PEACEW RKS

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE 

IN LIBYA TODAY

Peter Cole with Fiona Mangan

[ [

Al-Aziziya

Ruhaibat

RujbanAl-Awainia

Msallata

Gharyan

Zintan

Tarhuna

Misrata

Sirt

Waddan

Hun Sawkna

Birak

Ghadames

Awbari

Sabha

Murzuq

Bani Walid

Ajailat Jmail

Badr Jadu

Kabaw

Timzin

Nalut

Tiji

Zuwara

Zwaia

Kikla

Qal’a

Yefren

Tawergha

Ajdabiya

Benghazi*

Al-Marj

Al-Baida Dern

Sultan

Quaminis

Al-Fuwayha

Jalu

Tazirbu

Awjila

Abyar

Mlitania

Tukra Al-Qubba

Labraq

Suluq

Jirma

Umm al-Aranib

Qutrun

Ghat

Tmasseh

LIBYA

Al-Zawiya

Khoms

Suq al-Jum’a

Al-Asab’a

Al Marj

Al-Dirsa

Al-Masamir 

Al-Abid

Al-Urfa

Al-Awama

Al-Baida

Bara’sa

Al-Hasa

Al-Awama

Al-Huta

Al-Dirsa

Al-Masamir

Derna

Al-Ubaidat 

Al-Shawa’i

Tawajir

Wadi Ash-Shati’

Al-Hasawna 

Al-Maqarha 

Awlad Bu Saif 

Al-Rabi’at 

Amazigh

Al-Nwail

Warshfana

Tebu

A

Al-Awaqir

Al-Fawaqir

Warfalla

Firjan

Al-Majabara

eg

-A T

b

Ajdabiya

Al-Fawaqir

Mahashish

Al-Magharba

Sirt

Qadhadfa

Awlad Shaikh

Az-Ziyayna

Awlad Hamil

Al-Magharba

Awlad Sulaiman

Waddan

Al-Ashraf

Rabah

Al-Khwaild

Al-Si’an

Al-Awajala

Al-Hawana

Mashashia

Al-Slit

ya

Tawergha

azi*

Sabha

Awlad Bu Saif 

Qadhadhfa

Awlad Hadir 

Al-Rabi’at

Awlad Sulaiman

Misrata

Al-Ahali descendants

Al-Karaghala

Awlad al-Shaikh descendants

Tarhuna

Awlad Ma’raf

Awlad Muslim

Muzawagha

Muraghaba

Gharyan

Bani Dawud Quarter

Bani Nasir Quarter

Bani Khalifa Quarter

Al-Qawasim Quarter

Zintan

Awlad Bilhul

Awlad Dwaib

Al-Fazzazna

Bani Walid

Warfalla

(Sub-divisions: 

Sa’dat, Jamamla, 

Sabayi’, Faladna, 

Al-Awatin)

Karaghala

Cities

Small local tribes

Al-Si’an

Amazigh 

Warshfana

Al-Nwail 

Al-Fawaqir 

Al-Awaqir

Al-Ubaidat

Tebu

Tuareg 

Majabara

Warfalla

Firjan

Awlad Sulaiman

Al-Magharba

Karaghala

Karaghala refers to a set of originally Turkic 

and Caucasian clans, descended in part from the 

Ottoman janissaries who founded outposts in Libya 

during the Ottoman empire, but who have long since 

intermarried into both Arab and native Libyan tribes. 

Despite this, shared family connections, outlook, and 

culture remain among many descendants of these clans, 

such that today, it is a recognizable part of Libya’s 

social fabric.

Al-Fazzazna 

Al-Fazzazna refers to a number of small clans who are 

descended from indigenous inhabitants and trading 

families in the area, sometimes intermarried with Arab 

nomadic tribes. 

Tripoli and Benghazi are mixed cities, and internal economic migration 

means that today, their inhabitants hail from across Libya. They are 

therefore not included on this map.

* 

LIBYA MAJOR COMMUNITIES
Cover map: A portion of the map of Libyan tribes. 

Map created by Isabel Kruger.

The views expressed in this report are those of the 

authors alone. They do not necessarily reflect the 

views of the United States Institute of Peace.

United States Institute of Peace

2301 Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20037

Phone: 202.457.1700

Fax: 202.429.6063

E-mail: usip_requests@usip.org

Web: www.usip.org

Peaceworks No. 118. First published 2016.

ISBN: 978-1-60127-612-4

© 2016 by the United States Institute of Peace

About the Repor

This report examines the renewed role of tribes as 

guarantors of social stability and providers of security 

and justice services in Libya since the 2011 revolution. 

Supported by the International Narcotics and Law 

Enforcement Bureau of the U.S. Department of State, the 

study is part of a portfolio of rule of law work carried out 

by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) in Libya. 

Report findings are based on qualitative field research 

and a nationally representative survey carried out by USIP 

in partnership with Altai Consulting. A companion report 

discusses how political currents in Libya since 2011 have 

shaped policing and security actors on the ground. 

About the Author

Peter Cole is a scholar and researcher, primarily focused 

on Libya, the Middle East, and North Africa. The lead 

editor of The Libyan Revolution and Its Aftermath

(2015), he has been a consultant for Altai Consulting 

since August 2015 and was formerly a senior analyst at 

International Crisis Group, and a special consultant on 

nonstate armed groups at UNSMIL and to the National 

Dialogue Preparatory Commission. Fiona Mangan is a 

senior program officer with the USIP Center for Applied 

Conflict Transformation and Middle East and Africa 

Center. Her work focuses on prison reform, organized 

crime, justice, and security issues. Field research and 

initial analysis were carried out by Naji Abou Khalil and 

Valérie Stocker of Altai Consulting. 
PEACEWORKS • AUGUST 2016 • NO. 118

CONTENTS

Kufra

Al-Aziziya

Ruhaibat

RujbanAl-Awainia

Msallata

Gharyan

Zintan

Tarhuna

Misrata

Sirt

Waddan

Hun Sawkna

Birak

hadames

Awbari

Sabha

Murzuq

Bani Walid

Ajailat Jmail

Badr Jadu

Kabaw

Timzin

Nalut

Tiji

Zuwara

Zwaia

Kikla

Qal’a

Yefren

Tawergha

Ajdabiya

Benghazi*

Al-Marj

Al-Baida Derna

Sultan

Quaminis

Al-Fuwayha

Jalu

Tazirbu

Ribyana

Awjila

Abyar

Mlitania

Tukra Al-Qubba

Labraq

Suluq

Jirma

Umm al-Aranib

Qutrun

Ghat

Tmasseh

LIBYA

Al-Zawiya

Khoms

Suq al-Jum’a

Al-Asab’a

Al Marj

Al-Dirsa

Al-Masamir 

Al-Abid

Al-Urfa

Al-Awama

Al-Baida

Bara’sa

Al-Hasa

Al-Awama

Al-Huta

Al-Dirsa

Al-Masamir

Derna

Al-Ubaidat 

Al-Shawa’ir 

Tawajir

Wadi Ash-Shati’

Al-Hasawna 

Al-Maqarha 

Awlad Bu Saif 

Al-Rabi’at 

Amazigh

Al-Nwail

Warshfana

Tebu

Al-Ubaidat Al-Awaqir

Al-Fawaqir

Zwayya

Warfalla

Firjan

Al-Majabara

-A T

b

Ajdabiya

Al-Fawaqir

Mahashish

Al-Magharba

Sirt

Qadhadfa

Awlad Shaikh

Az-Ziyayna

Awlad Hamil

Al-Magharba

Awlad Sulaiman

Waddan

Al-Ashraf

Rabah

Al-Khwaild

Al-Si’an

Al-Awajala

Al-Hawana

Mashashia

Al-Slit

Tawergha

azi*

Sabha

Awlad Bu Saif 

Qadhadhfa

Awlad Hadir 

Al-Rabi’at

Awlad Sulaiman

Misrata

Al-Ahali descendants

Al-Karaghala

Awlad al-Shaikh descendants

Tarhuna

Awlad Ma’raf

Awlad Muslim

Muzawagha

Muraghaba

Gharyan

Bani Dawud Quarter

Bani Nasir Quarter

Bani Khalifa Quarter

Al-Qawasim Quarter

Zintan

Awlad Bilhul

Awlad Dwaib

Al-Fazzazna

Bani Walid

Warfalla

(Sub-divisions: 

Sa’dat, Jamamla, 

Sabayi’, Faladna, 

Al-Awatin)

Tobruk

Al-Shahaibat 

Al-Mnaa 

Al-Qut’ana 

Al-Qunashat 

Hubun

Tebu

Karaghala

Cities

Small local tribes

Al-Si’an

Amazigh 

Warshfana

Al-Nwail 

Al-Fawaqir 

Al-Awaqir

Al-Ubaidat

Tebu

Tuareg 

Majabara

Warfalla

Firjan

Awlad Sulaiman

Al-Magharba

Karaghala

Karaghala refers to a set of originally Turkic 

and Caucasian clans, descended in part from the 

Ottoman janissaries who founded outposts in Libya 

during the Ottoman empire, but who have long since 

intermarried into both Arab and native Libyan tribes. 

Despite this, shared family connections, outlook, and 

culture remain among many descendants of these clans, 

such that today, it is a recognizable part of Libya’s 

social fabric.

Al-Fazzazna 

Al-Fazzazna refers to a number of small clans who are 

descended from indigenous inhabitants and trading 

families in the area, sometimes intermarried with Arab 

nomadic tribes. 

Tripoli and Benghazi are mixed cities, and internal economic migration 

means that today, their inhabitants hail from across Libya. They are 

therefore not included on this map.

* 

LIBYA MAJOR COMMUNITIES Introduction ... 5

Tribalism in Libya ... 6

Tribes as Security and Justice Actors ... 13

Participation in Security and Justice Provision ... 18

Conclusion ... 32

Appendix A. Research Methodology ... 37

Appendix B. Glossary ... 39

[Since the revolution, tribes have asserted themselves 

within Libya’s fractious security, justice, and peacemaking 

space....As tribal involvement has grown, so has the 

impact of intertribal power dynamics.]

Map of Libyan Tribes

Kufra

Al-Aziziya

Ruhaibat

Rujban

Al-Awainia

Msallata

Gharyan

Zintan

Tarhuna Misrata

Sirt

Waddan

Hun

Sawkna

Birak

Ghadames

Awbari

Sabha

Murzuq

Bani Walid

Ajailat Jmail

Jadu Badr

Kabaw

Timzin

Nalut

Tiji

Zuwara

Zwaia

Kikla

Qal’a

Yefren

Tawergha

Ajdabiya

Benghazi*

Al-Marj

Al-Baida Derna

Sultan

Quaminis

Al-Fuwayha

Jalu

Tazirbu

Ribyana

Awjila

Abyar

Mlitania

Tukra Al-Qubba

Labraq

Suluq

Jirma

Umm al-Aranib

Qutrun

Ghat

Tmasseh

LIBYA

Al-Zawiya

Khoms

Suq al-Jum’a

Al-Asab’a

Al MarjAl-DirsaAl-Masamir Al-AbidAl-UrfaAl-Awama

Al-BaidaBara’saAl-HasaAl-AwamaAl-HutaAl-DirsaAl-Masamir

DernaAl-Ubaidat Al-Shawa’ir Tawajir

Wadi Ash-Shati’Al-Hasawna Al-Maqarha Awlad Bu Saif Al-Rabi’at 

Amazigh

Al-Nwail

Warshfana

Tebu

Al-Ubaidat Al-Awaqir

Al-Fawaqir

Zwayya

Warfalla

Firjan

Al-Majabara

Tuareg

-A T

b

AjdabiyaAl-FawaqirMahashishAl-Magharba

SirtQadhadfaAwlad ShaikhAz-ZiyaynaAwlad HamilAl-MagharbaAwlad Sulaiman

WaddanAl-AshrafRabah

Al-Khwaild

Al-Si’an

Al-Awajala

Al-Hawana

Mashashia

Al-Slit

Ghadamasiyya

Tawergha

azi*

SabhaAwlad Bu Saif QadhadhfaAwlad Hadir Al-Rabi’atAwlad Sulaiman

MisrataAl-Ahali descendantsAl-KaraghalaAwlad al-Shaikh descendants

TarhunaAwlad Ma’rafAwlad MuslimMuzawaghaMuraghaba

GharyanBani Dawud QuarterBani Nasir QuarterBani Khalifa QuarterAl-Qawasim Quarter

ZintanAwlad BilhulAwlad Dwaib

Al-Fazzazna

Bani WalidWarfalla(Sub-divisions: Sa’dat, Jamamla, Sabayi’, Faladna, Al-Awatin)

TobrukAl-Shahaibat Al-Mnaa Al-Qut’ana Al-Qunashat Hubun

Tebu

Karaghala

CitiesSmall local tribesAl-Si’anAmazigh WarshfanaAl-Nwail Al-Fawaqir Al-AwaqirAl-UbaidatTebuTuareg MajabaraWarfallaFirjanAwlad SulaimanAl-MagharbaKaraghalaKaraghala refers to a set of originally Turkic and Caucasian clans, descended in part from the Ottoman janissaries who founded outposts in Libya during the Ottoman empire, but who have long since intermarried into both Arab and native Libyan tribes. Despite this, shared family connections, outlook, and culture remain among many descendants of these clans, such that today, it is a recognizable part of Libya’s social fabric.Al-Fazzazna Al-Fazzazna refers to a number of small clans who are descended from indigenous inhabitants and trading families in the area, sometimes intermarried with Arab nomadic tribes. 

Tripoli and Benghazi are mixed cities, and internal economic migration means that today, their inhabitants hail from across Libya. They are 

therefore not included on this map.

* 

LIBYA MAJOR COMMUNITIES
USIP.ORG 3

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Summary

■ Governance in Libya has long been influenced by tribal leaders alongside central authority. 

Tribalism and its meaning for Libyans, though, has evolved over the centuries, initially in 

response to outside powers and more recently to internal circumstances.

■ The first efforts to extend central government authority, introduced during the Ottoman 

era, were continued through the Gadhafi era and fueled significant conflict between tribes. 

■ In the wake of the 2011 revolution that destroyed what little remained of state institutions, 

tribes and armed groups stepped in to fill the vacuum. This trend increased after the collapse of central state security in 2014.

■ When tribal power structures are stable, they dominate policing and security services. 

When they are unstable, they lose control and sometimes rely on armed groups.

■ Tribal influence over police is derived from the ability of tribes to staff local police structures and the need of the police to secure tribal permissions to act in tribal territories.

■ Tribal influence over justice actors is more limited. Many cases, though, do not make it to 

court, either because they are resolved through tribal arbitration or because local instability 

prevents courts from operating.

■ Libyans nonetheless overwhelmingly desire a security and justice system provided by the 

state and independent of tribal influence. Support for informal or nonstate justice systems 

is minimal. Nonetheless, a significant minority (in some areas majorities) see tribes as 

effective security providers, perhaps because state providers have not been effective. 

■ Reform efforts need to draw on tribal expertise and experience in peacemaking and 

negotiation, bearing in mind what modern tribalism means to Libyans.
USIP.ORG 5

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Introduction

For much of its history, Libya has had either a weak or a nonexistent central government, and 

local governance outside administrative capitals has been handled largely by tribe or clan leaders known as notables—a term encompassing all manner of local dignitaries, including religious 

leaders, family elders, businesspeople, and others. The desert and coastal areas that make up 

the modern state have been treated as an independent state only relatively recently, since 1952. 

Before then, the vast expanse of Libya was governed by external actors—the Romans, Arab 

caliphates, the Ottoman caliphate, and finally the Italian occupation—able to impose only 

limited authority outside the coastal urban areas. The absence of centralized government was 

accentuated by the country’s three regions—Tripolitania, Cyrenaica, and Fezzan—which were 

usually administered by separate governors as separate entities.1 Those regions still manifest 

significant political and social differences.

Tribal culture—outside the native ethnic groups now known as the Amazigh (Berber), 

Tuareg, and Tebu—became dominated by an Arab social culture brought with successive 

waves of Arab Bedouin migrations.2 Arab tribes conquered or displaced local and nomadic 

tribes but also gradually merged with them.3 The genealogies of tribes became complex as 

different clans and bloodlines merged or diverged. In some areas, clans within the Arab tribes 

who claimed a purity of bloodline extending back to the Prophet and his companions (such 

tribes are known as the Sa’da) dominated tribes with mixed racial origin (known as Murabitin) 

through birthright or conquest.4 Elsewhere, Arab Bedouin clans banded with non-Arab clans 

for protection and reinforced social pacts through marriage. In rural areas, this bonding process 

sometimes led to the group becoming a “tribe”—the Warfalla, for example. Similarly, in urban 

areas, trading families and residents bonded together to protect a city’s interests against the 

(inevitably foreign) government of the day, creating a style of city-state and antigovernment 

politics that is evident even today.

The first sustained modern efforts to extend central government authority over local 

tribes came in the Ottoman era, when in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century the 

Qaramanli dynasty (1711–1835) attempted to conquer Libya’s interior. The state later sought to 

extend the Ottoman tanzimat administrative reforms, raising levies and hiring tax collectors.5

This assertion of state authority fueled significant conflict between tribes, depending on how 

they positioned themselves regarding the state. When the subsequent Italian colonization 

project sought to extend beyond its base in Tripoli, it too fomented significant armed resistance 

and intertribal fratricide.6

In the modern era, both King Idris (1951–1969) and Muammar Gadhafi (1969–2011) 

attempted to extend the authority of government over tribes in various ways, whether by 

building the state (Idris) or bypassing it to manipulate tribal interests directly (Gadhafi). 

Complicating matters, given that government and statebuilding were historically imposed from 

outside, whenever representatives of tribes and cities involved themselves in statebuilding or 

national politics, they tended to be dismissed by their tribes as pawns or self-interested servers 

of foreign projects or Gadhafi’s regime. 

The 2011 revolution damaged or destroyed what little remained of state institutions, 

many already hollowed from Gadhafi-era neglect, which triggered a vacuum of government 

authority, legitimacy, and security. Across the country, tribes and armed groups stepped in to 

fill the vacuum. Almost all Libyan families armed themselves and tribal communities became 

militarized. This trend increased following the collapse and polarization of central state security 

and justice institutions in 2014. At the same time, the nature and assertion of tribal authority 
6 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

began to be challenged, particularly by religio-political networks, ranging from the Muslim 

Brotherhood to the more extreme Ansar al-Sharia and, recently, the Islamic State.

The extent to which tribal identity retains the ability to mobilize groups socially and 

politically in modern Libya is debated. Much anecdotal evidence suggests that tribes have 

reemerged and reinvented their role in the public sphere since the revolution, including in 

the domains of justice and security provision, conflict management, and conflict resolution. 

This report explores that supposition, analyzing what tribe means in postrevolution Libya; the 

impact of tribalism on security, justice, and peacemaking; and how Libyans perceive the role 

of tribe versus state in these areas. The report presents the results of a nationally representative 

survey of 979 Libyans conducted between January and August of 2015 and qualitative field 

research in the cities of Tobruk, Bani Walid, and Sabha. It presents the cities—each with very 

different tribal composition—as case studies through which to explore some of the variances 

and modalities of tribal influence. Unless otherwise cited, statements and conclusions in this 

report are drawn from fieldwork interviews and survey data. 

Discussions of tribe and tribalism in the Arab world often conjure notions of social organization based on bloodline or tradition.7

 At the simplest level, this definition holds true in Libya, 

but centuries of history have caused the characteristics of tribal society in Libya to evolve and 

mature in complex ways. Successive waves of migration of Arab and non-Arab tribes and clans 

have muddled ancestry over time, and families who connected through marriage, geography, 

and trade have also come to be viewed as new tribes, creating distinctions and hierarchies 

within and between tribes.8 Additionally, although the word tribe has continued to be used 

to describe a group whose members share a bloodline reaching back generations, tribes have 

also evolved to become political actors.9 For those tribes that emerged as politically influential, 

influence was channeled through leading members of that tribe, or notables.

10 For this reason, 

the word tribe, at least for the more politically significant tribes, has come to define a political 

entity consisting of a small network of leading notables at the head of tribes that, for reasons of 

history, have come to have a big say in local affairs. This political sense of the word has also been 

observed—wryly, by Libyans—to apply to townships, such as Misrata, which also act tribally in 

this way, even though they are not (wholly) descended from Arab Bedouin tribal societies and 

do not consider themselves to be a tribe. 

Box 1. Key Takeaways

Tribalism in Libya refers to modes of social organization by bloodline and by compacts 

between clans. These modes have evolved over the centuries.

Tribalism has a political dimension in Libya that involves networks of local elites 

(notables) of the same tribal origin who share political objectives.

The channels through which local elites exercised governance and conflict mediation 

were severely disrupted under Gadhafi, who empowered minorities and lower-status 

tribes over traditional elders from higher-status tribes.

Tribe is a receding reality for the majority of Libyans; members of a tribe do not think 

or act the same way.

Tribalism in Libya
USIP.ORG 7

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

The three case study areas in this report, for example, offer three different tribal, social, and 

political orders. In Tobruk, social order was built on military conquest and patronage; in Bani 

Walid, on social pacts between clans that later came to be regarded as tribes; and in Sabha, on a 

political confederation of nomadic Arab Bedouin tribes that at one point established a sultanate.

Historically, statebuilding efforts in Libya have met resistance from notables within the 

tribes, not least because Libya was governed by foreign powers for much of its history. Efforts 

by the state to build its presence and power led to what has been called a politics of notables in 

which the state had to work with and through prominent local leaders to achieve governance.11

The fraught dialogue between tribes and state became especially volatile in the nineteenth 

century, when the Ottoman state’s tanzimat reforms led it to try to systematically extend its 

reach into various regions of Libya to collect taxes, levy soldiers, control trade, and so forth. 

This entailed employing tax collectors, customs officials, garrison commanders, judges, and 

administrators. Ottoman governors were inevitably temporary, and thus depended on the 

political influence and support of prominent Libyan families. Notables sought to gain power 

either from employment with the state or sometimes by resisting it; the state required the 

co-option of those families, who had social power and could in theory persuade the population 

to accept the state’s presence.12 This practical emphasis on influence meant that such notables 

could emerge from any local group or actor with social capital or influence; in Ottoman society, 

such figures included ulema (religious scholars), muftis (legal scholars), heads of clans (naqibs), 

families with elite bloodlines, landowners, police chiefs, and garrison commanders, all of whom 

could nominate delegates (nawwab) in their stead.13

For this reason, the composition of notables has changed over time in step with regime 

changes and Libya’s different statebuilding exercises. Notables still include naqibs and na’ibs

(family representatives) from families with strong religious reputations or ancestral bloodlines. 

However, during the Gadhafi era, security brigades and military battalions replaced Ottoman-era 

garrisons, and today armed group commanders of all leanings have emerged as notables in many 

circumstances. The role of the traditional ulema and mufti class has become somewhat sidelined 

by other religious trends but is still considered important. Retired state officials and bureaucrats, 

diaspora Libyans, businesspersons, philanthropists, professionals, scholars, and technical experts 

can also be called on to step up as noteworthy persons in their own right, again according to 

circumstance.14 However, when tribal affairs are at stake—for example, in disputes over land or 

grazing rights, or in the negotiation of peace accords between neighbors—the heritage embodied 

in particular families and clan heads is respected and their views must, to a large extent, be 

accommodated even where the views of professionals and experts within the tribe may differ.

This uneasy relationship between state authority and independent local authorities with de 

facto power has survived in a modified way. It explains in large part why local Libyan leaderships 

want state security services but also to dominate or control those services. Through history, tribal 

notables have used state structures to develop and extend their social status and influence; for 

its part, to extend its reach, the central administration in Tripoli allowed those notables to do so. 

The system survived until the independence of Libya and the reign of Idris, who allowed tribal 

allies to dominate the independent state’s new policing and military sectors.15

Gadhafi’s ascent to power disrupted this state of affairs. During his first years in power, 

Gadhafi made systematic attempts to undo the power of local notables. Omar El Fathaly 

and Monte Palmer, who conducted field research in rural Libya in the early 1970s, charted 

Gadhafi’s “dismissal of all local officials including governors, mayors, and deputy mayors, most 

of whom had been tribal sheikhs or their relatives; and replacement by a new class of local 

Local Libyan leaderships 

want state security services 

but also to dominate or 

control those services.
8 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

administrators whose values and social origins were compatible with those of the RCC [the 

Revolutionary Command Council], that is, educated members of less prestigious tribes with no 

ties to the old elite structure.”16 Despite his revolutionary zeal, Gadhafi’s efforts were frequently 

frustrated in these early years.17

Such efforts were intensified during the so-called Green Book phase of the 1970s, which 

saw the regime take more sweeping measures to reorder society into an idealized “state of 

the masses” (jamahiriya), which involved trying to eliminate tribal interests altogether.18 The 

policy was enforced by newly created Revolutionary Committees at great human cost, and 

involved forced nationalization of property and state-sponsored trade union movements in the 

1980s.19 Preoccupied with the possibility of internal disunion, Gadhafi condemned tribalism 

as incompatible with his notion of a jamahiriya based on direct political participation. But 

when the regime tried to remove tribal leaders and replace them with political figures loyal to 

the jamahiriya, these loyalists often turned out to be simply members of other tribes and clans 

disfavored by the previous order.20 The replacement of old notable elites with members of less 

prestigious tribes echoed a revolutionary class warfare, but in practice simply replaced one tribal 

hierarchy with another.21

By the 1990s, Gadhafi’s policies and restructuring of local governance demonstrated a 

recognition that his revolutionary state, far from eliminating the power of tribes, had simply 

reconfigured it. Following an attempted military coup against the regime in 1993 in which 

families of one tribe, the Warfalla, played a key role, Gadhafi revived an ideological and 

ideologized form of tribalism in his public discourse.22 “In its rehabilitated incarnation, tribalism 

was mixed extensively with nationalistic discourse, [meaning that] Gadhafi encouraged tribal 

leaders to denounce fellow tribesmen whose political ideas clashed with his national Jamahiriya 

project.”23 The creation of Popular Social Leadership Committees in 1994 was a particularly 

insidious mechanism by which those same disfavored families and individuals were awarded a 

nebulous position as a coordinator (munassiq) for their particular clan. This entailed sweeping 

authority—including the right to have homes bulldozed and to regulate state utilities and 

services—typically used to cow and control notable families.24 Sometimes tribes resisted 

this attempt to merge a tribal ethos with the national agenda.25 Again, though, Gadhafi’s 

empowerment of those who were marginalized under traditional tribal structures overcame any 

such resistance. By installing munassiq within the fabric of tribe and family, the Gadhafi regime 

dictated the nature of intertribal alliances and imposed itself as the sole mediator in intertribal 

and intercommunal disputes. State security and intelligence apparatus officials also replaced 

tribesmen as mediators between different components of society. In short, under Gadhafi, 

tribal leadership, discourse, and influence mechanisms were heavily policed and politicized.

Relevance

Tribalism, as a way of political organization within and against the state, still exists in Libya. 

However, the counterforces of urbanization, globalization, population growth, and regionallevel political and religious movements have considerably diminished tribal notables’ reach both 

across the country and among younger members of the tribe. Most Libyans are under thirty-five, 

and more than half the population live in the tribally mixed cities of Tripoli and Benghazi. Many 

have either lived or studied abroad at some point, or encountered anti-tribal ideologies such as 

Salafism and political Islam, which further distance them from tribal networks. The survey data 

presented in this section demonstrates that, although powerful networks of leading notables at 
USIP.ORG 9

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

the heads of tribes remain influential in Libyan politics, security, justice, and peacemaking, most 

Libyans have a very remote connection to these activities and feel little association with tribe in 

their daily lives.

The word tribe still carries a sense of bloodline and heritage. The survey portion of this study 

polled respondents on their understanding of the concept of the tribe and its place in Libyan 

society, and found that 53 percent of the 979 respondents understood members of a tribe to 

be “tied to each other by blood links.” A further 23 percent gave a more nuanced response, 

namely, that members of a tribe “refer to one ancestor, but are not always tied by blood links.” 

As noted, different models of tribe exist in Libya, some that have a common ancestry and some 

that do not, and the exact genealogy of tribal lineage is complicated by various social pacts, 

intermarriages, and migrations. Nonetheless, in all cases, genealogy is a significant part of how 

Libyans understand tribal “membership.” 

Respondents, however, reported that little else other than genealogy connected tribes (see 

figure 1). Only one in ten respondents reported that members of the same tribe “take up 

arms together when the tribe is threatened” or “have the same cultural or behavioral codes.” 

Additionally, only tiny percentages—2 and 3 percent, respectively—reported that members of 

a tribe shared economic or political interests.26

Further evidence that the concept of tribe carries strong genealogical but marginal political 

significance is found in other survey data. Libyans reported stronger links to their country and to 

their family than to their tribe, even though most do identify with a particular tribe (see figures 

2 and 3). Tribal identity is somewhat stronger in the east and the southwest, where tribes have 

historically played a stronger role in governance and dispute resolution, than in the west.

Figure 1. Which of the following statements do you identify with most? (n=979)

...take up arms together when the tribe is threatened

...share the same economical interest

...share the same political cause

...share the same cultural and behavioral codes

...refer to one ancestor but are not always tied by blood links

... are tied to each other by blood links

Members of one tribe...

10%

2%

3%

9%

23%

53%
10 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

To conclude, the survey results reinforce the two conclusions drawn from historical 

scholarship and qualitative analysis: one, that tribe is a politically relevant concept insofar as 

it is employed by small elite networks of politicians, military leaders, and local family heads as 

an organizing principle when engaging in political and security matters; and two, that, almost 

paradoxically, it is exceedingly remote from most Libyans’ lives.

Some academics, particularly in Libya, have tried to explain why notables play political and 

security roles that are outsized in relation to the number of Libyans with strong tribal identities. 

In the 1990s, the Benghazi public intellectual Faraj Najem presented the genealogies of Libyan 

tribes for a modern audience in a thesis dissertation, referring to a variety of genealogical 

studies conducted by Arab authors as well as those done by Italian orientalists in the early 

Figure 2. Among the following groups, to which do you identify the most? (n=979, by region)

Figure 3. Do you identify with one particular tribe? (n=979, by region)

■ Tribe 

■ Family 

■ City 

■ Neighborhood 

■ Country 

■ Other 

■ Don’t know 

■ Refused to answer West East Southwest Libya

47%

11%

25%

14%

1%

1%

1%

1%

2%

1%

38%

8%

23%

27%

41%

9%

25%

23%

44%

10%

25%

19%

1%

1% 2%

Yes

No

Libya

Southwest

East

West

77% 

83% 

86% 

74% 26% 

14% 

17% 

23% 
USIP.ORG 11

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

twentieth century.27 Political scientist Amal Obeidi noted that tribal solidarity is not static 

and that Libyans who self-identify as tribal in fact use tribal connections only out of practical 

necessity and theoretically are willing to drop tribal identification and to consider themselves 

only as Libyans. Her reading of tribalism was as a practical attempt to create civil society in a 

country that, given the nature of its governments, had never had one.28

Obeidi’s explanation comes close to the conclusions of this report’s surveying, but the use 

of the term civil society is arguably overestimating the visibility and presence of tribes. Other 

anthropologists cite anecdotal evidence that many Libyans do not know who notables are 

or how to access them, and that full understanding of where points of influence and access 

within a tribe lie is far from commonplace. The scholar and anthropologist Igor Cherstich 

notes, “In my fieldwork experiences I have never met a Libyan who knew the identity of his 

tribal head. Many of my informants, even those who were very proud of their tribal identity, 

would inquire about the identity of their leaders only in situations that required their help 

or mediation.”29 Survey data from this study reinforces this conclusion. In the east, only 22 

percent of respondents said they had met with a tribal leader or elder within the previous 

twelve months; in the west, only 9 percent; and in the southwest, only 14 percent (see figure 

4). Far from being a stand-in for civil society, tribes seem to be somewhat more akin to an 

emergency insurance policy and mediation service in the eyes of many Libyans.

Figure 4. Have you met with a tribal elder over the past twelve months? (n=979)

9% 

22% 

14% 19% 

7% 13% 

91% 

78% 

86% 81% 

93% 87% 

West East Southwest Male Female Libya 

Yes No 

Finally, it is not surprising, given these findings, that respondents were divided on whether 

tribes were “a source of pride” for Libyans. Slightly more than half agreed that tribal identity 

was a source of pride and 26 percent strongly disagreed (see figure 6). Part of the explanation 

for such mixed feelings is likely to be tribes’ mixed record on promoting stability and providing 

security and justice, which are discussed in the following section.

Far from being a standin for civil society, tribes 

seem to be somewhat 

more akin to an emergency 

insurance policy and 

mediation service in the 

eyes of many Libyans.
12 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Tribal interests—as communicated by networks of notables—are a political reality in 

Libya, then. However, these realities are remote for most Libyans, who have nuanced opinions 

of tribalism and, if they belong to a tribe, turn to it only in extreme or unusual circumstances.30

These attitudes help explain why most Libyans are critical in regard to the legitimacy of tribes 

as security and justice providers in the current context.

Figure 5. Where do you usually meet with tribal elders? (n=979)

Figure 6. Do you believe that tribal identity is a source of pride? (n=979)

■ Tribal elder’s private 

 residence

■ Municipal council

■ Sports club 

■ Mosque 

■ Other

■ Don’t know 

■ Refused to answer 

West East Southwest Libya

34%

8%

17%

16%

24%

1%

12%

14%

10%

59%

12%

6%

33%

18%

31%

26%

9%

15%

15%

34%

1%

4%

1%

1%

1% 1% 1%

33% 

46% 

41% 

37% 

11% 

12% 

17% 

12% 

16% 

14% 

12% 

15% 

9% 

6% 

11% 

8% 

29% 

20% 

19% 

26% 

West 

East 

Southwest 

Libya 

Strongly agree Rather agree Neutral Rather disagree 

Strongly disagree Refused to answer Don’t know 
USIP.ORG 13

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Regarding state policing services, the preponderance of national opinion on whether tribes 

should influence such services was clear; 86 percent of respondents stated that local police 

should be completely independent of tribal affiliation (see figure 7), and 70 percent felt that 

tribal elders should not exercise even informal influence over police (see figure 8). 

Underneath this clear and overwhelming national preference for a police structure 

independent of tribal influence, more nuanced views on what role tribes should play emerged. 

Respondents tended to view tribes positively, as making a significant contribution to security in 

their areas; however, this view was more commonly encountered in the east—where tribal modes 

of organization, relationships between tribes, and the boundaries of tribal territories are more 

stable—than in the west and southwest, where tribal conflicts are currently ongoing (see figure 9).

Just over 60 percent of respondents agreed that tribes were able to “provide security” to the 

community regardless of individual tribal affiliation (see figure 10), and 51 percent felt that 

security entities organized along tribal affiliation (armed groups) were less corrupt than state 

security forces (see figure 11). 

Box 2. Key Takeaways

Most Libyans prefer that a state policing service be available, and believe that tribes 

should not be involved in all security and justice issues. 

Nonetheless, a significant minority (in some areas majorities) see tribes as effective 

security providers, perhaps because state providers today are not effective. 

The preference is strong for a state-mandated legal order and criminal justice system. 

Support for an exclusively informal or nonstate justice system is minimal.

Tribes as Security and Justice Actors

Figure 7. Do you agree that local police should be completely independent from any tribal affiliation?

■ Strongly agree 

■ Somewhat agree

■ Somewhat disagree 

■ Strongly disagree 

■ Refused to answer 

■ Don’t know 

West East Southwest Libya

83%

4%

3%

5%

2%

3%

91% 88% 85%

1%

4%

2%

2%

7%

1%

4%

3%

2%

5%

2%

3%
14 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Figure 8. Do you agree that tribal elders should have an influence on local police? (n=979, by region)

Figure 9. On a scale of 1 to 10, how significant a contribution do you think that tribes make to security in your local area?

 (n=979, average by region, 1=No contribution, 10=Very important contribution)

■ Strongly agree 

■ Somewhat agree

■ Somewhat disagree 

■ Strongly disagree 

■ Refused to answer 

■ Don’t know 

West East Southwest Libya

58%

11%

9%

14%

3%

5%

4%

2%

57%

16%

9%

16%

1%

1%

63%

11%

7%

17%

58%

12%

9%

15%

1%

1%

West East Southwest Libya

6.8

7.7

7.1 7.1
14 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Figure 8. Do you agree that tribal elders should have an influence on local police? (n=979, by region)

Figure 9. On a scale of 1 to 10, how significant a contribution do you think that tribes make to security in your local area?

 (n=979, average by region, 1=No contribution, 10=Very important contribution)

■ Strongly agree 

■ Somewhat agree

■ Somewhat disagree 

■ Strongly disagree 

■ Refused to answer 

■ Don’t know 

West East Southwest Libya

58%

11%

9%

14%

3%

5%

4%

2%

57%

16%

9%

16%

1%

1%

63%

11%

7%

17%

58%

12%

9%

15%

1%

1%

West East Southwest Libya

6.8

7.7

7.1 7.1
16 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Similar nuances emerged on justice issues. As with policing, a clear national preference 

for the state to provide justice emerged. Most respondents maintained that “certain crimes 

are more appropriately handled by the state justice system rather than by tribes”; few held 

that “tribes do not need the state justice system to provide justice.” But just under half of 

the respondents also acknowledged that tribes could “help the state justice system to provide 

justice to Libyans.” A similar proportion of respondents felt that “victims of crime should be 

able to influence whether the issue is handled by the tribe or state justice system.” Respondents 

were split on statements attempting to define precisely how tribes supported the state system 

in regard to issues such as identifying criminals and pretrial detention (see figure 12).

Furthermore, as with perceptions of tribal involvement in policing, a majority of 

respondents maintained, despite the clear national preference for state justice services, that 

tribal adjudication of justice issues—where clan heads and notables resolve a criminal offense 

“out of court,” without reference to police or judiciary—could be impartial, honest, and 

Figure 12. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=979, by region)

5.6 

4.6 

4.4 

5.4 

3.4 

4.5 

7.0 

3.5 

5.8 

4.5 

4.4 

6.1 

3.3 

4.7 

7.2 

3.7 

6.0 

4.5 

4.5 

5.7 

3.2 

5.0 

7.5 

3.5 

5.7 

4.6 

4.4 

5.6 

3.3 

4.6 

7.1 

3.6 

Tribes contribute to arresting criminals, 

including their own tribal members 

Tribes contribute to arresting criminals only when 

they are from other tribes 

Tribes prevent the state justice system from 

arresting their own members 

Tribes help the state justice system to fulfill its mission 

Tribes do not need the state justice system to 

provide justice to Libyans 

Victims of crime should be able to influence whether the 

issue is handled by the tribe or state justice system 

Certain crimes are more appropriately handled by the 

state justice system rather than by tribes 

Certain crimes are more appropriately handled 

by the tribe’s justice system rather than by the state 

Libya Southwest East West 
USIP.ORG 17

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Figure 13. On a scale of 1 to 10, to what extent do you consider the justice provided by tribal elders to be... 

(1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=979, by region)

Libya Southwest East West 

6.2 

6.3 

6.0 

5.7 

6.6 

6.8 

6.7 

6.2 

6.9 

6.8 

6.5 

6.2 

6.4 

6.5 

6.3 

5.9 

Efficient 

Honest 

Impartial 

Quick 

efficient. A significant portion of Libyans, particularly in the southwest and the east, rated 

justice services provided by tribes highly on these values, though fewer were ready to identify 

the services as “quick” (see figure 13).

What are we to make of the clear nationwide preference for independent state security 

and justice provision alongside Libyan acknowledgment that tribes play an informal but not 

inconsequential role in providing security and justice? It is certain that Libya is not a state in 

which tribal rule or customary law dominates, and tribal considerations are distant for most 

Libyans. Equally, it can be said that tribal notables retain influence in local politics and in the 

provision of justice and security, and that this influence is acknowledged. Given the collapse of 

the Libyan state, police, and judiciary after 2011, and the rise of armed groups and the spread 

of arms, one would expect tribal notables—where they have been able to secure a hold over 

the basic elements of security provision, such as the use of force and access to prisons—to have 

increased their participation in this sector at the state’s expense. Here, however, context and 

location-specific dynamics matter a great deal—as is shown in the following three case studies 

of Tobruk, Bani Walid, and Sabha.
18 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Tribal participation in security and justice provision is examined across three case studies: 

• Tobruk, where tribal power structures are stable and integrated with the state security 

apparatus; 

• Bani Walid, where tribal power structures are stable but act independently of the 

state security apparatus; and 

• Sabha, where tribal dynamics are tense and local security actors rely on external 

players, notably Misratan and Salafist paramilitaries.

Each discussion begins with a brief description of tribalism in the city and is followed by an 

analysis of tribal participation in security and justice provision and public perceptions of tribes 

as security and justice actors.

Tobruk

In Tobruk, the dominant tribe is the al-Ubaidat, which, according to one of their leaders interviewed by Altai, numbers around three hundred thousand. The defections of prominent 

al-Ubaidat military commanders from Gadhafi to support the revolution in February 2011 

led to Gadhafi’s losing control of the Tobruk region.31 As a result, the al-Ubaidat have gained 

significant influence and legitimacy in postrevolutionary Libya. A number of client tribes are 

permitted to live on al-Ubaidat land. 

Tribes of Tobruk

The tribal territories around Tobruk span from Derna to the Imsa’id border crossing with 

Egypt. The fundamental social dynamic of the Bedouin tribes of this area is the division of 

bloodline between the Sa’da tribes, which claim to be descended from the founding mother of 

the nine aristocratic tribes of Cyrenaica, and the Murabitin tribes, which include the “original” 

inhabitants of the territory and thus do not have the same lineage as the Sa’da. For this reason, 

and because some were conquered, the Murabitin tribes are deemed client tribes of the Sa’da. 

Most Sa’da tribes in the eastern part of the country hold territory through military conquests 

made during or after the Arab migrations into Libya.32

Participation in Security and Justice Provision

Box 3. Key Takeaways

Tribal actors have always had some influence over security and justice structures. This 

influence has generally increased since the revolution.

Where tribal power structures are stable, they have dominated policing and security 

services.

Where tribal power structures are unstable, they have lost control of policing and security services, which have thus weakened and sometimes had to rely on armed groups.

Tribal influence over police is derived from the ability of tribes to staff local police structures and the need for the police to secure tribal permissions to act in tribal territories.

Tribal influence over justice actors is limited. However, many cases do not make it to 

court either because they are resolved through tribal arbitration or because local instability prevents courts from operating.
USIP.ORG 19

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

In Tobruk, the dominant Sa’da tribe is the al-Ubaidat, whose members settled in the region 

in the eighteenth century, pushing the Awlad Ali into western Egypt.33 The al-Ubaidat owes 

its position to its military prowess and its protection of the Sanusi religious order, and for this 

reason has held the leadership of every security institution in the region since the Ottoman 

era, including the Libyan National Army under Idris and Gadhafi.34 Internal al-Ubaidat politics hinge on disputes among the fifteen clans within the tribe, each of which has a different 

territory and sheikh. Tradition states that these incumbent clans of Sa’da lineage “own” their 

conquered territory by right; thus, each clan is independent of the other. 

Five tribes in the Tobruk region are especially significant:35

• Al-Ubaidat. The dominant Sa’da tribe in Tobruk, present in the region since the 

eighteenth century. 

• Al-Mnaffa. A Murabitin tribe, the al-Mnaffa are considered the oldest inhabitants of 

the area. The tribe is divided into two branches, the Msika and the Ulum.

• Al-Qut’an. A Murabitin tribe, the al-Qut’an is of Berber origin and inhabits the 

region spanning the modern Egyptian border. It also has two branches, the 

al-Rahmana and the al-Marirat.

Al-Baida

Derna

Tobruk

Al-Qubba

Mechili

Shahat Labraq

Martuba

Umm Ar Rizam

At Tamimi

Acroma

Adam Kambut Bi’r al Ashhab

LIBYA

Tobruk

DISTRICT Al-Butnan

REGION Cyrenaica

POPULATION 120,000

MAIN TRIBAL ACTOR(S) Al-Ubaidat (main tribe), 

Al-Mnaffa, Al-Qut’an, Al-Qunashat, Al-Habun

KEY POINTS

● The Al-Ubaidat defected in the early days of the 

February 2011 revolution, the primary reason why 

Qadhafi lost control of the East; today they control 

all key institutions.

● Internal Al-Ubaidat politics hinges on the relationship between fifteen clans who control different 

territories.

● Tensions between Al-Ubaidat and other tribes exist 

but are mediated through complicated arrangements focusing on the gifting of land and buildings, 

and clientilism.

● Tensions also exist between Westerners (Misratans, 

Awlad Al Shaikh) who have been offered posts of 

authority by the House of Representatives.

KEY SECURITY AND JUSTICE ACTORS

● Al-Ubaidat dominate all key military and security 

institutions, including the General Inspections 

and Intelligence Apparatuses, the Tobruk Security 

Directorate, Military Intelligence, the Air Force, 

military divisions, and naval and army bases.

● The Al-Ubaidat control both the local branches 

of these institutions in Tobruk and the regionalnational leadership.
20 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

• Al-Qunashat. A Murabitin tribe, the al-Qunashat is part of the Awlad Ali tribe, with 

which the al-Ubaidat warred in the eighteenth century. It was a nomadic tribe, 

traveling between oases when rainfall permitted. 

• Al-Habun. A Murabitin tribe, its origin is unrecorded. It consists of six small 

families.

Tribal Dynamics Within Security and Justice Entities

Individuals from the al-Ubaidat tribe sit at the head of all the main civilian security institutions in Tobruk: the Security Directorate (headed, as of March 2015, by Colonel Ahmad Sa’d 

Shu’aib) and its Criminal Investigations Department (headed by Colonel Ramadan al-Mazini) 

and General Inspections Apparatus (headed by Colonel Rafi). Client tribes staff the mid- and 

junior levels; notably, the Masamir tribe has specialized primarily in domestic intelligence, and 

the tribe’s members hold a number of key posts within the General Inspections Apparatus. In 

an indication of the political reality of al-Ubaidat tribal pride, during the government of the 

House of Representatives, based in Tobruk, the speaker of Parliament and the interior minister 

explicitly tried to cultivate al-Ubaidat political support by favoring the tribe’s candidates when 

appointing the heads of the security institutions.

Within Tobruk, the tension between the al-Ubaidat and Murabitin tribes was palpable and 

recognized in field interviews. Conflicts are mostly mediated in two ways. One is by securing 

complicated arrangements involving the ownership and gifting of land and buildings used for 

policing and military purposes.36 The other is by allowing Murabitin tribes to staff institutions, 

which allows the tribes to have a voice in policing and security policy.37

Despite members of the al-Ubaidat occupying key positions within the Security Directorate 

(or perhaps because they do have control of those positions), the directorate exercises effectively 

no authority over Tobruk’s al-Ubaidat, or Murabitin tribes, in criminal or political affairs. In 

the vast majority of cases, tribes resolve their own civil or criminal matters using mediation by a 

third tribe. When a security incident involves members of one tribe, the identity of the suspects 

is normally quickly verified, and the mediating tribe takes the “suspect” under its protection 

while the case is “resolved,” bypassing the formal criminal justice system and ordinary forms of 

pretrial detention. Arrest warrants are deemed necessary only when tribes refuse to cooperate 

and in practice require preapproval from tribal notables. A police colonel from the Qut’an tribe 

stated that the directorate would not arrest any person until it had issued three warnings to the 

tribe, after which the directorate would send notables a request for approval for arrest.

Notables with legal training within the tribes normally use Libyan criminal law, rather 

than customary law, to base their decisions regarding the punishment for committing a crime. 

However, the application of criminal law varies according to the circumstances of the crime 

and the relative wealth and power of both the criminal’s tribe and the victim’s tribe. Since 2011, 

the number of cases resolved by tribes alone, without recourse to the judicial system, has risen 

where the justice system is constrained in processing new cases or viewed as ill equipped to 

apply a punishment such as imprisonment.

For these reasons, the Central Investigations Department of the Security Directorate in 

Tobruk is limited to providing technical assistance. Because the identity of suspects is generally investigated and determined by the criminal’s and the victim’s tribes, criminal investigation 

skills generally come into play only in cases where tribes have no purview, such as in cases 

regarding foreign workers. At the time of writing, the Central Investigations Directorate had 

been required to assist in only two such cases since the 2011 revolution.

Arrest warrants are deemed 

necessary only when tribes 

refuse to cooperate and in 

practice require preapproval 

from tribal notables.
USIP.ORG 21

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Public Perceptions

Public perceptions of policing and justice services in Tobruk are mixed. Residents polled 

in Tobruk rated tribes more highly than Libyans overall on questions pertaining to issues 

such as arrests—a judgment that reflects how relatively swiftly tribes in Tobruk can identify 

and detain suspects in most cases (see figure 14). Moreover, 86 percent of respondents from 

Tobruk agreed that tribes provide security to all communities regardless of tribal membership. In other words, the public in Tobruk appears to be comfortable with the role played by 

tribes in working with policing entities to self-police and identify suspects (see figure 15), and 

views tribes as acting relatively impartially in apprehending even members of their own tribes. 

These findings appear to reflect a level of respect or appreciation for the manner in which the 

al-Ubaidat and client tribes play their role in security and justice provision in Tobruk.

Figure 14. Do you consider that justice provided by tribal elders is... (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=22, Tobruk)

4.6

Certain crimes are appropriately

handled by the tribal justice system

rather than by the state

Certain crimes are appropriately

handled by the state justice system

rather than by the tribes

Tobruk

7.3

Tribes help the state justice

system to fulfill its mission

Tribes contribute to arresting criminals

even when they are its own members

5.4

5.9

Figure 15. Do you agree with the following statements? (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=22, Tobruk)
22 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Figure 16. Do you agree with the following statements? (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=22, Tobruk)

Figure 17. Do you agree with the following statements? (n=22, Tobruk)

Quick 6.4

6.5

6.8

6.8

Impartial

Honest

Efficient

36% 

91% 

14% 

27% 

23% 

9% 

68% 

32% 

Security actors organized along tribal 

affiliation are more effective 

Local police should be completely 

independent from any tribal affiliation 

Tribal elders should have an influence 

on local police 

Security actors organized along tribal 

affiliation are less corrupt 

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree 

Strongly disagree Refused to answer Don’t know 

Nevertheless, public opinion in Tobruk holds that tribes are a relatively poor substitute 

for an independent state judicial system, with most respondents from Tobruk believing that 

the state justice system is a more appropriate actor regarding criminal issues than the tribe 

(see figure 16). Further confirming the preference for state security and justice institutions 

independent of tribal influence, 91 percent of respondents agreed that local police should be 

completely independent from any tribal affiliation, and only 19 percent agreed that tribal elders 

should have an influence on local police (see figure 17).
USIP.ORG 23

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Bani Walid

Bani Walid is a market town connecting the oasis towns of the Fezzan to the coastal ports. 

It lies in a valley and is the near exclusive habitat of the Warfalla tribe, whose descendants 

are spread across Libya and south into neighboring Niger and Chad. The valley in which 

Bani Walid is located contains olive trees cultivated by these families over generations, visible 

claims to heritage and territory.

Tribes of Bani Walid

The only tribe in Bani Walid is the Warfalla. The region encompassing Bani Walid was originally named Wrfalla (a name with Berber Amazigh roots). Whereas in Tobruk, Arab tribes 

conquered and established clients, in Wrfalla, Arab Bedouin tribes cohabitated with other migrating families and clans, or sometimes integrated with them formally (mukatabah) in a sort 

of tribal brotherhood (muwakhah) until fifty-two clans, or “houses” (lahmat), emerged. These 

clans then “became” the Warfalla tribe, named after the territory they lived in.38 Within the 

Warfalla, as in Tobruk, the “unadulterated” Arab Bedouins of the Cyrenaican Sa’da tribes are 

distinguished from those whose ancestors integrated with other tribes, which are collectively 

called the Mtarfa. The dominant Sa’da tribes occupied—and still occupy—the highlands and 

best arable land in the area; the Mtarfa occupy the drier plains stretching toward Misrata.

Tripoli*

Al-Aziziya Msallata

Gharyan

Tarhuna

Misrata

Bani Walid

Sabha

Sirte Surman

Sabratah

Zwaia

Al-Zawiya Tajoura

Khoms

Karaghal

Al-Asab’a Alriyayna

Alzintan

Alwsta Alshgega

Mizdah Nasmah

Zliten

Krarim

Tawergha

As Saddadah

LIBYA

Bani Walid

DISTRICT Misrata

REGION Tripolitania

POPULATION 85,425

MAIN TRIBAL ACTOR(S) Warfalla

KEY POINTS

● Rejected both revolution and state during the 

2011 uprising: Pure-blooded Warfalla families 

sought to maintain their dominance over mixedblood families who supported the revolution in an 

attempt to upend the social order.

● No state security presence, refusal to recognize 

the authority of any state representative.

● Following the revolution, fighting continued 

between locals and revolutionary brigades, 

notably Misratans; the Third Force under Salah 

Badi was eventually ejected from the city.

● Many youth subsequently joined Operation 

Dignity and Zintan during the battle for Tripoli in 

summer and fall 2014.

KEY SECURITY AND JUSTICE ACTORS

● Two historic security bodies were destroyed 

during the revolution.

● Security is organized locally by the Warfalla Social 

Council.
24 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

In the Ottoman era, this loose structure was codified into fifths (akhmas) for tax collection, 

from which a social structure and hierarchy developed that persists today. The Sa’dat, who 

are considered the town’s natural leaders, became one fifth. Below that, two other fifths—

the Jmamla, who migrated to the Warfalla with Awlad Sulaiman families in 1842 after the 

collapse of the Fezzan Sultanate, and the Sabayi’, composed of religious clan families—are 

also considered significant social leaders of the Warfalla. At the bottom of this social hierarchy 

are the underprivileged Mtarfa, whose clans make up the other two fifths, named the Faladna 

and Lawtiyin.39 A simmering and long-standing animosity between the Mtarfa and the 

town’s social leadership exploded into open conflict during and following the 2011 revolution, 

the upper families of the Warfalla supporting the Gadhafi regime, and the Mtarfa families 

supporting the revolution.

Tribal Dynamics Within Security and Justice Entities

Following the 2011 revolution, conflict was significant in and around the city of Bani Walid, 

considered one of the final strongholds of forces loyal to the ousted Gadhafi regime. Although 

revolutionaries temporarily captured the city, the notables of the Warfalla tribe successfully regained control by early 2012, and it became a haven for those who had supported the regime. 

The result was the eviction of all pro-revolution armed group battalions and military councils 

from the city. 

In February 2012, the notables of Bani Walid created the Warfalla Social Council 

(WSC), which brought together notables from Warfalla families across Libya but was heavily 

dominated by those from Bani Walid.40 WSC members meet daily in the center of town to 

coordinate and plan local affairs; it is through these regular meetings that the WSC mediates 

policing and justice issues within Bani Walid. 

The WSC ignores and refuses to recognize the legitimacy of any postrevolutionary 

government or national institutions. On matters of security and justice provision, the WSC 

does not recognize the orders of the General Security Directorate of the Libyan National 

Police, or decisions taken by the judiciary and prosecutor general; nor does it recognize the 

Libyan Armed Forces. Although a local security directorate technically exists in the city, it 

is paralyzed by the resistance of local notables and not operational. Antagonism to national 

institutions is due in part to the unique transitional justice issues faced by Bani Walid, whose 

youth formed a significant proportion of loyalist fighters for Gadhafi during the revolution, 

and who since the revolution have harbored a number of figures considered to be war criminals 

for whom arrest warrants have been issued. Unlike in other regions in Libya, where tribes have 

worked with state security and justice institutions or “stacked” them in their favor, the WSC—

which similarly dominated these institutions in Gadhafi’s time—now finds itself acting outside 

the law of a state it no longer recognizes.

We are waiting until a fair and neutral justice system is activated in order to try the 

criminals. We have neither the capacity nor the necessary legal arsenal to deal with those 

cases.

—Bani Walid notable

The WSC has assumed authority over all policing and justice service functions. It has no 

legal mandate from and no relationship with the Libyan judicial system, but precisely for this 

reason enjoys strong popular support within the town. In reality, the WSC’s purview is mostly 
USIP.ORG 25

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

confined to resolving petty crimes. Cases of murder, torture, arbitrary detention, or kidnapping 

are not dealt with; the WSC considers itself neither qualified nor entitled to deal with such 

cases, and in fact would disagree with the laws of the postrevolutionary Libyan state over any 

cases defined as such. Consequently, cases of petty crime have been on the rise since 2012, and 

the failure to resolve murder, arbitrary detention, and kidnapping cases has begun to undermine 

the WSC’s legitimacy in the eyes of the families of victims and the community as a whole. For 

example, the town remains angry after the discovery of the bodies of twenty-one people who, 

according to Bani Walid residents, had died under torture in neighboring Misratan prisons 

during the postrevolution conflict in 2012 and 2013. Additionally, because many of Bani Walid’s 

youth remain in detention in Misrata and other neighboring cities, the WSC’s primary justice 

service function has been to mediate with neighboring tribes and towns. 

The other serious security challenge presently facing Bani Walid is that of the Islamic 

State and religious radicalization. Radical Salafist communities are present in Bani Walid, and 

some elders interviewed cited bombings of the Sufi Sheikh Ali Zraiq shrine in Bani Walid in 

December 2014 as evidence of their presence. Separately, Islamic State meetings, recruitment 

efforts, and use of safe houses have been reported in Sirte, Harawah, Sukna, Hun, Tarhuna, and 

Zilla—all areas close to Bani Walid and within which Bani Walid and Warfalla families live. 

In part, the ability of the Islamic State to work in such areas is a consequence of these tribes’ 

resistance to the postrevolutionary security state and the factions dominating it, combined with 

an inability by the Misratan Third Force—which operates much like an army and is deployed 

across central and western Libya—to substantially penetrate the tribal fabric of these towns. The 

resentment and marginalization felt by these tribes has also enabled the Islamic State to develop 

tentative contact with the WSC and exploit the political discontent and security vacuum.41

The nature of these contacts is probably related in part to liaison and governance; for 

example, the Islamic State employs local elements to conduct negotiations and to operate 

checkpoints. At present, Warfalla notables have made no decision to “join” the Islamic State, 

and some notables have explicitly warned against the consequences of such a step. According 

to interviews with the WSC deputy leader and a prominent Warfalla family with knowledge 

of the negotiations, a number of Warfalla and Bani Walid residents were killed in uprisings 

against the Islamic State’s presence in the neighboring city of Sirte; one such uprising was led 

by a member of the Warfalla tribe.

Public Perceptions of Tribal Influence over Security and Justice Actors

In Bani Walid, survey data were limited because of significant local sensitivity to questioning 

and the way in which Bani Walid was classified geographically in the survey.42 Nonetheless, 

qualitative interviews conducted for this study and statements issued by the WSC indicate 

that the town does not trust the independence or neutrality of any of the postrevolutionary 

security or justice institutions, to the extent that townspeople have refused to deal with them. 

Nationally, the reputation of Warfalla has been affected by this perception and by its close 

association with Gadhafi.

Sabha

The town of Sabha is founded on an old oasis settlement that, due to its position at the head 

of several wadis and traversable desert tracks, has always been the “capital,” or central point, 

of Libya’s southern Fezzan region. But unlike Bani Walid (an old market center) or Tobruk 

The town does not trust 

the independence or 

neutrality of any of the 

postrevolutionary security 

or justice institutions, to the 

extent that townspeople 

have refused to deal 

with them.
26 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

(an old port), Sabha is also a modern urban settlement that is home to tribes from across the 

region who settled in the town in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.

Tribes of Sabha

The original inhabitants of the Sabha oasis are a collection of minor families and tribes collectively called the Fezzazna. In modern times, however, governance in Sabha has rested on 

reconfigurations of a tribal alliance (saff) between nomadic Arab tribes that has dominated 

Fezzan politics since the Ottoman era.43 When the Ottomans attempted to collect taxes and 

control Saharan trade routes, the Awlad Sulaiman, Qadhadhfa, and Warfalla banded together 

in an alliance called al-Suff al-Fuqhi. This alliance was centered in Sabha and led by the Awlad 

Sulaiman, specifically the Saif al-Nasr family, who briefly headed a sultanate in Fezzan from 

1830 to 1842. The Ottomans levied the Fezzazna clans—the Awlad Bu Saif and Magharha—

to fight the sultanate, and in 1842 Saif al-Nasr was killed. 

The alliance was revived in 1923, after the Italians reoccupied Libya and again employed 

the Magharha and other minor Fezzan clans to control the tribes. The Italians installed a 

cooperative tribal notable, Khalifa al-Zawi, who ruled from the neighboring town of Murzuq 

from 1916; the Awlad Sulaiman and Warfalla evicted Zawi from Murzuq in 1926, but by 

1930 had lost to Italy, which used poison gas and airplanes against them. After independence, 

the tribes returned from exile and formed part the bedrock of the Libyan state in the west. 

Birak

Awbari

Sabha

Murzuq

Jirma

Umm al-Aranib

Taraghin

Funqul

Dujal Al Badr

Tmasseh

Zawilah

Tamanhint

Samnu

Aqar Tmisan Adiri Al Mahruqah

LIBYA

Sabha

DISTRICT Sabha

REGION Fezzan

POPULATION 96,872

MAIN TRIBAL ACTOR(S) Awlad Sulaiman, 

Qadhadhfa, Warfalla, Awlad Bu Saif, Hasawna, 

Magharha, Tebu, Tuareg, Fezzazna (collection of 

tribes and families)

KEY POINTS

● Decades of infighting and Gadhafi’s manipulation 

of tribal dynamics have led to fragmented and 

tense relationships between the various tribes in 

Sabha.

● During the Gadhafi coup of 1969, Gadhafi sought 

to minimize the influence of the previously

dominant Awlad Sulaiman and Warfalla, to the 

benefit of the Qadhadfa; this power dynamic was 

reversed during the 2011 revolution, leading to 

a tribal struggle for power.

● Since the 2011 revolution, fighting has continued 

between the various tribes, sometimes leading to 

heavy fighting and serious casualties on all sides.

KEY SECURITY AND JUSTICE ACTORS

● Misratans (the Third Force) are the key security 

providers in the Sabha, along with joint patrols by 

the Awlad Sulaiman-led Sixth Infantry Brigade.

● Of the local tribes, the Awlad Sulaiman hold the 

upper hand in terms of military strength thanks 

to their alliance with the Misratans.
USIP.ORG 27

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Another scion of the Saif al-Nasr family, Muhammad Saif al-Nasr, became ruler over Fezzan. 

The Warfalla, Zintan, and the Qadhadhfa followed the Awlad Sulaiman into government 

under Saif al-Nasr and nascent military and police forces.44

The Gadhafi coup of 1969 shook up the tribal order in Sabha again; Gadhafi sought to 

minimize the influence of the tribes, placed the Qadhadhfa at the head of the military and 

security institutions, and brought in previously minor and marginalized tribes such as the 

Magharha in Sabha. Gadhafi encouraged large numbers of poor migrant Awlad Sulaiman and 

Warfalla tribal members to immigrate from Chad and Niger, so as to undermine the powerful 

merchants and heads of the Warfalla and the Awlad Sulaiman, including the Saif al-Nasr 

family, whose leader died in jail in the 1980s, interviewed family members explained.

In 2011, the balance of power changed again as the Qadhadhfa and Magharha fled, and 

the Awlad Sulaiman switched sides. The Awlad Sulaiman’s turn against the Qadhadhfa, and 

subsequent alliance with the Misratans, has severely damaged the old tribal pacts that kept 

the city secure, and policing and security governance in the city reflects this background tribal 

struggle for power.

Eight tribes in the Sabha region are particularly significant:45

• Awlad Bu Saif. One of the more prominent of the score of minor families and tribes 

collectively known as the Fezzazna.

• Awlad Sulaiman. An Arab tribe that briefly headed a sultanate in Fezzan from 1830 

to 1842. The tribe repositioned itself as a key client tribe to the Qadhadhfa during 

the Gadhafi regime, leading to significant Awlad Sulaiman migration into Sabha in 

the 1980s. The tribe has sought to reassert itself as the dominant tribe in Sabha since 

the revolution by allying with Misrata.

• Hasawna. A minor Arab tribe based to the north of Sabha.

• Magharha. A small Arab tribe based in Birak al-Shati’. Historically marginal, the 

tribe was brought into the security and justice services by Gadhafi to counterbalance 

the historical and demographic influence of major Arab tribes.

• Qadhadhfa. A small Arab tribe based in the Sirte region. Gadhafi placed this 

tribe—his own—in key security and government posts. 

• Tebu. A Saharan ethnic group who live across southern Libya, northern Chad, and 

northeastern Niger. The Tebu have its own language and cultural norms. 

• Tuareg. A Saharan Berber ethnic group spread across the Maghreb and Sahel, including 

southern Libya, Mali, Niger, and Algeria. Traditionally nomadic pastoralists, many 

Tuareg are now seminomadic. They have their own language and cultural norms.

• Warfalla. The Warfalla is a significant presence in Sabha, and, with the Awlad 

Sulaiman, is very influential because of its numerical weight across Libya. See also 

the Bani Walid case study.

Tribal Dynamics Within Security and Justice Entities

Given Sabha’s heterogeneous tribal composition and history of repeated social reordering, it is 

perhaps unsurprising that social hierarchies have been significantly upset by the 2011 revolution 

and its aftermath. Since 2011, the city has experienced repeated waves of intertribal conflict, 

with tribes violently recontesting the social, political, and economic space. In January 2014, 

the prime minister at the time, Ali Zeidan, decided to deploy the Third Force—a military unit 

formed after the revolution in the powerful coastal city of Misrata—in Sabha, theoretically as a 
28 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

neutral pacifying force.46 The result has been that Sabha’s military security is now almost exclusively Misratan-dominated, a configuration accepted locally to some degree because Misratans 

historically have not been a part of tribal alliances in the area. During key informant interviews 

conducted in Sabha for this report, respondents indicated that Misratan might is tolerated because of the Third Force’s ability to suppress otherwise uncontainable intertribal violence. 

Sabha residents say we don’t do anything because crime rate has risen. But we are not 

here for policing in the city; this is the responsibility of the tribes.

—Third Force Head of Operations

The Third Force has tended to refrain from taking on policing duties, viewing itself as an 

army and preferring to delegate these tasks to tribes or to tribal armed groups. Nonetheless, 

given the lack of a normally functioning police force, Sabha residents have sometimes asked 

the Third Force to help investigate and resolve civil and criminal disputes, such as robbery cases. 

The Third Force has done so on a purely discretionary basis, primarily as favors to individuals. 

It does not control or police through any official state institutions in Sabha or elsewhere in the 

south, though it is reported to maintain an unofficial prison.

As in most cities, the Security Directorate of the National Police technically oversees regular 

civilian police departments in Sabha, though these barely function. Most policing activities 

occur through coordination with newly formed state security entities: the Ahrar Fezzan (the 

Freemen of Fezzan, whose members style themselves the Intelligence Force) and the (Salafist) 

Special Deterrence Force (SDF), which technically are under the authority, respectively, of 

the chief of staff and the Ministry of Interior. Both are led and dominated by members of the 

Awlad Sulaiman tribe, but have made efforts to recruit across tribal lines and include members 

of the Tuareg and the Hasawna and Awlad Bu Saif tribes. Nonetheless, the extensive control 

over their activities exercised by Awlad Sulaiman has limited their ability to carry out policing 

across Sabha’s many and mixed tribal lines. The movement of the SDF and the Ahrar Fezzan 

is also restricted by the Third Force, which tries to insist that they obtain its permission before 

conducting operations. However, neither the SDF nor the Ahrar Fezzan appear to follow these 

strictures at times of communal unrest.

In a murder case, if the family of the victim requests that the culprit is turned over to us, 

or if the family of the culprit hands him in, we put him in prison. But we cannot go and 

arrest the culprit by force because of the tribal implications. This would only be possible 

if tribes lifted social protection of criminals.

—Head of the SDF

Tribes do not cooperate with any of these entities when apprehending and detaining 

suspects. The Ahrar Fezzan is held in particularly low regard because its leader, Bahr al-Din 

Rifi, a former head of the military council in Sabha, is widely deemed responsible for outbreaks 

of violence against Tebu neighborhoods in April 2012. Over the years of conflict in Sabha, 

neighborhood zones controlled by local tribes (who dictate who can or cannot safely enter) 

have developed, and the tribes have usually refused to permit entry to the Awlad Sulaiman units 

that conduct policing investigations. The Awlad Sulaiman armed groups carry out their own 

criminal investigations but acknowledge that once a suspect enters a tribal zone, they can do 

nothing to apprehend him.
USIP.ORG 29

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

The SDF, despite its Awlad Sulaiman leadership, has assumed greater prominence in 

policing provision because of its close association with Misrata’s Third Force. It has assumed 

authority over what would ordinarily be Ministry of Justice judicial police functions and is in 

charge of Sabha prison by the Security Directorate. It also reportedly runs an unofficial prison 

in Sabha Fortress. The force recruits from Salafist religious networks and operates on a code of 

Salafist morals and discipline, which appear to have enabled it to overcome—at least in part—

the tribal tensions and divisions that have circumscribed the Ahrar Fezzan. This religiosity 

also reportedly extends to extrajudicial “moral policing” activities. For example, twenty-five of 

Sabha prison’s approximately ninety-five inmates were—according to the SDF’s head, Ibrahim 

Muhammad—voluntarily handed into custody by their relatives without any police proceedings 

appearing to have taken place. Other inmates were reported as having had their arrest processed 

by the Security Directorate, but the SDF had in fact arrested them. When the research for this 

report was conducted, the inmates included fifty alleged gang members (haraba) arrested for 

petty theft and nineteen on murder charges; in most, if not all, cases, some aspect of intertribal 

violence was alleged.

Judicial proceedings have come to an almost complete halt because of unpaid wages and 

threats to judges’ safety. However, different interviewees painted different pictures as to the 

source of the problem. The head of the SDF implied that civilian court employees were to 

blame because they had conducted a sit-in to protest unpaid wages and closed the court. The 

head of Sabha’s local council claimed that armed groups employed to guard the court had shut 

it down to force payment of five months’ unpaid wages. After the municipality paid the armed 

groups, the court reopened but the civilian employees refused to return, citing safety issues.

In conclusion, intertribal and inter–armed group conflict dynamics prevent a unified 

and effective police force in Sabha, though Salafist and Misratan security actors appear, for 

different reasons, to be able to overcome those tribal dynamics to some extent and to provide 

some security. Insecurity and damage to normal policing structures have also had the knock-on 

effect of incapacitating the justice system.

Public Perceptions of Tribal Influence over Security and Justice Actors

Respondents from Sabha provide mixed views on local tribal security and justice actors. Just 

over 90 percent of respondents agreed that local police should be independent of any tribal affiliation. Almost 60 percent replied “No, not at all” to the statement “Security actors organized 

along tribal affiliation are less corrupt,” which is the largest proportion of any area sample that 

responded in that fashion (see figure 18). However, 68 percent of respondents from Sabha still 

thought tribes made a significant contribution to security in their local area, and 41 percent 

thought tribal actors organized along tribal lines were more effective, as opposed to 55 percent who did not. One in two respondents from Sabha “strongly agree[d]” with the statement, 

“Tribes only provide security to their members”; almost as many did not agree.

Perhaps for these reasons, despite the communal violence, Sabha residents, acknowledging 

the problems that tribalism in policing services has created, still tended to rate tribes themselves 

as significantly more effective (see figures 19 and 20). In other words, Sabha residents appear 

to be turning away from state policing services, dominated as they are by Awlad Sulaiman, and 

relying on tribal elders for policing and mediation services. Yet Sabha residents are more likely 

than the national average to prefer disputes to be arbitrated by a state-run legal system, rather 

than by tribal customary law (see figure 21).

Judicial proceedings 

have come to an almost 

complete halt because of 

unpaid wages and threats 

to judges’ safety. 
30 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Figure 19. Do you consider that justice provided by tribal elders is... (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=22, Sabha)

6.0

6.3

6.7

6.0

Quick

Impartial

Honest

Efficient

Figure 18. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? (n=22, Sabha)

36% 

91% 

5% 

9% 

27% 

9% 

77% 

59% 

Security actors organized along tribal 

affiliation are more effective 

Local police should be completely 

independent from any tribal affiliation 

Tribal elders should have an influence 

on local police 

Security actors organized along tribal 

affiliation are less corrupt 

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree 

Strongly disagree Refused to answer Don’t know 

Figure 20. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=22, Sabha)

Tribes help the state justice

system fulfill its mission

Tribes contribute to arresting criminals

even when they are its own members

5.4

5.9
USIP.ORG 31

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Figure 21. Do you agree with the following statements? (1=Not at all, 10=Yes, absolutely, n=22, Sabha)

Certain crimes are appropriately

handled by the tribal justice system

rather than by the state

Certain crimes are appropriately

handled by the state justice system

rather than by the tribes

Sabha

2.2

9.1

Perceptions of individual tribes were strongly negative, though for a variety of social and 

historical reasons, some tribes—such as the Warfalla and Tuareg—are viewed more positively than 

others. As regards the Awlad Sulaiman, 18 percent of respondents believed it played a positive role 

and 64 percent a negative one. The figures for other tribes were as follows: the Warfalla, 27 percent 

positive and 41 percent negative; the Qadhadhfa, 9 percent positive and 59 percent negative; the 

Magharha, 18 percent positive and 68 percent negative; the Tebu, 18 percent positive and 68 

percent negative; and the Tuareg, 32 percent positive and 55 percent negative.

Tribal Mediation: A National Perspective

In addition to being involved currently in security and justice provision, as discussed, tribes 

have traditionally intervened in almost any incidence of communal or political conflict, tribal 

elders seeking to mediate cease-fires and peace agreements. Although rarely effective at stopping fighting directly, elders can open channels of communication and convene discussion 

sessions. Several initiatives have seen such tribal councils extend to a regional or even a national 

level—though some of these efforts have been politicized; some national tribal councils have 

dissipated under the impact of local and personal dynamics, however. 

The survey data indicates stronger public support for the role that tribes play in this domain 

than in security and justice provision. A large majority of respondents (73 percent) nationally 

felt that tribal elders have an important role in ensuring harmony between different tribes, 

37 percent seeing it as crucial. However, the extent that elders are perceived as successful in 

specific areas of conflict mediation—such as removing roadblocks and checkpoints, exchanging 

prisoners, and brokering cease-fires—differs markedly across areas of the country.

Respondents from Zawiya, al-Jabal al-Gharbi, and Nalut reported that local tribal elders 

had been highly successful in brokering prisoner exchanges. Elders from Misrata, al-Jafara, and 

Sabha were also reported as having enjoyed a reasonable degree of success. Tribal leaders from 

Murzuq and al-Jufrah appear to have been the least successful in this regard. 

Elders from Wadi al-Shati, Nalut, and al-Jabal al-Gharbi were perceived as most successful 

in brokering cease-fires, and their counterparts from al-Jufrah, Benghazi, Sirte, and Sabha as 

the least successful. 

Although rarely effective 

at stopping fighting 

directly, elders can open 

channels of communication 

and convene discussion 

sessions.
32 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Nationwide, responses indicate that tribal leaders have had less success in removing 

roadblocks and checkpoints, with the exception of Wadi al-Haya’, al-Marj, and al-Wahat, 

where 63 percent, 60 percent, and 54 percent of respondents, respectively, reported that tribal 

elders had succeeded in removing roadblocks and checkpoints (see figures 22, 23, and 24).

In Tobruk, Bani Walid, and Sabha, tribal councils have all convened to mediate both local 

and national conflicts and to arrange prisoner exchanges. In Bani Walid, the WSC is the vehicle 

for all such efforts. It has also convened regional gatherings of tribal leaders from central and 

southern areas; these gatherings have been used as opportunities to call for the tribes to unite 

to press for the introduction of national amnesties, for the release of prisoners, and for an end 

to the marginalization of particular communities. 

In Tobruk, 81 percent of respondents believed that elders play a significant role in 

pacifying relations among tribes. Perceived success in removing roadblocks and checkpoints 

was significantly higher than the national average, success in brokering cease-fires was slightly 

higher, and success in exchanging prisoners was somewhat lower (see figure 25). 

Sabha, unlike Tobruk, experiences regular intertribal violence. Nonetheless, the public in 

Sabha is as likely as that in Tobruk to consider the use of elders as mediators to be legitimate. 

More than three out of four respondents from Sabha considered that elders contribute to 

pacifying relations among tribes, and 64 percent that “tribes should help the state administration 

in solving conflict,” significantly higher than the national average of 47 percent support for this 

position. Perceived success in removing roadblocks and checkpoints is equal to that in Tobruk, 

and in exchanging prisoners far greater than in Tobruk and slightly higher than the national 

average. However, reports of success in brokering cease-fires is below both the national average 

and the figure for Tobruk, doubtlessly reflecting the significant scale of communal violence and 

that Sabha’s tribal fabric is far more politically damaged than Tobruk’s (see figure 26).

Conclusion

In Libyan politics, then, a local tribal fabric has consistently attempted to shape the leadership, 

staffing, structure, and direction of security and justice actors, as well as their ability to provide 

services. The companion to this report demonstrates how political currents in Libya since 2011 

have shaped policing and security actors on the ground. Together, the two reports suggest that 

policing and security institutions in Libya are subject to a confluence of both political and 

tribal dynamics, political currents and divisions alternatively co-opting and reinforcing historic 

social and tribal divisions—and vice versa. 

In Tobruk, a stable tribal order based on a master-client dynamic, the al-Ubaidat tribe 

firmly in charge, has survived the revolution. As a result, policing and security services are 

effective within Tobruk, though limited by capacity and the partnerships that the services have 

had to form with tribal actors. On the national level, however, Tobruk’s policing and security 

services are clearly politicized in line with the al-Ubaidat’s aspirations to steer the country’s 

security institutions in a direction favorable to Tobruk—which is indicated in the police and 

security services’ support of Haftar’s Operation Dignity. Partnerships between the al-Ubaidat 

tribe and client tribes such as the al-Qut’an in the region have held, offering a modicum of 

regional stability.

In Bani Walid, the revolution provoked an internal attempt within the Warfalla to 

overthrow the established tribal leadership. Those seeking power were pro-revolutionary, 

whereas the established leadership was anti-revolutionary; consequently, although the 

established leadership survived, it did so at the cost of rejecting state policing and security 
USIP.ORG 33

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Figure 22. Have tribal elders in your area successfully brokered cease-fires? (n=979, by region)

Refuse to answer 

Don’t know 

No 

Yes 

2% 1%

West

53% 

30% 

15% 

East

37% 

38% 

16% 

9% 

Southwest

40% 

49% 

10% 

Libya

47% 

34% 

15% 

4% 

Figure 23. Have tribal elders in your area successfully removed roadblocks and checkpoints? (n=979, by region)

West East Southwest Libya

35% 

42% 41% 38% 

48% 

43% 51% 

47% 

15% 7% 

8% 8% 

12% 

Refuse to answer 

Don’t know 

No 

Yes 

2% 3%

Figure 24. Have tribal elders in your area successfully brokered prisoner exchanges? (n=979, by region)

Refuse to answer 

Don’t know 

No 

Yes 

2%

West East Southwest Libya

53% 

42% 

52% 50% 

33% 

43% 

44% 

37% 

12% 10% 

1%

3% 11% 

5% 3%
34 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

59% 

50% 

27% 

48% 

50% 

37% 

32% 

37% 

50% 

34% 

36% 

47% 

Libya 

Libya 

Tobruk

Libya 

Brokering 

cease-fires 

Exchanging 

prisoners 

Removing 

roadblocks and 

checkpoints 

Yes No Don’t know Refuse to answer 

Tobruk

Tobruk

Figure 25. Did elders in your area succeed in... (n=22, Tobruk; n=979, Libya)

Figure 26. Did elders in your area succeed in... (n=22, Sabha; n=979, Libya)

46% 

50% 

55% 

48% 

46% 

37% 

50% 

37% 

36% 

34% 

46% 

47% 

Sabha 

Libya 

Sabha 

Libya 

Sabha 

Libya 

Brokering 

cease-fires 

Exchanging 

prisoners 

Removing 

roadblocks and 

checkpoints 

Yes No Don’t know Refuse to answer 
USIP.ORG 35

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

institutions. All such services are now handled through a tribal structure named the Warfalla 

Social Council, which has some capability to ensure stability locally but only limited capability 

(and that based primarily on negotiation) to provide policing and protect the town from its 

neighbors, Misrata, and the Islamic State.

In Sabha, as in Bani Walid, the revolution inspired an attempt to overthrow the established 

tribal order. Unlike in Bani Walid, however, in Sabha, where the old order was based on a 

coalition headed by minor tribes (mainly the Qadhadhfa and Magharha), that attempt was 

successful. The Awlad Sulaiman, the area’s pre-Gadhafi-era historic tribal leaders, established 

command over all major policing institutions. In doing so, they provoked intercommunal 

violence, and so found it necessary to shore up security by establishing external alliances with 

the Misratan Third Force. The Third Force has managed to reestablish some essential elements 

of security, but the tribalized nature of policing institutions has led to a tribal zoning of the city. 

The inability to police much of the area has been only partly addressed by a reliance on Salafist 

currents whose religious values override purely narrow tribal affiliations.

Outside the political space, the political machinations of tribal notables are a remote reality 

for most Libyans, who evince clear and unambiguous preferences for neutral state policing 

and justice provision. Libyans recognize the genealogical heritage of tribes and call on their 

network of sheikhs and elders, but only in extreme circumstances. If tribes are becoming more 

prominent than usual, therefore, it is because the social and political fragmentation of the 

country is placing more and more Libyans in extreme circumstances.

Within the current transitional security and justice environment, Libyans are more 

comfortable—as the case studies attest—with tribal intervention in the areas of mediation 

and pacification, indicating that they see a legitimate role for tribal authorities in mediating 

disputes, arranging prisoner exchanges, and negotiating social order issues such as roadblocks 

and checkpoints. However, to succeed in such negotiations, mediators need a functioning tribal 

order behind them so that the agreements they broker will be implemented and respected. 

Where the tribal order has collapsed into violence, as in Sabha, tribal mediators are seen 

as having limited success in making agreements stick; in stable Tobruk, however, they are 

perceived as having been more successful.

What conclusions does this study offer for future security and justice models in Libya? It 

is important to separate Libya’s current interim circumstances from its long-term security and 

stability prospects. One conclusion is that, when it comes to peace and security, Libyans are 

comfortable with tribal mediation as an interim stopgap measure as long as the state remains 

in crisis. However, continued political polarization poses risks to successful tribal mediation 

efforts. If Libya continues its national-level civil war (as opposed to local tribal wars), then 

finding ways to support tribal elders in negotiating, signing, and implementing local cease-fires 

in the face of efforts by spoilers to stoke conflict is a reasonable goal for future engagement.

Given citizens’ clear desire for security and justice institutions and for actors that conduct 

their work independently of tribal influence, Libya must move to defactionalize security and 

justice services, a process that will include detribalizing them in many localities. Eradicating 

tribal interests from state services, however, is a goal that has eluded Libyan governors and 

statebuilders since before the Ottoman Empire. Many detribalization efforts failed because 

they sought merely to elevate certain tribes over others. Moving forward, security and justice 

reform must instead seek to create tribal balance if it is to ensure that state institutions are 

broadly representative of the Libyan populace. 

Outside the political 

space, the political 

machinations of tribal 

notables are a remote 

reality for most Libyans, 

who evince clear and 

unambiguous preferences 

for neutral state policing 

and justice provision. 
36 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Additionally, even though tribal interests are being served by tribes exerting influence over 

state institutions, the notables interviewed spoke of being overburdened and expressed little 

desire to be responsible for every conceivable security matter in their area. If this sentiment is 

widespread, then tribes may be readier than observers perhaps assume for the state to reassert 

control—or at least some level of control. Careful negotiation between the state and the tribes 

might help to tip control of security and justice services back toward the state. 

As part of any reform effort, consideration should be given to educating Libyans on how 

other countries manage the dynamic between tribes and state security and justice institutions, 

and on how policing services can be depoliticized amid a civil war. The work of creating a truly 

mixed system with a national rather than partisan focus must be undertaken at the ministerial 

level and institutional level. This work will not be possible, however, until a successful political 

agreement has been reached and the current warring over control of these functions has ceased.

In the judicial arena, tribes have stepped in to assist where the judiciary are significantly 

constrained in their work by colossal pressure from backlog of pending cases, security threats, 

and salary issues. This tribal intervention has not been driven solely by a concern to help the 

judiciary function more effectively; tribes are certainly interested in taking advantage of the 

current situation to divert cases involving their members away from the formal court system and 

into tribal channels. Nonetheless, the survey data indicate that though Libyans acknowledge 

the potential for tribes to play a role in supporting the judiciary, the majority would rather 

rely on a state justice system than turn to tribal arbitration or customary law. Dialogue with 

notables and civil society leaders could help identify where and how this support could best 

be rendered. Tribal elders’ expertise in mediation, for instance, could be fruitfully used by an 

institutionalized alternative dispute resolution mechanism, which could reduce the burden on 

the courts by diverting certain types of cases into mediation channels, as has become a common 

practice in numerous countries. 

In sum, since the revolution, tribes have asserted themselves within Libya’s fractious security, 

justice, and peacemaking space. Tribal influence in this space, however, is not new; it has always 

been there, albeit to varying degrees. What has occurred since the revolution is a surge in 

tribal influence in the provision of security and justice in response to the collapse of the state. 

And as tribal involvement has grown, so has the impact of intertribal power dynamics on who 

exactly provides security and justice in each area of the country, and how they do so. Libyans 

recognize this reality and acknowledge that tribes can play positive roles. Nonetheless, Libyans 

overwhelmingly desire a security and justice system provided by the state and independent of 

tribal influence. As Libya seeks to rebuild and move beyond its history of colonization, coups, 

and conflict, reform efforts must draw on tribal expertise and experience in peacemaking and 

negotiation, bearing in mind what modern tribalism really means to Libyans. Reform efforts 

that do this and are infused with the principles of democracy and equality can help shape a new 

security and justice sector for a new Libya.
USIP.ORG 37

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Appendix A. Research Methodology

USIP worked with Altai Consulting on this research project. The methodology involved a 

combination of key informant interviews, public opinion sampling drawn from national survey 

results, and a thorough review of literature and open-source media data in English, Arabic, and 

French. Where relevant, targeted media monitoring and analysis were also included. Qualitative data was gathered through an iterative process of collection followed by review and analysis, leveraging Altai’s network of key informants, researchers, and experts.

Key Informant Interviews

Key informant interviews (or elite interviews, in social sciences terminology) are those selected 

on the basis of their knowledge who normally but not always have decision-making power or 

were or are participants in events. Altai Consulting has local coordinators in Libya who enable 

research to be supplemented by an extensive network of key informants:

• government officials,

• heads of state security and justice institutions,

• armed group leaders,

• leaders of women’s organizations,

• heads of municipal councils,

• heads of tribal entities,

• heads of reconciliation committees,

• civil society actors,

• Libyan and international media,

• private-sector actors,

• independent experts and academics, and

• officials and experts within the international community.

Key informant interviewing has methodological limitations: sample sets are highly limited; 

interviews are generally semi-structured or unstructured; interviewers must accommodate 

interviewees’ wishes on topics of discussion; and interview time is limited and interviewees 

sometimes cannot be reached to confirm or clarify points. Above all, information provided is 

not necessarily objective and may omit key facts.

To address these issues, it is critical to triangulate between categories of key informant 

interviews with people of different gender and from different ideological and professional 

backgrounds. A report focused on the impact of conflict on women, for instance, would 

triangulate between key informant interviews with heads of women’s rights nongovernmental 

organizations (NGOs); women’s associations; local councils; international personnel working 

on gender issues in Libya, including in the United Nations; and foreign embassies and NGOs. 

Key informant interviews help confirm conclusions drawn from other research that are 

unsupported elsewhere, give necessary additional insights into the interpretation of data, and 

ensure that a wider range of views and opinions are consulted.

Key informant interviews are carried out in person where the situation allows (such as 

in Tunis or Tripoli), or by telephone or Skype. Interviewees are not bound to objectivity but 

are aware of the purposes of research and agree to be interviewed on that basis and with the 

understanding that information given will not be made public outside the context of the report. 
38 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

Given the cultural and political context, the confidentiality involved, and personal nature of key 

informant interviews, the use of written or signed agreements or statements of purpose has not 

been required so far.

Open-Source Media Monitoring and Literature Reviews

Monitoring and analysis of Libyan media relevant to the topic or geographical focus are conducted by the media monitoring team to provide the lead researcher with an additional source 

of information.

Extensive review of secondary literature of relevance to the topic or geographical focus, 

including news reports and academic literature, is conducted during the preparatory research 

phase to complement primary information collection.

Public Opinion Sampling

To supplement findings from the key informant interviews, surveys, and media monitoring, 

public opinion sampling may also be conducted. Sampling entails conducting in-depth interviews with ordinary Libyans through Altai’s Libyan partner Istishari. The approach to these 

in-depth interviews depends heavily on the topic, aims, and geographical focus of the specific 

report. Emphasis is usually placed on sampling from a wide representation of gender, ethnictribal, ideological, and professional backgrounds.

Respondent recruitment for in-depth interviews draws on two methods:

• Street intercept. In locations with a relatively permissive security environment, local 

(Libyan) Altai fieldwork coordinators locate themselves in a public space (such as a 

shopping mall, park, or square), and ask random members of the public if they would 

be prepared to participate in an in-depth interview. The fieldwork coordinators then 

ask the respondent a predefined series of open-ended questions, either recording the 

responses using a Dictaphone or smartphone, or noting them on paper.

• Snowball approach. Snowballing identifies a promising starting point for recruiting 

in-depth interview respondents, and from there secures permission for in-depth 

interviews through a process of introductions and referrals. Such interviews are 

conducted in person by a local (Libyan) Altai fieldwork coordinator, or by phone, 

depending on the situation.
USIP.ORG 39

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Appendix B. Glossary 

Al-Ubaidat. The dominant Sa’da tribe in Tobruk, present in the region since the eighteenth 

century. 

Awlad Sulaiman. A key Arab tribe inhabiting Sabha and southern Libya which at times 

ruled the region, and supported Gadhafi during his regime. The Awlad Sulaiman has sought 

to reassert itself as the dominant tribe in Sabha since the revolution by allying with Misrata.

Notables. A term for local elites with decision-making power over local affairs. It covers 

various Libyan Arabic words denoting this social class, including ‘a’yan (those highly visible), 

wujaha’ (well-known faces), hukama’ (local authorities or decision makers), ulema (scholars), 

shuyukh (sheikhs), kibar al-sinn (elders), and qiyada ijtima’iyya (social leadership), and others.

Misrata. A seaport town in western Libya that is politically and militarily predominant 

due to its high militarization and amassing of weaponry during the 2011 revolution. Misrata 

is a collection of 250–300 clans, most with Turkic and Caucasian genealogies, as well as a 

significant Murabitin Arab heritage.

Murabitin. The Murabitin (“those who are attached”) are a class of Libyan Arab tribes 

whose genealogies branch off from the original Arab migrants into Libya, usually because they 

have non-Arab or indigenous heritage in their genealogy. Because of their mixed heritage, they 

are often socially subordinate to Sa’da tribes.

Sa’da. The name given to those Arab tribes that trace their genealogies to the first Arab 

migrations into Libya and beyond that to the days of the Prophet and his companions. These 

tribes often have a martial culture; many owe their positions in Libyan society to military 

conquests by their ancestors.

Security Directorate. The Gadhafi regime’s equivalent of a police force, comprising both a 

General Security Directorate in Tripoli and local branches.

Warfalla. The only tribe in Bani Walid, the Warfalla tribe was established through the 

social linkage of families over time rather than through bloodline. Significant political division 

emerged in 2011 between pro-revolutionary and anti-revolutionary strands in the tribe. 

USIP.ORG 41

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

Notes

1. Helen Chapin Metz, Libya: A Country Study (Washington DC: Library of Congress Federal Research 

Division, 1989). 

2. Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples (London: Faber & Faber, 1991), 198.

3. The main historic event was the Hilalian invasion, a migration of several tribes, chiefly the Bani Hilal and 

Bani Salim, from the Arabian Peninsula into North Africa during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. 

However, internal North African wars between Arab tribes meant that conquests and displacement continued well into the nineteenth century. See “Hilaliens,” Encyclopédie berbère (Aix-en-Provence: Edisud, 2000), 

3465–68; Jean Poncet, “Le mythe de la ‘catastrophe’ hilalienne,” Civilisations 22, no. 5 (1967): 1099–120. 

The Egyptian historian Hasan Ibrahim Hasan notes the examples of the proto-state Idrisid dynasty in 

Morocco and Hammudid in Andalusia, both Sharif Arab peoples operating in a Berber environment and 

who adopted the Berber language. Tarikh al-Islam al-Siyasi wal-Dini wal-Thaqafi wal-Ijtima’i (Cairo, 1964), 

184–93. Similar examples are available in Libya. See Ibrahim Kamali, Sukkan Tarabulus al-Gharb (Tripoli: 

Centre for Libyan Jihad Studies, 1991), 143. On Berber roots in Zintan, an Arab town, for example, see 

Auguste Cauneille, “Le semi-nomadisme dans l’Ouest libyen (Fezzan, Tripolitaine),” in Nomades et 

Nomadismes au Sahara (Paris: UNESCO, 1963).

4. Faraj Najem, Tribe, Islam and State in Libya: Analytical Study of the Roots of Libyan Tribal Society and its 

Evolution up to the Qaramanli Reign (Cairo: Al Azhar, 2003), 216–25.

5. See Dirk Vandewalle, A History of Modern Libya (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 15–17.

6. Ali Abd al-Latif Ahmida, The Making of Modern Libya (New York: State University of New York Press, 

1994), 51–44, 117–32.

7. See, for example, the discussion in Andrew Shryock, Nationalism and the Genealogical Imagination: Oral 

History and Textual Authority in Tribal Jordan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). Shryock 

argues that the meaning of the word tribe itself has been distorted by early anthropological works, which 

attempted to translate complex social networks into easily understood and discrete units of analysis.

8. This segmentation, as anthropologists termed it, was used to explain how society could be divided according 

to agreed notions of common ancestorship yet not dissolve into perpetual warfare. For a Libya-focused 

discussion, see Emrys L. Peters, “The Proliferation of Segments in the Lineage of the Bedouin of 

Cyrenaica,” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 90, no. 1 (1960): 29–53. 

A more general regional overview can be found in Dale F. Eichkelman, The Middle East: An Anthropological 

Approach, 2nd ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1989).

9. For a discussion of Libyan tribes in this political sense, see Wolfram Lacher, “The Rise of Tribal Politics” in 

The 2011 Libyan Uprisings and the Struggle for the Post-Gadhafi Future, ed. Jason Pack (New York: Palgrave 

Macmillan, 2013), 151–73.

10. In Libyan Arabic, a variety of terms are used for this political category that translate roughly as notables. 

Examples include wujaha’ (prominent persons), ‘a’yan, (visible members of the community), hukama’ (decision makers), kibar al-sinn (elders), and others. In all cases, it is the same category of persons being described, 

though individuals counted in that category may change.

11. This phrase, from the title of an influential essay by Albert Hourani, “Ottoman Reform and the Politics of 

Notables,” was coined to describe a kind of local politics within the Ottoman Empire that arose “first, when 

society is ordered to relations of personal dependence...secondly, when society is dominated by urban 

notables, by great families which...reside mainly in the city, draw their main strength from there, and 

because of their position in the city are able to dominate also a rural hinterland; and, thirdly, when these 

notables have some freedom of political action. This freedom may be of two kinds. The city may be selfgoverning...or else the city may be subject to a monarchical power, but one on which the urban population 

wishes and is able to impose limits or exercise influence.” The Modern Middle East: Revised Edition, ed. 

Albert Hourani and Phillip Khoury (New York: L. B. Tauris, 2004), 87.

12. Ibid., 87–88.

13. Ibid., 89–91.

14. See “Divided We Stand: Libya’s Enduring Conflicts,” Crisis Group Middle East/North Africa Report no. 130 

(Brussels: International Crisis Group, 2012), 39. 

15. See Lisa Anderson, Tribe and State: Libyan Anomalies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), 218. 

Many histories of Libya prior to Gadhafi document the influence tribes played over early state formation. 

For representative examples, see Emrys L. Peters, The Bedouin of Cyrenaica (Cambridge: Cambridge 

University Press, 1990); E. Evans Pritchard, The Sanusi of Cyrenaica (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 

1949); and Ali Abdullatif Ahmida, The Making of Modern Libya: State Formation, Colonization, and 

Resistance, 2nd ed. (New York: State University of New York Press, 2009).

16. Omar I. El Fathaly and Monte Palmer, Political Development and Social Change in Libya (Lanham, MD: 

Lexington Books, 1980), 58.

17. The seminal articulation on Libyan tribalism in this period is John Davies, Libyan Politics: Tribe and 

Revolution (London: I. B. Tauris, 1987), an anthropological account based on two years’ participant 
42 USIP.ORG

PEACEWORKS 118

observation of the Zway and Magharba in Ajdabiya and the frustrations Gadhafi’s regime experienced in 

interfacing with local notables and penetrating tribal substructures. The resulting book, drawn from Davies’ 

field notes, defies summation, but consequently is the fullest account available of tribe-state relations under 

Gadhafi.

18. Gadhafi’s ideal of a jamahiriya was a unique creation that drew on Gamal Abdal Nasser’s variant of socialism 

and Islamic philosophy, and tried to adapt both to Libyan society. Its key characteristic was that society 

would possess no governing institutions, no political system based on representation, and no “exploitation” 

of “wage-earners” to accumulate capital (see also Vandewalle, History of Modern Libya).

19. Ibid. 

20. Omar El Fathaly and Monte Palmer, “The Transformation of the Elite Structure of Revolutionary Libya,” 

in Social and Economic Development of Libya, ed. George H. Joffé and Keith Stanley McLachlan (Ann Arbor, 

MI: Middle East and North African Studies Press, 1982), 255–79.

21. El Fathaly and Palmer, Political Development and Social Change in Libya, 58; see also Davis, Libyan Politics, 23.

22. On the incorporation of tribalism into Gadhafi’s ideology, see Igor Cherstich, “When Tribesmen Do Not 

Act Tribal: Libyan Tribalism as Ideology (Not as Schizophrenia),” Middle East Critique 23, no. 4 (2014): 

405–21, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2014.969890. 

23. Ibid. 5; see also Amal Obeidi, Political Culture in Libya (Richmond, UK: Curzon, 2001), 118.

24. See Peter Cole, “Bani Walid: Loyalism in a Time of Revolution,” in The Libyan Revolution and Its Aftermath, 

ed. Peter Cole and Brian McQuinn (London: Hurst, 2015), 291–94.

25. Davis, Libyan Politics, 40–44.

26. This phenomenon is discussed further in the other case studies, which demonstrate a lack of shared political 

interests even when a tribe is widely believed to be politically aligned. In Tobruk, for example, the al-Ubaidat 

tribe had vested interests in the prerevolutionary security establishment, yet members of the tribe sided with 

political Islamic and other anti-establishment forces, and one Ubaidat figure even tried to overturn the 

establishment in Tobruk. In Bani Walid, tribal elites sided with Gadhafi in the revolution, whereas lowerborn families and heads joined the revolution, provoking bloodshed and unrest in the town. In Sabha, tribal 

youth are recruited into armed groups with a variety of ideological and political alignments.

27. Najem, Tribe, State and Islam in Libya.

28. See Obeidi, Political Culture in Libya, 116, 108–33; see also Obeidi, “Political Culture in Libya: A Case 

Study of Political Attitudes of University Students” (Ph.D. diss., Durham University, 1996). 

29. Cherstich, “When Tribesmen Do Not Act Tribal,” 10.

30. Indeed, many analysts and observers of Libya have noted that ambivalence or even antipathy on the subject of 

tribalism influences Libyans’ analysis of political events. Wolfram Lacher notes “much controversy among 

observers over the role of tribal allegiances” (“Families, Tribes and Cities in the Libyan Revolution,” Middle East 

Policy Council 18, no. 4). For both sides of the case, Lacher cites Abdelsattar Hatiti, “Al-Kharita al-Qibtiyya alLibya,” Al-Sharq al-Awsat, February 2011; and Mansour El-Kikhia and Abli Abdullatif Ahmida, quoted in 

William Maclean, “In Libya’s New Politics, Localism May Trump Tribes,” Reuters, September 23, 2011.

31. The al-Ubaidat were substantively represented in eastern military and security institutions. The decisions of 

these commanders not to respond to Gadhafi’s orders—whose decisions were personal, though made in 

consultation with a range of actors including tribal leaders—is what is meant here. Specifically, certain 

defections were critical: of Sulaiman Mahmud al-Ubaidi, who controlled the Tobruk port and Marsa alHriqa oil terminal; of Abd al-Fattah Yunis, who because of his long service to Gadhafi controlled the 

security brigade stationed in Benghazi; and of Libyan Air Force personnel stationed at Gamal Abdul Nasser 

airbase. The actions of these individuals contributed to Tobruk’s siding with the National Transitional 

Council and other rebel cities in the east. 

32. Najem, Tribe, State and Islam in Libya, 216–21. Najem translates “al-Ubaidat” as “al-Ibidat”; both variants 

are justifiable according to various transliteration conventions for Modern Standard and dialect Arabic.

33. Enrico De Augustus, Popolazione della Cirenaica (Tripoli: Pirotta & Bresciano, 1923), available in translation 

by Ibrahim Ahmad al-Mahdawi as Sukkan Barqa (Benghazi: Qar Yunis University, 1998).

34. Peters, Bedouin of Cyrenaica.

35. De Augustus, Popolazione della Cirenaica.

36. For example, in June 2015, when a family of the Mnaffa tribe gifted a small plot of land to key heads of 

security institutions, all of whom were al-Ubaidat. See “Qabilat al-Mnaffa bi-Bi’r al-Ashhab tamnah qit’at 

ard lil-jaish al-Libi,” Akhbar Libya, June 20, 2015, http://bit.ly/24Zkck7.

37. According to one officer from the Masamir tribe, who had been a member of the former Internal Security 

Apparatus, “We have information concerning everyone, including all the representatives of the HoR [House 

of Representatives].” 

38. Najem, Tribe, State and Islam in Libya, 211.

39. Cole, “Bani Walid,” 292.
USIP.ORG 43

TRIBE, SECURITY, JUSTICE, AND PEACE IN LIBYA TODAY

40. See Wolfram Lacher, “Libya’s Local Elites and the Politics of Alliance Building,” Mediterranean Politics 21, 

no. 1 (2016): 73–76. This step was taken under the leadership of the Sa’adi notable Muhammad al-Barghouti, 

and was deputized by a law professor at Bani Walid University, Miftah Ijbara. At some point, leadership of 

the WSC passed from Barghouti to Salih Mayouf.

41. A prominent tribal notable interviewed in June 2015 confirmed the presence of the Islamic State in Bani 

Walid as well as in the neighboring towns in central Libya. He asserted that “negotiations are ongoing” 

between the WSC and Islamic State. These reports were echoed in telephone interviews with domestic 

security officials focused on countering radicalization based in Tripoli and Tobruk.

42. Bani Walid was classified geographically as within Misrata’s municipality, and because respondents were not 

obliged to disclose their tribal affiliation or location, 1``it was often unclear which respondents were from 

Bani Walid. 

43. Ali Abdullatif Ahmida, The Making of Modern Libya, 51–54, 117–32.

44. Auguste Cauneille, “Le Nomadisme des Zentân (Tripolitaine et Fezzân),” Travaux de l’Institut de Recherches 

Sahariennes 16 (1957): 73–99.

45. Al-Amin Muhammad Ma’izi, Sukkan Fazzan: Dirasa Wasfiya Qadiman Wa-hadithan [Hadarat al-sahara, 

Vol. 1] (Tripoli, 2005). See also Enrico De Augustus, Popolazione della Tripolitania (Tripoli: Pirotta & 

Bresciano, 1917), available in translation by Ibrahim Ahmad al-Mahdawi as Sukkan Tarabulus (Benghazi: 

Qar Yunis University, 1998).

46. See “Misratan-led forces take control of Military Barracks and Airport in Sabha,” Libya Herald, November 

4, 2014.

 5

About the Institut

The United States Institute of Peace is an independent, nonpartisan 

institution established and funded by Congress. Its goals are to 

help prevent and resolve violent conflicts, promote postconflict 

peacebuilding, and increase conflict-management tools, capacity, and 

intellectual capital worldwide. The Institute does this by empowering 

others with knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as by its direct 

involvement in conflict zones around the globe.

Chairman of the Board: Steven J. Hadley

Vice Chairman: George E. Moose

President: Nancy Lindborg

Chief Financial Officer: Michael Graham

Board of Di

Stephen J. Hadley (Chair), Principal, RiceHadleyGates, LLC, Washington, 

D.C.• George E. Moose (Vice Chair), Adjunct Professor of Practice, The 

George Washington University, Washington, D.C. • Judy Ansley, Former 

Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor under 

George W. Bush, Washington, D.C. • Eric Edelman, Hertog Distinguished 

Practitioner in Residence, Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced 

International Studies, Washington, D.C. • Joseph Eldridge, University 

Chaplain and Senior Adjunct Professorial Lecturer, School of International 

Service, American University • Kerry Kennedy, President, Robert F. 

Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights, Washington, D.C. • Ikram 

U. Khan, President, Quality Care Consultants, LLC, Las Vegas, Nev. • 

Stephen D. Krasner, Graham H. Stuart Professor of International 

Relations, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif. • John A. Lancaster, 

Former Executive Director, International Council on Independent Living, 

Potsdam, N.Y. • Jeremy A. Rabkin, Professor of Law, George Mason 

University, Fairfax, Va. • J. Robinson West, Chairman, PFC Energy, 

Washington, D.C. • Nancy Zirkin, Executive Vice President, Leadership 

Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Washington, D.C.

Members Ex Offi

John Kerry, Secretary of State • Ashton Carter, Secretary of Defense 

• Gregg F. Martin, Major General, U.S. Army; President, National 

Defense University • Nancy Lindborg, President, 

United States Institute of Peace (nonvoting)
2 Looking for Justice

Governance in Libya has long been handled by tribal 

leaders rather than a central authority. Tribalism, though, 

has evolved over the centuries, initially in response to outside powers and more recently to internal circumstances. 

Since the 2011 revolution that ousted Muammar Gadhafi, 

one international debate has focused on the extent to 

which tribal identity mobilizes groups socially and politically. If tribes are more prominent, perhaps it is because 

the social and political fragmentation of the country has 

put more and more Libyans in extreme circumstances. An 

uneasy relationship between state authority and independent local authorities with de facto power explains in large 

part why local Libyan leaderships want state security services but also wish to dominate or control those services. 

This report analyzes what tribe means in Libya today; the 

impact of tribalism on security, justice, and peacemaking; 

and how Libyans perceive the role of tribe versus state in 

these areas. 

Other USIP Publications

■ Prioritizing Security Sector Reform: A New U.S. Approach by Querine 

Hanlon and Richard H. Shultz, Jr. (USIP Press, March 2016)

■ Policing Libya: Form and Function of Policing Since the 2011 Revolution by 

Peter Cole and Fiona Mangan (Peaceworks, August 2016)

■ Regional Security through Inclusive Reform in the Maghreb and the Sahel by 

Querine Hanlon and Joyce Kasee (Peace Brief, December 2015)

■ The Role of Media in Shaping Libya’s Security Sector Narratives by Naji 

Abou-Khalil and Laurence Hargreaves (Special Report, April 2015)

■ Security and Justice in Post-Revolution Libya by Fiona Mangan and 

Christina Murtaugh (Peaceworks, September 2014)

PEACEWORKS • AUGUST 2016 • NO. 118

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE • 2301 CONSTITUTION AVE., NW • WASHINGTON, DC 20037 • USIP.ORG 

@ usip