full resumption of bilateral relations. Other issues of interest to the United
States include Libyan political and economic reform efforts, steps to address long
standing human rights concerns, and Libyan engagement with Arab and African
states.
This report provides background information on Libyan history and U.S.-Libyan
relations; profiles Libyan leader Muammar Al Qadhafi; discusses current political
and economic reform efforts; and reviews current issues of potential congressional
interest. It will be updated periodically to reflect important developments. For
information about Libya see CRS Report RL32604, Libya: Legislative Basis for U.S.
Economic Sanctions
, by Dianne E. Rennack, and CRS Report RS21823, Disarming
Libya: Weapons of Mass Destruction
, by Sharon A. Squassoni and Andrew Feickert.

Contents
Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background and Recent History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The Qadhafi Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
The Green Book and Qadhafi’s Ideology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Terrorism and Confrontation with the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Qadhafi’s Arab-Israeli Intransigence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
International Isolation and Signs of Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Current Issues in U.S.-Libyan Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Reestablishing Normal Bilateral Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Post-9/11 Counter-terrorism Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Compensation for Victims of Libyan-Sponsored Attacks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Libya’s State Sponsor of Terrorism Designation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Outstanding Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Alleged Assassination Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Trial of Bulgarian Nurses and International HIV Victims Fund . . . . . . . . . 10
The Return of U.S. Oil Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Current Congressional Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Political and Economic Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Muammar Al Qadhafi: A Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Political Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Government Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
The “Authority of the People” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Opposition Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Exiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
The Muslim Brotherhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Political Reform and Human Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Human Rights Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Legal and Institutional Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Energy and the Libyan Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Oil Reserves and Production Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
New Exploration and Production Sharing Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Natural Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Military Profile and WMD Disarmament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
The Libyan Military . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Structure, Training, and Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Arms Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
WMD Programs and Disarmament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Nuclear, Chemical, and Ballistic Missile Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Termination of WMD and Missile Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Motives for Disarmament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
International Controls and Inspections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Further Reading and Historical Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Appendix A: Libya’s Pre-Qadhafi History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Libya’s Colonial Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
The Ottoman Empire and Qaramanli Dynasty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
“The Shores of Tripoli” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Italian Annexation and Post War Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Independence and Monarchy, 1951-1969 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
List of Figures
Figure 1. Map of Libya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
List of Tables
Table 1. Libyan Military Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Libya: Background and U.S. Relations
Recent Developments
U.S. oil producers Amerada Hess, ConocoPhillips, and Marathon Oil (the
“Oasis group”) reached an agreement with Libyan authorities to resume operations
in Libya after a 19-year hiatus. Libyan officials expressed confidence that the return
of the Oasis group companies would support Libya’s efforts to secure removal from
the U.S. state sponsors of terrorism list. On October 2, Libya announced the results
of a second round of post-sanctions bidding for new oil exploration and production
agreements. European and Asian companies won most of the licenses, with U.S.-
based Exxon-Mobil joining first round U.S. winners Occidental Petroleum, Amerada
Hess and ChevronTexaco.
On December 25, 2005, Libya’s Supreme Court overturned the convictions and
death sentences of five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor accused of infecting
over 400 Libyan children with HIV during the 1990s. The court’s actions followed
the announcement of plans to create a support fund to provide relief for the infected
children and their families. Public protests in Libya following the announcements
led to four arrests, and Libyan authorities initially suspended negotiations concerning
the planned fund but have re-engaged with Bulgarian officials over financial relief
terms. The foreign medical professionals remain in Libyan custody and will be retried
by a lower court during 2006. In October 2005, President Bush called for their release
in a joint appearance with Bulgarian President Georgi Parvanov.
On September 28, President Bush waived two Arms Export Control Act
restrictions on the export of defense articles to Libya, which remains designated as
a state sponsor of terrorism. The waiver will allow U.S. companies to possibly
participate in Libya’s efforts to destroy its abandoned chemical weapons stockpiles.
The waiver also allows the refurbishment of eight C-130 planes purchased by Libya,
but withheld from delivery for the last thirty years. The President did not indicate
whether or when the aircraft might be delivered. The C-130s remain in storage at
Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Georgia.
Following a September 2005 meeting with Libyan Foreign Minister Abd Al
Rahman Shalqam, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated that the United
States is committed to broadening its relationship with Libya, but she stopped short
of calling for the full normalization of U.S.-Libyan relations. In a nationally televised
address on October 1, Libyan leader Muammar Al Qadhafi called for the
establishment of “friendship with the U.S.” Many observers expect that Libya will
be removed from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism in the near future.


CRS-2
Background and Recent History
The north African territory that now composes the Great Socialist People’s
Libyan Arab Jamahirriya1 has a long cultural history as a center of Phoenician,
Carthaginian, Roman, Berber, and Arab civilizations. Modern Libya’s distinct
regions and tribally-influenced society create a complex political environment that
is made up of diverse constituencies from northwestern Tripolitania, northeastern
Cyrenaica, and the more remote southwestern Fezzan (see Figure 1). Significant
economic and political changes have occurred since Libya became independent in
1951. These changes have been fueled by the country’s emergence from Italian
colonization, the discovery of vast oil and natural gas reserves, and the domination
of political life by the authoritarian government of Muammar Al Qadhafi,2 who
overthrew the Libyan monarchy on September 1, 1969. The legacies of anti-Italian
insurgency and World War II combat, international pressures associated with the
Cold War, and complex relationships with Arab and African neighbors have all
shaped the country’s development. See Appendix A for a discussion of Libya’s pre-
Qadhafi history, other background information, and a list of historical resources.
Figure 1. Map of Libya
1 The Arabic word jamahirriya means “state of the masses” or “peoples’ authority” and was
added to Libya’s official name in 1978 by Col. Muammar Qadhafi to reflect Libya’s
nominally decentralized political system. The adjective ‘great’ was added in 1986.
2 Multiple spellings of Muammar Al Qadhafi’s first and last names are used in the Western
press. This report uses a phonetic spelling; others reflect varying pronunciations.

CRS-3
The Qadhafi Era

On September 1, 1969, a cabal of Libyan military officers led by army Captain
Muammar Al Qadhafi seized important government institutions in the eastern city
of Benghazi and abolished the Libyan monarchy. Facing negligible internal
resistance, the leadership of the Movement, known as the Revolutionary Command
Council (RCC), established authority and announced that it would direct the activities
of a new cabinet. The RCC also made statements affirming Libya’s Arab and Islamic
identity and its support for the Palestinian people. After renaming the country the
Libyan Arab Republic, the RCC announced the promotion of Captain Qadhafi to
Colonel and named him commander in chief of Libya’s armed forces.3 Like Qadhafi,
the other members of the RCC were pan-Arabist and socialist ideologues from rural
and somewhat marginalized communities. The United States did not oppose the 1969
coup, as the RCC initially presented an anti-Soviet and reformist platform.
Colonel Qadhafi and the RCC focused intensely in their early years in power on
taking steps to safeguard “national independence” and consolidate their rule through
populist and nationalist political and economic programs. The members of the RCC
were determined to secure the immediate and full withdrawal of British and U.S.
forces from military bases in Libya, which occurred on March 28 and June 11, 1970,
respectively. Italian expatriates were expelled and their assets were confiscated on
October 7, 1970. All three dates subsequently were declared national holidays. The
new government also pressured U.S. and other foreign oil companies to renegotiate
oil production contracts and cede a larger share of production revenues. Some
British and U.S. oil operations eventually were nationalized. In the early 1970s, the
RCC gradually reversed its stance on its initially icy relationship with the Soviet
Union and extended Libyan support to revolutionary, anti-Western, and anti-Israeli
movements across Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. These policies
contributed to a rapid souring of U.S.-Libyan political relations, although economic
relations, particularly U.S. oil purchases from Libya, remained steady.
The Green Book and Qadhafi’s Ideology. Beginning in the early-1970s,
Muammar Al Qadhafi and his regime carried out drastic and frequent reorganizations
of Libyan political and economic life in line with his “Third Universal Theory.” The
theory, which blends pan-Arab, Islamic, and socialist values, is enshrined in
Qadhafi’s three volume Green Book. The redistribution of land and wealth, the
allocation of fluctuating oil revenues, and a near total decentralization of political
institutions reshaped Libya’s social landscape in line with Qadhafi’s principles.
These trends also helped Qadhafi and his supporters maintain political control.
Overseas, Qadhafi promoted his political and economic “Third International Theory”
as an alternative to the capitalist and communist systems of the United States and the
Soviet Union for the developing countries of the Third World. Qadhafi’s
confrontation with the United States and was both a catalyst for and product of the
Libyan government’s violent and destabilizing activities abroad, Qadhafi’s
ideological fervor, and his regime’s gradual drift into the Soviet sphere of influence.
3 Over time, Qadhafi stopped using his military title and identifying himself with a formal
government position. Although he retains de facto control over Libya’s affairs, he is now
commonly referred to as the “Guide of the Revolution” or “Brother Leader.”

CRS-4
Terrorism and Confrontation with the United States. In line with his
ideological precepts, Muammar Al Qadhafi long justified Libyan backing for anti-
colonial, separatist, and Islamist movements and terrorist groups around the world
as legitimate support for parties seeking self determination. The United States and
others categorically and continuously rejected Libya’s policies as unacceptable
sponsorship of illegitimate terrorism and subversive violence. In the 1970s and
1980s, U.S. officials cited evidence of training camps and other Libyan government
support for a panoply of terrorist groups including the Abu Nidal organization, the
Red Army Faction, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General
Command (PFLP-GC), and the Irish Republic Army. Libyan-sponsored bombings
and assassinations also drew sharp international criticism, especially killings of
Libyan expatriate dissidents and the bombings of Pan Am Flight 103 and UTA Flight
772 in the late 1980s. In the 1990s, Libyan-trained individuals led brutal rebel
movements across Africa, including Foday Sankoh’s Revolutionary United Front in
Sierra Leone and Charles Taylor’s National Patriotic Front of Liberia.4
Qadhafi’s Arab-Israeli Intransigence. The Arab-Israeli conflict was
another particularly pointed source of tension between the United States and
Qadhafi: Libya remained distinctly opposed to negotiation or reconciliation with
Israel throughout the Cold War era and the 1990s, promoting armed struggle as the
only viable means to end Israel’s occupation of territory it captured from neighboring
Arab states in 1967. At times, Qadhafi’s position led to deep bilateral rifts between
Libya and Egypt, particularly under Anwar Sadat, as well as confrontations with
P.L.O. leader Yasir Arafat. Qadhafi and his security services provided support,
training, and safe harbor for Palestinian terrorist groups until the late 1990s. After
a temporary reconciliation with Arafat during the first Palestinian intifada in 1987,
Qadhafi returned to voicing complete opposition to the Oslo peace process and called
for Arab leaders to avoid further recognition of or negotiation with Israel.
In recent years, Qadhafi has maintained his opposition to Arab engagement with
Israel in face of continued Israeli occupation and settlement activity, but he also has
called for reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian people within a single
state, which he proposes be called ‘Isratine.’ At a World Economic Forum meeting
in Jordan in May 2005, Qadhafi’s politically active son, Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi,
stated that he had “no problem dealing and speaking with Israelis,” which led some
observers to speculate that Libya was preparing to change its position with regard to
establishing normal relations with Israel. Libyan Foreign Ministry officials
subsequently distanced themselves from the younger Al Qadhafi’s statements and
reaffirmed official Libyan support for a “one state” solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. In a 2005 interview, Libyan Foreign Minister Abd Al Rahman Shalqam
denied that Qadhafi planned to visit Israel in the wake of Israel’s unilateral
4 See Paul Richards, “War as Smoke and Mirrors: Sierra Leone 1991-2,1994-5,1995-6,”
Anthropological Quarterly, Vol. 78, Issue 2, Spring 2005; Douglas Farah, Blood from
Stones
, Broadway Books, New York, 2004, pp.23-25; The Economist, “Foday Sankoh,” Vol.
368, Aug., 9, 2003, p. 73; Economist, “Qaddafi Says Farewell, Arabia, and Sets His Sights
on Africa,” Vol. 351, Apr. 24, 1999; I. Abdullah and P. Muana, “The Revolutionary United
Front of Sierra Leone,” in C. Clapham (ed.) African Guerrillas, London: James Currey,
1998, pp. 179-93; Scott Anderson, “The Makeover,” New York Times Magazine, Jan. 19,
2003; and Douglas Farah, “Gaddafi ‘Meddling’ in Africa,” Washington Post, Aug. 16, 2003.

CRS-5
disengagement from the Gaza Strip, and argued that the disengagement had not
influenced Libya’s position toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.5
International Isolation and Signs of Change. Following the imposition
of U.N. sanctions in the aftermath of the Libyan-sponsored airliner bombings of the
late 1980s, Libya entered a period of increasing international isolation. The
compounded effects of a loss of oil revenue, restrictions on the travel of senior
officials, an international air travel ban, and an arms embargo brought significant
pressure on Qadhafi and his government. Signs of change began to emerge in 1999
when Libya agreed to pay compensation for the bombing of UTA Flight 772 and
allow two intelligence agents to stand trial for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.
Qadhafi’s offers of counterterrorism and intelligence cooperation following the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and his late 2003 decision to dismantle
Libya’s weapons of mass destruction and long range missile development programs
marked further steps toward new relationships with the United States and the
international community. Qadhafi also has participated in peacemaking efforts in a
number of African conflicts, including hosting and subsidizing U.N. World Food
Program aid flights to Darfur, Sudan from Libyan territory. New oil production
agreements and gradually improving political relations with the United States and a
number of European and Asian countries have demonstrated the benefits of Libya’s
apparent new orientation (see below).
Current Issues in U.S.-Libyan Relations
The relationship between the United States and Libya has been confrontational
for much of the last thirty-five years, but has shown signs of positive change since
late 2003. Libyan government support for international terrorism, its regional
intervention, and its now-abandoned pursuit of weapons of mass destruction proved
to be persistent points of contention until recently. The Libyan government has long
taken issue with what it regards as unbalanced U.S. military and financial support for
Israel and what it describes as unwarranted U.S. intervention in the affairs of Arab
states. In the past, these differences led to a number of confrontations and
engagements between U.S. and Libyan armed forces, the imposition of economic and
diplomatic sanctions by the United States, and some limited, covert efforts at regime
change on the part of the United States.6
Today, Libya has begun a process of reconciliation and re-engagement with the
United States after this long period of confrontation. The Libyan government’s
current policies of gradual economic liberalization and limited political reform are
designed to improve economic conditions and the legitimacy of the Qadhafi regime
5 Al-Hayah (London), “Shalqam: Washington Will Lift Libya’s Name From the List of
Countries Sponsoring Terrorism Within Months,” Sept. 24, 2005. Foreign Broadcast
Information Service (FBIS) Document GMP20050924706004.
6 Joseph T. Stanik, El Dorado Canyon: Reagan’s Undeclared War with Qaddafi, Naval
Institute Press, 2003; Bernard Gwertzman, “Shultz Advocates U.S. Covert Programs to
Depose Qaddafi,” New York Times, Apr. 28, 1986; and Clifford Krauss, “Failed Anti-
Qaddafi Effort Leaves U.S. Picking Up the Pieces,” New York Times, Mar. 12, 1991.

CRS-6
in the eyes of the Libyan people and the international community. Current issues in
U.S.-Libyan relations include negotiations regarding Libya’s continued designation
as a state sponsor of terrorism, Libyan progress on political and economic reform,
humans rights issues, and the final payment of the Pan Am Flight 103 settlement. A
number of U.S. oil companies have successfully bid for reentry into Libya’s energy
market, and U.S. businesses have resumed trade relations with Libyan firms. The
recent announcement of a retrial for five Bulgarian nurses and one Palestinian doctor
accused of deliberately infecting over 400 Libyan children with HIV has been
welcomed by the United States, and U.S. officials have participated in multilateral
discussions concerning the establishment of a relief fund for the victims and their
families.
Reestablishing Normal Bilateral Relations
The Bush Administration has taken a series of gradual steps to reestablish
normal relations between the United States and Libya since Libya’s December 2003
decision to relinquish its weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs.
! On February 11, 2004, the United States opened a two-person
interest section at the Belgian embassy in Tripoli, which was
expanded to a larger Liaison Office in June 2004. The White House
announced several measures on February 26, 2004, including
recisions on bans on using U.S. passports to travel to or through
Libya, and U.S. citizen expenditures in Libya.
! On September 20, 2004, President Bush issued Executive Order
13357 that ended most economic sanctions against Libya, allowed
air flights between the two countries, permitted Libyan purchases of
U.S.-built aircraft, and released approximately $1 billion in Libyan
assets that had been frozen in the United States. However, Libya
remains on the state sponsors of terrorism list, which continues to
restrict transfers of military equipment, weapons, or dual-use items,
and the availability of foreign aid, if warranted.7
! On September 28, 2005, President Bush issued two waivers of Arms
Export Control Act restrictions on the export of defense articles to
Libya. The waivers allow U.S. companies to “possibly participate”
in Libya’s efforts to destroy its chemical weapons and precursor
stockpiles, along with the refurbishment of eight C-130 transport
planes purchased by Libya in the 1970s that have been withheld for
the last thirty years.8 The President did not indicate whether or when
the aircraft might be delivered.
7 For a detailed discussion of remaining U.S. sanctions on Libya, see CRS Report RL32604,
Libya: Legislative Basis for U.S. Economic Sanctions, by Dianne E. Rennack.
8 The C-130s remain in storage at Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Georgia. They reportedly
remain militarily useful, provided that they receive necessary technology upgrades and
repairs. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “Bound to the Ground: Libyan C-130s Still Parked
30 Years After Purchase,” May 2, 2004.

CRS-7
Recent high-level contacts among Members of Congress, Bush Administration
officials, and Libyan officials have fueled speculation that Libya may be removed
from the state sponsors of terrorism list in the near future and that a full
reestablishment of military, economic, and other relations could follow. During an
August 2005 meeting in Libya with Senator Richard Lugar, Qadhafi reportedly
extended an invitation for U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and President
Bush to visit Libya.9 After a September 2005 meeting with Libyan Foreign Minister
Abd Al Rahman Shalqam, Secretary Rice stated that the United States is committed
to broadening its relationship with Libya following Libya’s “historic decision” to
disarm, but she stopped short of calling for the full normalization of U.S.-Libyan
relations.10 On October 1, Qadhafi called in a nationally televised address for the
establishment of “friendship with the U.S.”11 He also has urged other Arab
governments to extend full counter-terrorism cooperation to the United States.
Post-9/11 Counter-terrorism Cooperation
Muammar Al Qadhafi immediately condemned the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks as “horrific and gruesome” and his government has taken steps to improve
U.S.-Libyan counter-terrorism cooperation and intelligence sharing since 2001. The
Libyan government has long perceived Al Qaeda as a threat because members of
Libya’s Islamist opposition have been linked to Al Qaeda and other foreign jihadist
organizations (see below). This has contributed to Libya’s willingness to expand
counter-terrorism cooperation with U.S. authorities. Qadhafi has characterized
members of Al Qaeda as “heretics” in prominent public statements and has described
his government’s intelligence and counter-terrorism cooperation with the United
States as “irrevocable.” In June 2005, U.S. Undersecretary of the Treasury for
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey traveled to Libya to encourage
officials to incorporate counter-terrorist financing and anti-money laundering controls
into their financial sector reform program.12 U.S. officials reportedly hope to extend
counter-terrorism assistance to Libya in the future under the framework of the
interagency Trans-Sahara Counter Terrorism Initiative (TSCTI), which currently
involves all of Libya’s neighbors, except Sudan and Egypt.13
Libya has taken direct action to limit the activities of known Al Qaeda
associates within its borders, including elements of its own Islamist opposition allied
with Al Qaeda. In October 2004, Libya transferred the deputy commander of the
Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) Amari Saifi, also known as Abderrazak
Al Para, to Algeria, where he was wanted on terrorism charges. Saifi had been in the
custody of the rebel Chadian Movement for Democracy and Justice, with whom
Qadhafi reportedly maintains a close relationship.
9 Agence France Presse, “Kadhafi Invites Bush to Libya,” Aug. 21, 2005.
10 U.S. Department of State, Secretary Condoleezza Rice’s Remarks with Libyan Foreign
Minister Abd al-Rahman Shalqam, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York, Sept. 17, 2005.
11 Mail and Guardian, “Libya Seeks ‘Friendship’ with U.S.”, Oct. 1, 2005.
12 Reuters, “As Ties Warm, U.S. Pushes Libya on Terror Financing,” Reuters, July 13, 2005.
13 Ann Tyson, “U.S. Pushes Anti-Terrorism in Africa,” Washington Post, July 26, 2005.

CRS-8
Compensation for Victims of Libyan-Sponsored Attacks
On December 21, 1988, a bomb exploded on Pan Am flight 103 en route from
London to New York, killing all 244 passengers and 15 crew on board and another
11 people in the town of Lockerbie, Scotland. On November 14, 1991, the United
States and Scotland indicted two Libyan intelligence agents for their alleged roles in
the bombing: Abd Al Baset Ali Al Megrahi and Al Amin Khalifah Fhimah. Under
a U.N.-negotiated agreement, Fhimah and Al Megrahi were tried on murder charges
under Scottish law in The Hague beginning in 1999. Fhimah was acquitted and Al
Megrahi was convicted: he is currently serving a life sentence in a Scottish prison.
Some observers in the United Kingdom, including lead Scottish Lockerbie
investigator Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, have recently questioned Al Megrahi’s
conviction and argued that the Lockerbie investigation should be reexamined.14
In August 2003, Libya accepted responsibility for the bombing of Pan Am Flight
103 and agreed to a final settlement that calls for successive payments to the families
of victims following the termination of U.N. and U.S. sanctions. As of October
2005, Libya has issued payments of $4 million per victim following the termination
of U.N. sanctions in September 2003 and a second payment of $4 million to each
victim following the termination of bilateral U.S. sanctions in September 2004.
Libya is withholding a final payment of $2 million in a third party escrow account
until the United States removes Libya’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism.
On April 21, 2004, Libya extended its unilaterally set deadline for U.S. action and
payment to the victims’ families to July 22, 2004. Libya extended the deadline a
second time to September 22, 2004. Lawyers and U.S. negotiators secured a third
extension to April 30, 2005; however, Libya has frozen the final round of $2 million
payments (worth an estimated $500 million) and reasserted its demand for removal
from the U.S. state sponsors of terrorism list.15
Compensation claims for U.S. victims of the 1986 bombing of the La Belle
nightclub in Berlin16 and the 1989 Libyan-sponsored bombing of a French passenger
aircraft17 are pending in U.S. courts (see Current Congressional Issues below). Libya
has made payments to German and French victims for the bombings and has called
14 Sunday Times (London), “Focus: Was Justice Done?” Oct. 23, 2005; Magnus Linklater,
“It’s Time To Look Again at Lockerbie,” The Times (London), Oct. 26, 2005.
15 Associated Press, “Libyan Central Bank Takes Back Last Batch of Compensation Money
Due to Lockerbie Victims,” Apr. 9, 2005.
16 Two U.S. servicemen, Sgt. Kenneth T. Ford and Sgt. James E. Goins, were killed in the
bombing and 80 other U.S. servicemen and women were injured. Some were permanently
disabled. See Robert Lee Beecham, et al., v. Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 01
CIV 02243, District of Columbia Circuit.
17 On Sept. 19, 1989, a mid-air explosion killed 171 passengers and crew of the French
airline UTA flight 772 over Niger in western Africa, including seven U.S. citizens. On Mar.
10, 1999, a French court found six Libyans guilty in absentia for bombing the DC-10
aircraft. Libya paid a total of $33 million in compensation to the victim’s families in July
1999. France re-negotiated the settlement in 2003 and received about $1 million for each
victim. See Robert L. Pugh, et al. v. The Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, et al.,
Civ. A. No. 02-2026, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

CRS-9
for compensation to be paid by the United States to Libyan victims of the 1986
retaliatory U.S. air strikes on Libya, which killed civilians, including Muammar Al
Qadhafi’s adopted infant daughter.
Libya’s State Sponsor of Terrorism Designation
Libya’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism restricts any transfers of
military equipment, weapons, or dual-use items from the United States and requires
the executive branch to use its voice and vote to oppose loans and assistance to Libya
by international financial institutions. The state sponsor designation remains the most
significant obstacle to the resumption of full economic and military relations between
the United States and Libya, although significant counter-terrorism cooperation and
growing commercial ties between the two countries have contributed to a gradual re-
engagement. Muammar Al Qadhafi has denounced and renounced terrorism publicly
on several occasions since September 2001, and, in December 2003, he pledged to
end his government’s support for violent political movements around the world.
Libya is a party to all 12 international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism,
including the International Convention on the Suppression of the Financing of
Terrorism. As noted above, Libya and the United States have established a robust
intelligence sharing relationship, and Pentagon officials have expressed their desire
to include Libya in regional counterterrorism initiatives.18
Outstanding Questions. Officially, Libya remains designated as a state
sponsor of terrorism by the United States because of “outstanding questions over its
residual contacts with some past terrorist clients.”19 U.S. concerns about alleged
Libyan sponsorship of a 2003 plot to assassinate then-Crown Prince, and now King
Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud of Saudi Arabia, also played a role until recently.
Libya’s past support for Palestinian terrorists, its opposition to a two-state solution
to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and its history of support for various international
terrorist and rebel groups make some U.S. officials skeptical about the Libyan
government’s assurances that it has renounced terrorism and sponsorship of violent
non-state actors as foreign policy tools. Libya’s past provision of training, funding,
and weaponry to numerous European, Asian, and African rebel and terror groups also
concerns some U.S. observers and officials.
Alleged Assassination Plot. In December 2003, Saudi authorities arrested
a number of Libyan and Saudi nationals on charges of attempting to assassinate then-
Crown Prince Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. Saudi Arabia swiftly recalled its
ambassador from Tripoli and expelled the Libyan ambassador from Saudi Arabia in
protest. In 2004, a U.S. citizen named Abdulrahman Alamoudi pled guilty to a
charge of illegally traveling to Libya and engaging in banned commerce with the
Libyan government. Mr. Alamoudi claimed that his travel and financial dealings
were carried out in support of the plot to assassinate the Saudi leader. He was
sentenced to 23 years in prison in October 2004. The United States has expressed
18 Ken Silverstein, “Kadafi’s Son Calls for Closer Ties With U.S.” Los Angeles Times, Nov.
4, 2005.
19 U.S. Department of State, “Libya,” Country Reports on Terrorism 2004, Apr. 2005.

CRS-10
“serious concerns” about the allegations and U.S. officials have investigated the
reported plot and questioned the Libyan government on the issue.
In September 2005, officials from Libya and Saudi Arabia announced that the
dispute between their governments surrounding the alleged assassination plot has
been resolved. Muammar Al Qadhafi reportedly pledged not to support anti-Saudi
groups during consultations with a group of Members of Congress in Tripoli in late
July.20 On August 8, 2005, following his recent succession to the Saudi Arabian
throne, King Abdullah pardoned the Libyan agents being held in Saudi Arabia. A
Saudi Arabian Ministry of Information spokesman credited the pardon to King
Abdullah’s desire to mend the Saudi Arabian-Libyan diplomatic rift and to promote
unity among Arab countries. The governments have returned their respective
ambassadors, and Department of State personnel indicate that the royal pardon may
contribute to an atmosphere where U.S. concerns about the allegations may be easier
to assuage. However, the Bush Administration has reserved final judgment pending
further consideration of the matter.21
Trial of Bulgarian Nurses and International HIV Victims Fund
An ongoing legal case has powerful implications for revitalized commercial and
political relationships between Libya, the United States, and the member states of the
European Union. In 1999, five Bulgarian female nurses and one Palestinian male
doctor were arrested on charges that they deliberately infected 426 Libyan children
with HIV as part of an HIV-AIDS treatment experiment. Approximately 50 of the
infected children have died. A French doctor testified at the trial that the children had
been infected in 1997, one year before the Bulgarians and the Palestinian arrived in
Libya. On May 6, 2004, a Libyan court found the Bulgarians and the Palestinian
guilty, and the six were sentenced to death by firing squad. The decision also
sentenced one Bulgarian male doctor to four years for currency violations and
acquitted nine Libyan hospital officials of charges linked to the AIDS infections.
In May 2005, a Libyan court acquitted nine Libyan policemen and a doctor
charged with torturing the five Bulgarians and a Palestinian to gain their confessions
for allegedly infecting the children with HIV. In August 2005, Libya’s ambassador
to the United Kingdom, Mohammed Al Zaway, called on the Bulgarian government
to enter into negotiations with the families of the infected children over diya, a victim
payment and conflict resolution scheme outlined in Islamic law and commonly
referred to as “blood money.” Bulgarian officials rejected the possibility of any
negotiation and maintained the nurses’ innocence.
The Bulgarian government subsequently requested assistance from the United
States, the European Union, and the World Health Organization in securing the
nurses’ release. Bulgaria is currently a candidate for EU membership, and EU
officials have supported Bulgaria’s claims in the case. Members of Congress and
U.S. officials have raised the subject with their Libyan interlocutors since bilateral
20 Sylvia A. Smith, “Tent Talk: Souder, Qadhafi Confer on Saudi Tensions,” Fort Wayne
Journal Gazette
, July 27, 2005.
21 Author consultation with Department of State personnel, Aug. 10, 2005.

CRS-11
contacts resumed in late 2003. During a joint press appearance in Washington with
Bulgarian President Georgi Parvanov on October 17, 2005, President Bush stated
that, “there should be no confusion in the Libyan government’s mind, that those
nurses should be, not only spared their life, but out of prison, and we’ll continue to
make that message perfectly clear.”
On December 25, 2005, Libya’s Supreme Court overturned the convictions and
death sentences of the Bulgarian nurses and the Palestinian doctor. The court’s
actions followed the announcement of plans to create a relief fund sponsored by the
European Commission, the United Kingdom, Libya, Bulgaria, and the United States.
The International Benghazi Families Support Fund plans to provide relief for the
infected children and their families and to improve medical infrastructure in Libya.
Public protests in Libya following the announcements led to four arrests, and Libyan
authorities temporarily suspended further negotiations concerning the fund. Libyan
families have subsequently requested compensation payments of €10 million
(approximately $12 million) per family to be administered by the international fund.
The medical professionals remain in Libyan custody and will be retried by a lower
court in 2006.
The Return of U.S. Oil Companies
Following the lifting of U.S. sanctions in 2004, Occidental Petroleum and the
so-called Oasis group, which consists of Amerada Hess, Marathon, and
ConocoPhillips, have engaged in negotiations with Libyan officials regarding the full
resumption of their production activities. The issuance of Executive Order 12543 in
January 1986 forced the companies to abandon their Libyan operations. During the
sanctions era, the companies’ holdings were managed by a subsidiary of the Libyan
National Oil Company (NOC) and all revenue from the sale of oil produced from the
concession areas accrued to the Libyan government. The NOC made some attempts
to open the areas held in trust for the U.S. companies to foreign investment.
A two-step process required the review of the existing production agreements
with the NOC and the ratification of new agreements by Libya’s political leadership.
Officials from the NOC and the Libyan government approved the terms of Occidental
Petroleum’s reentry as of July 1, 2005, paving the way for Occidental to resume
operations in its old concession areas. The members of the Oasis group reached an
agreement with Libyan officials over the terms of their proposed re-entry in
December 2005. Under the terms of the agreement, the Oasis group’s Waha
concessions in Libya’s Sirte basin will be extended for 25 years, and the NOC will
hold a 59% interest in the venture. The group members agreed to make a one-time
$1.3 billion dollar reentry payment and to contribute $530 million toward the cost of
investments made by the Libyan NOC since 1986. Libyan officials have expressed
their opinion that the reentry of the U.S. oil firms will support their government’s
efforts to secure Libya’s removal from the U.S. state sponsors of terrorism list.22
22 Kevin Saville, “Oasis Group Reaches Deal on Libya Return,” Platts Oilgram News, Dec.
30, 2005; Barbara Lewis, “Libya Sees Swift Removal from US Terror List,” Reuters, Jan.
25, 2006.

CRS-12
Current Congressional Issues
Several Members of Congress have visited Libya since early 2004 and some
Members have called for further U.S. engagement in response to Libya’s decision to
rid itself of its weapons of mass destruction.23 After an August 2005 visit to Libya,
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Chairman Lugar called Libya “an important
partner for [the United States] on the war against terrorism,” and indicated that he
would “work constructively on the assumption that it’s in our best interest to
normalize the relationship, to get an embassy there, to get an ambassador.”
Representative Lantos has introduced a bill known as the “United States-Libya
Relations Act of 2005” (H.R. 1453) that calls for the dispatch of a charge d’affaires
to Libya, the negotiation of an agreement for the establishment of a full U.S. embassy
in Tripoli, and a number of cooperative security, economic, and cultural initiatives.
The bill would authorize the inclusion of Libyan nationals and organizations in
Fulbright exchanges and Middle East Partnership Initiative programs, in addition to
providing trade and economic support to improve governance and development in
Libya. The bill has been read and referred to the House Committee on Financial
Services Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and
Technology.
Other pending legislation in the 109th Congress would remove restrictions on
commercial activity and U.S. assistance to Libya. Section 210 of the FY2006-2007
Senate Foreign Affairs Authorization Bill (S. 600) would remove a prohibition under
Section 406(c) of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986
(P.L. 99-399) on the awarding of certain federal contracts to entities conducting
business in Libya. According to the Senate report (S.Rept. 109-35) on S. 600,
“deletion of section 406(c) will permit the Department to undertake activities such
as refurbishing and maintaining the current U.S. liaison office in Tripoli.” Section
207 of the FY2006-FY2007 House Foreign Affairs Authorization Bill (H.R. 2601)
also would repeal Section 406(c). The FY2006 Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-102) contains a
prohibition on the provision of assistance or reparations to Libya, with the specific
exception of the activities of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and direct
loans, credits, insurance and guarantees from the Export-Import Bank or its agents
(H.Rept. 109-265, November 2, 2005).
Senator Levin offered an amendment (S.Amdt. 1497) during consideration of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (S. 1042) that would
have prohibited the use of any U.S. funds to support further “negotiations towards
normalizing relations” with Libya until the Administration certified to Congress that
the Libyan government had “made a good faith offer” to redress the pending
compensation claims of U.S. military personnel injured in the 1986 bombing of the
La Belle nightclub in Berlin and the families of the two U.S. servicemen killed in the
attack.24 The amendment was withdrawn; however, the issue may be raised again
during the second session of the 109th Congress.
23 Sylvia Smith, “Libya Wins Lugar, Souder’s Praise,” Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, Sept.
25, 2005.
24 Congressional Record, Senate, July 26, 2005.

CRS-13
Political and Economic Profile
Muammar Al Qadhafi: A Profile. Muammar Al Qadhafi was born in 1942
near the central coastal city of Sirte. His Arabized Berber family belongs to the
relatively small Qadhafa tribe, and his upbringing was modest. As a young man
Qadhafi identified strongly with Arab nationalist and socialist ideologies espoused
by leaders such as Egypt’s Gamel Abdel Nasser. Although he was excluded from the
elite Cyrenaica Defense Forces on a tribal basis during the Libyan monarchy period
(see Appendix A), Qadhafi was commissioned as a regular army captain following
stints at the Libyan military academy in Benghazi and the United Kingdom’s Royal
Military Academy at Sandhurst. Following his return to Libya, he led the September
1, 1969 overthrow of the Libyan monarchy with a group of fellow officers. He was
27 years old.
Qadhafi has proven to be a controversial, complex, and contradictory political
survivor during his long reign in Libya, in spite of numerous internal and external
challenges to his rule. He has exercised nearly complete, if, at times, indirect
political control over Libya over the last thirty-plus years by carefully balancing and
manipulating complex patronage networks, traditional tribal structures, and byzantine
layers of national, regional, and local governance. Libya’s foreign and domestic
policies are nominally based on his personal ideology. Qadhafi and his supporters
have imposed his theories with realistic purpose and precision, not hesitating to crush
coup attempts, assassinate dissidents abroad, or sponsor violent movements and
terrorist attacks against Libya’s perceived external enemies.
Personally, Qadhafi often is described as mercurial, charismatic, shrewd, and
reclusive, with a personal devotion to preserving and promoting traditional values in
Libyan society. He is married and has eight children: seven sons and one daughter.
An April 1986 U.S. air strike in retaliation for a Libyan-sponsored anti-American
bombing in Berlin hit one of his homes in Tripoli, killing his adopted infant daughter
and hospitalizing members of his immediate family. The incident continues to be a
source of personal anger and resentment for Qadhafi: he has preserved the bombed
out ruins of the home in the military compound where it stood, and he remarked on
the death of President Ronald Reagan in 2004 that the former U.S. president had died
before he could be prosecuted for the “ugly crime that he committed in 1986 against
the Libyan children.”25
25 Khaled El-Deeb,”Gadhafi: Regrets Reagan Died Before Being Tried for 1986 Air Strikes
on Libya,” Associated Press, June 6, 2004.

CRS-14
Political Dynamics
Libya’s often contradictory political dynamics are a product of competing
interest groups seeking to influence policy within the confines of the country’s
authoritarian political system and amid Libya’s emergence from international
isolation. Elements of Muammar Al Qadhafi’s ideology permeate political discourse
on many security and foreign policy issues, while in other cases, such as economic
reform, new frameworks are being embraced to meet society’s current and changing
needs. The legacies of colonial occupation and Libya’s struggle for independence
continue to influence Libyan politics; rhetorical references to preserving sovereignty
and resistance to foreign domination are common in political statements. Most
Libyans also accept a prominent role for Islamic tradition in public life: Islam is the
official religion and the Quran is the basis for the country’s law and its “social code.”
Tribal relationships remain important, particularly with regard to the distribution
of leadership roles in government ministries and in political-military relations. Tribal
loyalties remain strong within and between branches of the armed services, and
members of Qadhafi’s tribe, the Qadhafa, hold many high ranking government
positions, including key positions in the air force. Members of larger, rival tribes,
such as the Warfalla, have opposed the regime on grounds of tribal discrimination.
Some Libyan military and security officials staged limited, unsuccessful coup
attempts against Qadhafi in 1993 and 1996 based in part on tribal and familial
rivalries. The Qadhafi government has performed periodic reassignments and purges
of the officer corps to limit the likelihood of organized opposition reemerging from
within the military. However, these political considerations have affected the
military’s preparedness and war fighting capability.
Political parties and all opposition groups are banned in Libya under Law
number 71 of 1972. Formal political pluralism is frowned upon by many members
of the ruling elite, even as an increasing number of regime figures advocate for
greater popular participation in existing government institutions. Opposition groups,
most notably the Muslim Brotherhood, appear to have shifted their political strategies
toward gradual attempts to influence national policy making in contrast to others’
confrontational efforts to change the makeup of the regime. Key figures in Libyan
politics include Muammar Al Qadhafi’s son Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi,26 General
People’s Committee Secretary Shokri Ghanem, and prominent members of the
security establishment, including intelligence chief Musa Kusa and army leader and
original RCC member Abu Bakr Younis Jaber.
Government Structure
Libya has a unique political system composed of nominally decentralized and
participatory levels of government. Muammar Al Qadhafi and his closest supporters
exercise final authority over domestic and foreign policies by means of their control
of the implementation mechanisms of the national government — the sizeable
26 For a detailed profile of Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi and a discussion of questions about the
possibility of his succeeding his father, see Yehudit Ronen, “Libya’s Rising Star: Said Al-
Islam and Succession,” Middle East Policy, Vol. XII, No. 3, Fall 2005, pp. 136-44.

CRS-15
military and security apparatus and a handful of powerful ministries. Qadhafi’s
ideological emphasis on “the authority of the people” is the stated basis for the
operation of Libya’s multiple levels of government. Although participation in these
institutions is mostly open and political leaders routinely encourage citizens to take
part in their deliberations, most external observers regard Libya’s political system as
authoritarian and undemocratic. The U.S. State Department’s annual human rights
reports document ongoing restrictions on political life and human rights in Libya.
The “Authority of the People”. A hierarchy of “people’s congresses”
make up Libya’s government and serve as venues for the exercise of “popular
authority” as defined by Muammar Al Qadhafi’s ideology. At the local level, citizens
meet in Basic People’s Congresses to appoint representatives to regional and
ultimately the national General People’s Congress. Participation in the basic
congresses is open to all Libyan citizens, although participation rates are notoriously
low and Qadhafi regularly makes public statements expressing his disappointment
with participation levels and urging broader popular involvement in public affairs.
At the March 1, 2000, session of the General Peoples’ Congress, Qadhafi abolished
the positions of 12 General People’s Committee (cabinet-equivalent) secretaries and
reassigned their duties to provincial committees. Secretariats of foreign affairs,
justice, public security, and finance remain under the authority of the centralized
General People’s Committee, which is led by Secretary (prime minister-equivalent)
Shokri Ghanem. Some experts have argued that the further decentralization was
designed to deflect popular criticism from the central government and further dilute
political opposition within the country.
Opposition Groups
The government has dealt harshly with opposition leaders and groups over the
last three decades, establishing special “people’s courts” and “revolutionary
committees” to enforce ideological and political discipline and to punish violators
and dissidents. Abroad, Libyan intelligence personnel have monitored, harassed, and,
in some cases, assassinated expatriate dissidents, some of whom were referred to as
“stray dogs.” Libya’s myriad opposition movements can be categorized broadly as
Islamist, royalist, or democratic in orientation. However, their activities and
effectiveness have been largely limited by disorganization, rivalry, and ideological
differences. New efforts to coordinate opposition activities have begun in response
to Libya’s reintegration to the international community and the emergence of a
broader political reform debate in the Arab world. However, most observers do not
regard any of Libya’s current opposition groups as a serious threat or alternative to
the current government.
Exiles. In the past, government officials and intelligence operatives have
monitored and taken violent action against expatriate opposition groups and leaders,
including in Europe and the United States. Clandestine opposition groups also have
carried out assassinations and attacks against Libyan government officials abroad.
Opposition groups in exile include the National Alliance, the Libyan National
Movement (LNM), the Libyan Movement for Change and Reform, the Islamist Rally,
the National Libyan Salvation Front (NLSF), and the Republican Rally for
Democracy and Justice. A royalist contingent based on the claim to the throne by
Mohammed Al Sanusi, the grandson of the former king, is based in London. These

CRS-16
groups and others held an opposition conference in July 2005 in London and issued
a “national accord,” calling for the removal of Qadhafi from power and the
establishment of a transitional government.27 In a September 2005 interview, Foreign
Minister Abd Al Rahman Shalqam characterized some of the regime’s expatriate
opponents as individuals who fled the country after committing economic crimes or
collaborating with foreign intelligence services. He then invited any expatriate
dissidents who had not committed crimes to return to Libya.28 In August 2005, the
government announced the return of 787 exiles who agreed to reconcile with the
Qadhafi regime.29
The Muslim Brotherhood. Like other political organizations and opposition
groups, the Muslim Brotherhood is banned in Libya under law number 71 of 1972.
Since the late 1940s, when members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood first
entered Libya following a crackdown on their activities, the Libyan Muslim
Brotherhood has existed as a semi-official organization. Hundreds of Brotherhood
members and activists were jailed in 1973, although the Brotherhood eventually
reemerged and operated as a clandestine organization for much of the following two
decades. In 1998, a second round of mass arrests took place, and approximately 150
Brotherhood leaders and members were arrested. Several reportedly died in custody,
and, following trials in 2001 and 2002, two prominent Brotherhood leaders were
sentenced to death and over 70 were sentenced to life in prison. The current
controller general of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, Suleiman Abdel Qadir,
describes the Brotherhood’s current objectives as peaceful and policy focused, with
calls for the cancellation of laws restricting political rights.30
Recently, Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi has reached out to the Libyan Muslim
Brotherhood by characterizing the organization as nonviolent and non-seditious and
signaling that imprisoned Brotherhood members will be released in the near future.
Members of the Muslim Brotherhood were conspicuously absent from the July 2005
Libyan opposition conference in London, having declared their disagreement with
efforts to overturn the current Libyan government. Some conference participants
alleged that the Brotherhood had reached an agreement with the Libyan government
to refrain from attending the conference in order to secure the release of its leaders
from prison. Muslim Brotherhood officials have denied the claim. Press reports
from September 2005 referred to Libyan plans to release 130 Islamist prisoners,
although Islamists were not among the over 1,600 prisoners released in conjunction
with the celebration of the 36th anniversary of the Libyan revolution on September
27 May Youssef, Anti-Gaddafists Rally in London, Al Ahram Weekly (Cairo), No. 749, June
30 - July 6, 2005; Al Jazeera (Doha), “Opposition Plans to Oust Al Qadhafi,” June 25, 2005;
Middle East Mirror, “Libya’s Fractured Opposition,” July 29, 2005.
28 “Libya’s Shalqam on Ties With US, S. Arabia, Opposition,” FBIS Document
GMP20050924512001.
29 UPI, “Libya Says Hundreds Return From Exile,” Aug. 20, 2005.
30 “Al Jazirah TV Interviews Libyan Muslim Brotherhood Leader on Current Situation,”
Aug. 3, 2005. FBIS Document GMP20050803550006.

CRS-17
1, 2005.31 On October 9, 2005, Libyan authorities announced that 86 imprisoned
Muslim Brotherhood activists would receive new trials.
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). The Libyan Islamic Fighting
Group (LIFG) is a violent Islamist movement opposed to the Qadhafi government
and allied with Al Qaeda and other international jihadist groups. According to the
Department of State, the LIFG has attempted to assassinate Qadhafi, most recently
in 1996, and may have participated in the planning of the May 2003 suicide
bombings in Casablanca, Morocco.32 The United States froze the LIFG’s U.S. assets
under Executive Order 13224 in September 2001, and formally designated the LIFG
as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in December 2004. Some observers have
characterized the designation as a gesture of solidarity with Libya and have argued
that the ability and willingness of the LIFG to mount terror attacks in Libya may be
limited. Others claim that LIFG fighters have allied themselves with other violent
Islamist groups operating in the trans-Sahara region, and cite evidence of Libyan
fighters joining the Iraqi insurgency as an indication of ongoing Islamist militancy
in Libya and a harbinger of a possible increase in violence associated with fighters
returning from Iraq.33 Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi has announced plans to release some
jailed members of the LIFG and other violent Islamist groups from prison, following
their renunciation of violence and pledge to participate in society peacefully.34
Political Reform and Human Rights
The authoritarian Libyan government’s poor human rights record has been
documented by world governments and international human rights monitors for much
of the last 35 years. Annual reports on political and human rights conditions from
the U.S. State Department and international groups such as Amnesty International
and Human Rights Watch have catalogued a broad range of recurring abuses
including arbitrary arrest, incommunicado detention, torture, a general ban on
political opposition, and official limitations on public speech, assembly, and press
activity.35 Since 2003, Libyan political figures, including Muammar Al Qadhafi and
his son Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi, have made a series of public statements and policy
announcements in an effort to repair Libya’s reputation with regard to human rights
practices. Although few tangible steps have been taken, Libyan authorities report
that legal reforms are under way that may improve the protections and rights afforded
to citizens. Judicial entities associated with human rights abuses and political control
31 Khaled El Deeb, “Libya Pardons More Than 1,600 Criminals in Prison to Celebrate
Gadhafi Coup,” Associated Press, Sept. 2, 2005.
32 U.S. Department of State, “Libya,” Country Reports on Terrorism 2004, Apr. 2005.
33 Alison Pargeter, “Militant Groups Pose Security Challenge for Libyan Regime,” Janes
Intelligence Review
, Vol. 17, No. 8, Aug. 2005, pp. 16-19.
34 “Libyan Leader’s Son on Call to Reopen Human Rights Files,” Aug. 20, 2005. FBIS
Document GMP20050820537003.
35 The latest reports on human rights conditions in Libya are available in the U.S.
Department of State’s Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Libya (Feb. 28, 2005)
and from Amnesty International [http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-lby/index], and Human
Rights Watch [http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=mideast&c=libya].

CRS-18
in the past, such as “revolutionary courts” and “people’s courts,” also reportedly have
been dismantled. As a result, some observers have expressed cautious optimism that
political, social, and religious freedom may be improving in Libya. Others continue
to warn that such reforms may be merely cosmetic and meant to support the
government’s efforts to improve its domestic legitimacy and international standing.
Human Rights Monitoring. The Libyan government has not permitted the
establishment of independent human rights organizations, but recently invited
international human rights groups Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch
to Libya for the first time in 15 years. In late 2004 and early 2005, representatives
from both organizations toured various security facilities and prisons and met with
selected imprisoned dissidents. Recently, Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi has supported
a pro-human rights agenda and has created an official human rights monitoring body
under the auspices of the Qadhafi International Foundation for Charitable
Associations. The foundation’s Human Rights Society operates a national hotline for
Libyans to report cases of unlawful detention, seizure of property or assets, and death
or injury at the hands of security personnel.36 Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi also has
stated that the government intends to review all reported cases of human rights
abuses and property crimes and to compensate victims as part of a national
reconciliation program.
Legal and Institutional Reform. Libyan law prohibits the activities of all
political opposition groups and restricts the free exercise of speech and the press.37
Since Qadhafi’s 1969 coup, little legal recourse has been available to citizens accused
of political crimes. Nevertheless, officials recently have announced plans to embark
upon a full review of the country’s Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure to
eliminate restrictive laws regarding political activity. New draft laws are scheduled
to be submitted to the General People’s Congress for consideration and approval
during late 2005 or early 2006.38 Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi also has called for a
constitution to clarify the power of different legislative, executive, and judicial
institutions in Libya and has endorsed ongoing legal reforms as a means to “provide
a free environment that is suitable for a normal political life.”39
In support of these efforts, some institutional changes have been instituted to
improve political and human rights conditions. In March 2004, the General People’s
Committee Secretariat of Justice and Public Security was split into two separate
36 Brian Whitaker, “Libya: Getafe’s Son Sets Up Human Rights Hotline,” The Guardian
(London), Sept. 17, 2005.
37 According to the U.S. State Department, Libyan law provides for freedom of speech
“within the limits of public interest and principles of the Revolution.” In practice, criticism
of the government and Qadhafi are restricted and often punished. By law, print and
broadcast media in Libya are owned and operated by government authorities. Satellite and
Internet access are limited and partially censored.
38 Human Rights Watch, “Libya: Reforms Welcome, But Concerns Remain,” May 23, 2005.
Available at [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/05/23/libya10983.htm].
39 “Libyan Leader’s Son on Call to Reopen Human Rights Files,” Al-Jazirah (Qatar), Aug.
20, 2005. FBIS Document GMP20050820537003.

CRS-19
secretariats in an effort to establish greater judicial independence. In January 2005,
the General People’s Congress approved a law abolishing judicial institutions known
as “people’s courts” and “revolutionary courts” that, until recently, tried suspected
regime opponents, sometimes in secret. International human rights organizations
welcomed the abolition of the people’s court system as an “important step” and urged
Libyan authorities to grant new trials to prisoners convicted by the courts, including
several who were convicted in late 2004.
Energy and the Libyan Economy
Until the discovery of oil in 1959, Libya’s economic viability was seriously
questioned by many outside observers. Foreign aid and subsidies largely supported
the national budget, until the introduction of massive amounts of oil revenue
transformed the country’s economy and social fabric. Following the September 1,
1969 military coup, Qadhafi and his government restructured Libya’s economy along
socialist lines, placing a heavy emphasis on national management of industry and
resource allocation. However, the economy remained highly dependent on oil
revenue and thus highly vulnerable to fluctuations in global oil prices.40 Recently, the
government has announced its intention to reverse state ownership trends associated
with the country’s long experiment with socialism. Economic diversification and
resource management remain challenges for the government and private sector as
they seek to revive the economy and capitalize on interest from foreign investors.
Oil revenue has been the lifeblood of the Libyan economy and government since
exports began in 1961, accounting for 95% of Libya’s annual foreign currency
earnings and 75% of annual government revenue in recent years.41 Since 1998, rising
oil prices have led to a tripling in Libyan oil revenue, reaching $18.1 billion in 2004
and projected to reach $19.4 billion in 2005. The increase has spurred corresponding
growth in the economy. Libyan leader Muammar Al Qadhafi stated recently that
Libyans are “very happy” with the current price level in the global oil market,
although he has underlined the importance of creating alternative sources of revenue
and economic growth in recent public statements.42
Oil Reserves and Production Capacity. Libya’s proven oil reserves are
estimated at 39 billion barrels (ninth largest in the world). Libyan officials estimate
that over 60% of the country has yet to be surveyed for oil and gas deposits, which
could hold an additional 76 billion barrels of oil.43 The Libyan National Oil
Company (NOC) manages oil production activity and negotiates exploration and
production agreements with foreign companies. Oil exploration and production are
carried out on the basis of a 1955 oil law, and Libyan authorities reportedly are
40 See Dirk Vandewalle, Libya Since Independence, Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, 1998.
41 U.S. Energy Information Admin. (EIA), Libya Country Analysis Brief, Feb. 2005.
42 Tripoli Great Jamahiriyah TV, “Libyan Leader Says ‘Problems Abroad’ Solved,” Sept.
19, 2005. FBIS Doc. GMP20050919710040. Reuters, “Libya Very Happy With High Oil
Prices - Gaddafi,” July 4, 2005.
43 Tarek Hassan-Beck, Libyan National Oil Company in International Oil Daily, “Libya
Targets ‘Huge Backlog’ of Field Work in Post-Sanctions Push,” Sept. 30, 2005.

CRS-20
drafting a new law to govern production activities and reform the foreign investment
approval process. Foreign investment is regulated through exploration and
production agreements negotiated by foreign companies and the NOC. Most of
Libya’s oil is exported to Italy, Germany, France, and Spain. However, following the
resumption of crude oil exports to the United States in June 2004, oil shipments to
U.S. refiners have increased, totaling 6.7 million barrels by the end of 2004.44
Until recently, Libyan oil production had steadily declined from its peak of 3.3
million barrels per day (b/d) in 1970 due to the deterioration of production equipment
and infrastructure related to strict investment controls and international sanctions.
Libya currently produces 1.7 million barrels per day (b/d), which officials have stated
is currently the sector’s maximum capacity. Since the termination of U.N. and U.S.
sanctions in 2003 and 2004, Libya has sought foreign investment to rehabilitate and
expand its oil production capacity and expects $11 billion in oil production related
investment from 2005 to 2015. Current government production targets are 3 million
b/d by 2011 and 3.6 million b/d by 2019.45 Oil Minister Fathi Bin Shatwan has
indicated that he expects Libya’s production capacity to increase 18% by 2006.46
New Exploration and Production Sharing Agreements. In addition to
negotiating the return of U.S. oil companies to their former production areas, Libyan
officials are presiding over a bidding process for new exploration and production
sharing agreements. Known as “EPSA IV,” the fourth round of foreign agreement
bidding since the process began in 1979 is opening large areas of onshore and
offshore Libyan territory to new oil and gas exploration and production. In January
2005, Libyan officials announced the results for the first fifteen EPSA-IV exploration
blocks, which cover an area of 51,000 square miles. Of the 63 international firms that
were approved by Libyan authorities and submitted bids, U.S. firms won exploration
licenses for 11 of the 15 blocks, whether as sole producers or as members of
consortia. Occidental Petroleum, which has secured a return to its former
concessions, led the U.S. companies with nine successful bids, and Amerada Hess
and Chevron Texaco also secured new licenses. Representatives from Occidental
Petroleum have stated that the company expects to begin exploratory drilling in its
new license areas in early 2006.
Winners of the second batch of EPSA IV bids were announced on October 2,
2005. European and Asian firms received most of the licenses, and Exxon-Mobil
was the sole U.S. license recipient. Two additional bidding rounds are scheduled to
be held in 2006. Some oil and gas market analysts have speculated that the approval
of the majority of production licenses for U.S. companies in the first EPSA-IV round
may have been intended as an economic reward to the United States for agreeing to
lift its bilateral sanctions against Libya. Others have argued that U.S. firms were
successful because of their willingness to agree to production share terms that heavily
favored the Libyan government and agreed to pay large signing bonuses. European
44 EIA., Petroleum Supply Annual 2004, Volume 1, June 2005.
45 Interview with Tarek Hassan-Beck, International Oil Daily, Sept. 30, 2005.
46 Dow Jones Intl., “Current Libya Oil Output At Maximum 1.7M B/D,” June 13, 2005.

CRS-21
and Asian oil companies have expressed strong interest in participating in new
Libyan ventures and are expected to submit competitive bids in the upcoming rounds.
Natural Gas. Libya’s proven natural gas reserves are estimated to be 52
trillion cubic feet, although, like the country’s oil reserves, Libya’s gas holdings may
be significantly higher given the generally under-explored status of Libyan territory.
As with oil production, the development of natural gas production and export
capacity has been limited by restrictive investment policies and international
sanctions. Nevertheless, Libya has been able to use natural gas for some domestic
power generation and for limited exports to some European countries. Shell recently
reached an agreement with Libyan authorities to explore for natural gas deposits and
to upgrade Libya’s aging liquefied natural gas plant at Marsa Al Brega.47 Libyan
authorities also are reportedly pursuing pipeline agreements with neighboring North
African states to improve export access to European markets. Representatives from
British Petroleum (BP) also are discussing natural gas projects with Libyan officials.
Military Profile and WMD Disarmament
The Libyan Military
Structure, Training, and Equipment. Libya’s mostly conscripted military
forces are small relative to the large amount of weaponry at their disposal (see Table
1
below). Most outside military analysts regard the training and leadership of Libyan
forces as poor and identify a lack of combined arms and joint service planning as
factors that limit their overall effectiveness. The Qadhafi government historically has
made the acquisition of weapons and equipment a higher priority than training or
creating high-quality military support infrastructure.
Table 1. Libyan Military Personnel
Service
Personnel
Army
45,000
Air Force
23,000
Navy
8,000
Revolutionary Guard Corps
3,000
Reserve Militia
40,000
Total
119,000
Sources: International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2004-2005; Anthony H.
Cordesman, The Military Balance in the Middle East, Center for Strategic and International Studies,
2004; and Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, “Libya,” Middle East Military Balance, Apr. 10, 2005.
47 WWP Report on Oil, Gas & Petrochemicals, “Libya: Multi-billion Dollar Joint Venture
Agreement to Modernize Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Plant,” June 1, 2005.

CRS-22
Libya’s army, navy, and air forces are equipped with a broad range of aging
Soviet and Eastern Bloc equipment, although the country’s poorly maintained
inventories also include some U.S. and western European arms, including French
Mirage fighters and U.S. C-130 transports.48 Libya’s exorbitant military spending in
the late 1970s and early 1980s yielded an unmanageable crop of diverse weapon
systems from various sources and manufacturers. Purchases declined significantly
during the 1990s because of international sanctions, which limited the revenue
available for defense spending. Libya’s current military leadership presides over a
largely stored and surplus catalogue of weaponry with poor maintenance records.49
The military also lacks sufficient numbers of trained personnel to operate the military
equipment currently in its possession.
Arms Sales. The subject of renewed arms sales to Libya remains a sensitive
subject in the United States and some European countries whose citizens were killed
in Libyan sponsored terrorist attacks during the 1980s. The European Union lifted
its arms embargo against Libya in October 2004. The United States maintains its
arms embargo as a result of Libya’s continuing designation as a state sponsor of
terrorism. Qadhafi reportedly has expressed interest in procuring U.S., European, and
Russian weapon systems. Libya recently purchased transport aircraft from Ukraine,
and Ukrainian officials reportedly have expressed interest in providing maintenance
and upgrades for Libya’s large inventory of Soviet-era tanks and armored vehicles.
French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie visited Libya in February 2005 and
discussed plans for French firms to repair military equipment previously sold to
Libya. The possibility of France selling sophisticated fighter aircraft and helicopters
to Libya reportedly also was discussed.50
WMD Programs and Disarmament51
Nuclear, Chemical, and Ballistic Missile Programs. Despite Libya’s
membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Libyan leader Muammar
Al Qadhafi made several efforts to acquire nuclear weapons related technology
assistance, beginning in the early 1970s. The most renowned was his reported
unsuccessful request for a working nuclear weapon from China in the 1970s. Other
unsuccessful attempts to acquire nuclear energy technology useful to the
development of nuclear weapons were subsequently made through contacts with the
48 Facts on File World News Digest, “U.S. Bars Libya Planes, Training,” Sept. 20, 1975;
and Washington Post, “Libya’s Qaddafi Praises Carter, Urges Closer Ties,” June 13, 1977.
In 2004, Libya sold 40 of its aging Mirage fighters to Pakistan.
49 Senior Middle East security analyst Anthony Cordesman has described Libya as “the
world’s largest military parking lot.” For a more detailed profile of the Libyan military, see
Anthony H. Cordesman, The Military Balance in the Middle East, Center for Strategic and
International Studies, Mar. 15, 2004, pp. 79-85.
50 AFP, “French Defence Minister Holds Talks in Libya,” Feb. 5, 2005; Andrew Borowiec,
“Paris Strengthens Military Ties with Libya,” Washington Times, Feb. 17, 2005.
51 For a detailed discussion of Libya’s WMD programs and disarmament see CRS Report
RS21823, Disarming Libya: Weapons of Mass Destruction, by Sharon A. Squassoni and
Andrew Feickert.

CRS-23
Soviet Union, the United States, France, India, Pakistan, Japan, and Argentina.52
Nonetheless, most experts agree that Libya never had a dedicated nuclear weapons
program. Over the next 25 years, Qadhafi made several public statements in which
he argued that Arab states were compelled to develop their own nuclear weapons
capability in response to Israel’s development of nuclear weapons.53 Libya
established a small nuclear research reactor at Tajura in 1979 with Soviet assistance,
and entered into several rounds of negotiations with Soviet and French authorities for
the construction of large nuclear power facilities that were never concluded.
According to several press accounts, Libyan officials reached an agreement with
Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan in 1997 for Khan and his illicit
proliferation network to provide the Libyan government with a nuclear weapons
design and the uranium enrichment technology it desired. These accounts and
International Atomic Energy Agency reports describe how, over the next six years,
a complex network of companies and individuals in Malaysia, Switzerland, Pakistan,
Spain, Turkey, South Africa, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United Arab
Emirates supplied Libya with uranium enrichment components.54
Libya’s chemical weapons programs were more advanced and independent than
its nuclear weapons development activities. In 1986 and 1987, U.S. officials
suspected Libya of using Iranian-supplied chemical weapons against military forces
in neighboring Chad and provided the Chadian military with protective equipment
to guard against further Libyan attacks.55 During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the
Libyan government developed chemical weapons production facilities at Rabta,
Sebha, and Tarhuna with technology acquired from a number of western European
52 John K. Cooley, “Qaddafi’s Great Aim for Libya is a Nuclear Capability of its Own,
Christian Science Monitor, Nov. 12, 1980; New York Times, “Nuclear Energy Aide And
Foreign Adviser Appointed in Tripoli,” Jan. 8, 1981; Joshua Sinai, “Libya’s Pursuit of
Weapons of Mass Destruction,” Nonproliferation Review, Spring/Summer 1997, pp. 92-100;
and Associated Press, “Japan Company Sold Atomic Plant to Libya,” Mar. 12, 2004.
53 In 1987, for example, Al Qadhafi said that, “Now that the Israelis possess the atomic
weapon, the Arabs have nothing before them except to work day and night to possess the
atomic weapon in order to defend their existence.” Reuters, “Gaddafi Urges Arabs to
Develop Nuclear Weapons,” Sept. 2, 1987. See also San Francisco Chronicle “Khadafy
Wants Arab A-Bombs,” June 23, 1987; and Agence France-Presse, “Libya Urges Arabs to
Get Nuclear Arms,” Jan. 27,1996. Qadhafi made similar remarks in a March 2002 interview:
“We demanded the dismantling of the weapons of mass destruction that the Israelis have ...
Otherwise, the Arabs will have the right to possess that weapon.” John Bolton, Remarks to
the Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC, May 6, 2002.
54 The IAEA does not directly identify Dr. Khan or Pakistan as a source for nuclear weapons
designs or enrichment equipment disclosed by Libya. Leslie Lopez, “Libyans Got Nuclear
Training at Malaysian Company, Police Say,” Wall Street Journal, June 4, 2004; Stephen
Fidler and Mark Huband, “Turks and South Africans ‘Helped Libya’s Secret Nuclear Arms
Project’,” Financial Times, June 10, 2004; Craig Whitlock and Shannon Smiley, “Germany
Arrests Man in Libyan Atomic Case,” Washington Post, Oct. 12, 2004; Douglas Frantz and
William C. Rempel, “New Find in a Nuclear Network,” Los Angeles Times, Nov. 28, 2004.
55 Elaine Sciolino, “U.S. Sends 2,000 Gas Masks to the Chadians,” New York Times, Sept.
25, 1987.

CRS-24
and Asian firms.56 The plants produced large amounts of chemical weapons and
components, including 23 tons of mustard gas. Libya’s ballistic missile program
relied on foreign technical assistance to produce Scud-B and a limited number of
Scud-C missiles but was limited by a lack of indigenous technical skill and
ineffective management.57
Termination of WMD and Missile Programs. In 1999, Libyan officials
approached the Clinton Administration and offered to dismantle Libya’s chemical
weapons programs in exchange for a loosening of U.S. terrorism sanctions. The offer
was rejected in an effort to maintain pressure on Libya to comply with U.S. and
United Nations demands in the Lockerbie airliner bombing case. Following the
Lockerbie settlement, Sayf Al Islam Al Qadhafi and intelligence chief Musa Kusa re-
engaged with U.S. and British intelligence authorities beginning in March 2003
regarding Libya’s weapons of mass destruction programs. The October 2003
interception of the freighter BBC China, which was carrying centrifuge components
to Libya, accelerated negotiations and led to assessment visits by U.S. and British
personnel later that month and in early December 2003.
On December 19, 2003, Foreign Minister Abd Al Rahman Shalqam read a
statement on Libyan national television announcing the government’s decision to
dismantle its weapons of mass destruction and long range missile programs and to
invite international inspectors to Libya to remove materials and perform verifications.
Qadhafi publicly endorsed the statement, paving the way for the removal of WMD-
related equipment from Libya in January and March 2004.58 Subsequent reviews of
seized material and interviews with Libyan officials indicated that Libya remained
far from developing a nuclear weapons capability, although A.Q. Khan sold Libya
a crude nuclear weapons design and some components necessary to begin a uranium
enrichment program. However, as of late 2003, Libya had not obtained key pieces of
equipment, such as a sufficient number of high precision rotors to power its
enrichment centrifuges.59
Motives for Disarmament. Officials and independent observers have
attributed Libya’s decision to end its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction to a
56 Joshua Sinai, “Libya’s Pursuit of Weapons of Mass Destruction,” Nonproliferation
Review
, Spring/Summer 1997, pp. 92-100; Anthony H. Cordesman, Weapons of Mass
Destruction in the Middle East, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1999;
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) et al., “Educational Module on
Chemical and Biological Weapons Non-Proliferation: Case Study: Libya,” 1998-2001.
57 Andrew Koch, “Libya’s Missile Programme Secrets Revealed,” Jane’s Defence Weekly,
Aug. 18, 2004.
58 Statement of Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance Paula A.
DeSutter Before the House Committee on International Relations Subcommittee on
International Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Human Rights, Sept. 22, 2004; and, Douglas
Franz and Josh Meyer, “The Deal to Disarm Kadafi,” Los Angeles Times, Mar. 13, 2005.
59 William J. Broad, “Libya’s Crude Bomb Design Eases Western Experts’ Fear,” New York
Times
, Feb. 9, 2004; David Crawford, “Libya Was Far From Building Nuclear Bomb,” Wall
Street Journal
, Feb. 23, 2004; and, William J. Broad, “Arms Control Group Says U.S.
Inflated Libya’s Nuclear Bid,” New York Times, Mar. 25, 2004.

CRS-25
number of factors. Administration officials have argued that U.S. military action in
Iraq in 2003 demonstrated to Libya the resolve of the Bush Administration to
eliminate perceived threats to U.S. security posed by states associated with terrorism
and in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. In contrast, Libyan officials have
denied that external pressure or threats influenced their government’s decision
making processes and have characterized the decision as a sovereign initiative to
restore Libya’s ties with the international community and improve its security and
economy. Most independent observers have argued that Libya’s decision was a
calculated move designed to extricate the country from the international sanctions
regime that was limiting its economic activity and contributing to the deterioration
of its vital oil and natural gas infrastructure. Libyan officials have pointed to the
financial and economic rewards associated with its international re-engagement,
although Qadhafi has stated his belief that Libya should be more directly and
substantively rewarded by the United States for its decision to disarm.
International Controls and Inspections. Libya acceded to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1975. Libya’s nuclear research facility at Tajura
has been subject to IAEA safeguards since 1980. Since Libya announced its intent
to abandon its weapons of mass destruction programs, the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons (OPCW) have monitored and assisted in ongoing disarmament activities.
Libya signed an “additional protocol” agreement in March 2004 granting IAEA
inspectors greater access to its nuclear facilities. The IAEA continues to evaluate
Libyan disclosure statements related to the scope of its uranium enrichment and
nuclear weapons development activities, particularly with regard to the sources of the
materials Libya acquired from the proliferation network of Pakistani scientist Abdul
Qadeer Khan. As a result of the 2003 WMD disarmament decision, Libya signed the
Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and acceded to the Chemical
Weapons Convention (CWC) in 2004. Libya also committed to eliminating all its
ballistic missiles beyond a 300-kilometer range with a payload of 500 kilograms and
agreed to abide by Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) guidelines.
As of October 2005, all materials and components associated with Libya’s
nuclear weapons development program have been removed and all associated
activities have stopped. Libya returned highly enriched nuclear fuel assemblies from
its Tajura research reactor to Russia in 2004, and Russia replaced them with low
enriched uranium fuel in December 2005 as part of a program co-sponsored with the
International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy.60 Libya has
submitted an inventory of its chemical weapons and related activities to the OPCW
and has destroyed over 3,500 munitions designed to disperse chemical agents. The
OPCW has verified Libya’s inventory and approved the conversion of a chemical
weapons facility into a pharmaceutical plant for the production of HIV/AIDS and
malaria medication. The Department of State began retraining assistance programs
for Libyan scientists in 2004, and President Bush recently waived provisions of the
Arms Export Control Act in order to allow U.S. firms to “possibly participate” in the
60 International Atomic Energy Agency, Staff Report: Removal of High-Enriched Uranium
in Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mar. 8, 2004; RIA Novosti (Moscow), “Russia Supplies 14kg
of Low-Enriched Uranium to Libya,” Dec. 23, 2005.

CRS-26
destruction of Libya’s remaining chemical munitions and precursors, which is
scheduled to be complete by April 2007.61
Further Reading and Historical Resources
Ali Abdullatif Ahmida, The Making of Modern Libya, State Univ. of New York Press,
Albany, 1994.
Lisa Anderson, The State and Social Transformation in Tunisia and Libya, 1830-1980,
Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1986.
Scott Anderson, “The Makeover,” New York Times Magazine, January 19, 2003.
Alan J. Day, W.B. Fisher, Richard I. Lawless, et al., “Libya”, in The Middle East and North
Africa 2004, 50th ed., Europa Publications, 2004.
Economist Intelligence Unit, Libya: Country Report 2004
Mansour O. El Kikhia, Libya’s Qadhafi, Univ. Press of Florida, Gainesville, 1997.
Muammar Al Qadhafi, Kitaab Al Akhdar (The Green Book), Green Book World Center for
Research and Study, Tripoli, 1983.
Helen Chapin Metz (ed.), Libya : A Country Study, Library of Congress: Federal Research
Division, 4th ed., 1989.
Richard B. Parker, Uncle Sam in Barbary, Univ. Press of Florida, Gainesville, 2004.
Ronald Bruce St. John, Libya and the United States, Univ. Of Pennsylvania Press,
Philiadelphia, 2002.
Joseph T. Stanik, El Dorado Canyon: Reagan’s Undeclared War with Qaddafi, Naval
Institute Press, 2003
Dirk Vandewalle, Libya Since Independence, Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, 1998.
61 Remarks by the President on Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation, National
Defense University, Washington, D.C., Feb. 11, 2004; Reuters, “Bush Waives Some Arms
Export Restrictions on Libya,” Sept. 28, 2005.

CRS-27
Appendix A: Libya’s Pre-Qadhafi History
Libya’s Colonial Experience
The Ottoman Empire and Qaramanli Dynasty. Ottoman forces first
occupied the coastal regions of the territory that now constitutes Libya in the mid-16th
century. However, Ottoman administrators faced stiff and near constant resistance
from tribal confederations and a rival independent state in the Fezzan region, all of
which limited the Ottomans’ political influence. Beginning in 1711, a semi-
independent state under Turkish official Ahmed Qaramanli emerged in Tripoli and
established control over the Ottoman provinces of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, with
Fezzan remaining contested. The Qaramanli family maintained its power and
independent rule until the early 19th century through naval privateers and pirates
under its control who were used to collect tribute and ransom from merchant vessels
seized in the Mediterranean Sea.
“The Shores of Tripoli”. The Qaramanli naval forces of Tripoli formed one
component of a regional grouping commonly referred to as “the Barbary pirates,”
which played a pivotal role in shaping the foreign and military policies of the young
United States. Beginning in the late 1780s, a series of confrontations between U.S.
merchant ships and naval raiding parties from Tripoli and other neighboring city-
states such as Algiers and Tunis led to the destruction of U.S. maritime cargo and the
seizure of U.S. hostages. Subsequent negotiations between the United States and the
governments of the Barbary states concluded with the signing of some of the first
bilateral treaties in U.S. history, including U.S. agreements to pay tribute to Tripoli
in exchange for the safe passage of U.S. vessels off what is now the Libyan coast.
Disputes over the terms of this bilateral agreement and continuing attacks on
U.S. merchant ships impressed upon the U.S. government the need for a naval
protection force to safeguard U.S. commercial activity in the Mediterranean. This
need eventually was satisfied by the creation of the United States Navy by Congress
in April 1798. An attack on the U.S. consulate in Tripoli in 1801 and further attacks
on U.S. ships sparked open hostilities between the newly commissioned light naval
forces of the United States and the privateers of Tripoli. Frequent naval engagements
from 1801 to 1805 were often won by U.S. forces, but one skirmish in 1804 ended
with the grounding of the U.S.S. Philadelphia and the capture of her crew. The
conflict culminated in the overland seizure of the eastern Libyan city of Darnah by
U.S. Marines and a team of recruited indigenous forces in 1805 - the basis for the
reference to “the shores of Tripoli” in the Marine Corps hymn. The fall of Darnah
compelled the Qaramanli leadership in Tripoli to relent to demands to ransom the
U.S. prisoners and sign a “treaty of peace and friendship.”
The decline of Qaramanli naval power following the confrontation with the
United States contributed to the dynasty’s steady loss of political power. Ottoman
authorities reoccupied Tripoli in 1835 and began a campaign to pacify and coopt the
region’s tribal confederations. The Ottomans solicited the cooperation of the leaders
of a conservative revivalist Sufi order known as the Sanusiyah based in Cyrenaica,
which they allowed to raise an independent militia and participate in a tacit ruling
partnership. Although the Ottoman administrative structure imposed in the 19th

CRS-28
century formed the basis for a centralized state, the penetration of Ottoman political
power remained incomplete and regional resistance to Ottoman reforms and central
authority persisted into the 20th century.
Italian Annexation and Post War Uncertainty. Italy annexed Tripolitania
and Cyrenaica in 1911, and the Ottoman Empire’s subsequent release of its claim to
its territory in 1912, marked the beginning of a violent twenty-year period of
resistance to Italian rule led by the Sanussi order and local tribes. The Italian
occupation authorities dismantled the remaining Ottoman governing structures and
disrupted the activities of social and cultural institutions across Libya. Sanussi
resistance fighters were defeated during World War I, and the international
community formally recognized Italian control over the territory in 1924. A second
round of anti-Italian insurgency spurred a violent crackdown by Italian forces under
Mussolini, who renamed the territory Libya in 1929. Resistance based in Cyrenaica
was worn down and ultimately crushed by 1931. In 1934, Italian peasant colonists
began entering the provinces, leading to the displacement of local farmers and the
uprooting of established agricultural communities across the country. The population
of Cyrenaica remained hostile to Italian rule and its Sanussi leaders allied themselves
with British colonial forces in neighboring Egypt.
During the Second World War, Libya served as a staging ground for Italian and
German attacks on French North Africa and British-held Egypt. Pivotal battles took
place in Cyrenaica from 1940 to early 1943, when German and Italian forces were
forced from Libya by British troops under General Bernard Montgomery. British-
organized Sanussi fighters played a role in supporting allied operations against
German and Italian forces. Following the war, Libya’s provinces were divided under
British and French protection until the disposition of Italy’s former colonies could
be negotiated. Protracted and complex negotiations continued for years. In
November 1949, U.N. General Assembly Resolution 289 declared that the three
disparate regions would be united in a single, independent state. The resolution also
dispatched a United Nations Commissioner to assist a national assembly representing
the regions in creating institutions for a new state that was to assume sovereignty no
later than January 1, 1952. The strength of tribal and regional identities complicated
the subsequent negotiations and strongly influenced the new government following
independence.
Independence and Monarchy, 1951-1969
A constitution agreed to by the U.N.-assisted National Constituent Assembly in
October 1951 established a federal system of government with central authority
vested in King Idris As Sanussi I and legislative authority vested in a Prime Minister,
a Council of Ministers, and a bicameral legislature. On December 24, 1951, the
United Kingdom of Libya became one of the first independent states in Africa. The
first parliamentary election was held in February 1952, one month after
independence. Political parties were banned by the king shortly after independence
was declared, and Libya’s first decade of independence was characterized by
continuous bargaining and rivalry among the provincial governments over taxation,
development, and constitutional issues. In 1963, King Idris replaced the federal
system of government with a unitary monarchy that centralized royal authority, in
part to streamline the development of the country’s newly discovered oil resources.

CRS-29
Prior to the discovery of marketable oil in 1959, the Libyan government was
largely dependent on economic aid and technical assistance it received from
international institutions and through military basing agreements with the United
States and United Kingdom. The U.S.-operated air base at Wheelus field outside of
Tripoli served as an important Strategic Air Command base and center for military
intelligence operations throughout the 1950s and 1960s. Oil wealth brought rapid
economic growth and greater financial independence to Libya in the 1960s, but the
weakness of national institutions and Libyan elites’ growing identification with the
pan-Arab socialist ideology of Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser contributed to
the gradual marginalization of the monarchy under King Idris. Popular criticism of
U.S. and British basing agreements grew, becoming amplified in wake of Israel’s
defeat of Arab forces in the 1967 Six Day War. King Idris left the country in mid-
1969 for medical reasons, setting the stage for a military coup in September, led by
a young, devoted Nasserite army captain named Muammar Al Qadhafi.