CHAPEL HILL -- The war to overthrow the Gadhafi regime in Libya is in its last stages, but now the revolution begins. The rebel National Transitional Council is facing a momentous struggle to build, not merely the revolution, but its own capacity to lead.
The challenges are huge: Libya has no democratic memory to recall, armed militias hold power on the streets and the glue of Gadhafi hatred, which made allies of disparate political and tribal groups, weakens as the key players position themselves for a post-Gadhafi future.
Despite this, Libya has a better chance to be democratic than almost any other country touched by the Arab Spring. The nation has oil wealth, infrastructure and an educated class that has quickly re-emerged after enduring more than 40 years of stultifying Gadhafi rule.
The Libyans I met in Benghazi and Tripoli expressed a passion for liberal multi-party democracy and are adamant that the new state be based on nation rather than tribe or region. The transitional council's instincts are good. Its members are inclined to be inclusive and want to hand over power to a legitimately elected assembly.
But the key to a stable and democratic Libya will be the choices made by leaders over the next few months. Complacency in this fragile transitional period can lead to squandered opportunities, alienation and conflict.
The National Transition Council has published a constitutional roadmap that spells out a timetable for the establishment of an interim government, constitutional assembly elections, a referendum to approve the new constitution and the first parliamentary elections. It understandably wants early elections to legitimize the process - within 240 days of "liberation" being declared - and is reticent about leading a public discussion on the new constitution and election system. However, the council's worthy desire not to appear overly controlling, when its legitimacy is fragile, has the consequence of rushing the process and limiting effective debate early on.
First, the voting system for the initial elections needs to produce an inclusive and representative assembly that can draw up the new constitutional framework of the nation. Ideas floating around in Benghazi, for local elections based on villages and city wards electing individuals, will not only make that first assembly beholden to tribal politics but it would exclude many of the new secular and liberal movements and punish women and minorities.
It would be much better to introduce a system to reflect the competition between burgeoning political parties and avoid the vote-seat anomalies that bedevil single-member district systems.
Second, a vibrant political party landscape needs more than 240 days to develop. If the new Libyan parties are not capable of presenting themselves to voters, elections will default to strong men and the old politics of Libya. That is the sad story of Afghanistan.
Alongside giving space for party development, the National Transitional Council needs to quickly initiate a public consultation process on what the new constitution should look like. Once the assembly is elected it has been given only 60 days to draft a new constitution, so the buy-in process must begin early. There is little more dangerous to democratization than a constitution designed quickly and secretly by the few without the eyes and voices of the many.
Andrew Reynolds is associate professor of political science and chair of global studies UNC-Chapel Hill. He was recently in Libya advising on issues of constitutional design.
