Libya’s neighbours back a political process after Algiers talks
The foreign ministers of Algeria, Egypt and Tunisia met in Algiers and backed a Libyan-led political process, including presidential and parliamentary elections under an agreed framework. Their joint statement calls for coordination with UN efforts and the withdrawal of foreign forces and fighters from Libya.
Geopolitics··Night
Three neighbours meet
The foreign ministers of Algeria, Egypt and Tunisia met in Algiers on October 25 and issued a joint statement backing a Libyan-led political process. La Presse de Tunisie and Misr 2030 both report the meeting and the ministers’ support for simultaneous presidential and parliamentary elections. The statement calls for an agreed constitutional and legal framework for those votes. It is a position taken by Libya’s neighbours, not an announcement that an election date has been set.[1], [2]
A framework for elections
The ministers said a political settlement should come from Libyan national consensus and preserve the country’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Their statement supports efforts by the UN mission to facilitate dialogue and urges regional and international coordination around the process. The ministers also reviewed the UN political roadmap announced in August 2025 and the results of the 4+4 dialogue committee, including a framework agreement signed in August 2026. These are steps discussed at the meeting, not evidence that institutional division has ended.[1]
Foreign forces and coordination
The statement also rejects foreign interference and calls for foreign forces, mercenaries and foreign fighters to leave Libya. Misr 2030 reported that Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty stressed Libya’s sovereignty and the importance of a settlement led by Libyans. The ministers agreed to continue consulting and coordinating their positions. The Algiers meeting follows a meeting of the same three-neighbour mechanism in Cairo in May 2026. The new statement concerns the wider political process rather than the separate maritime agreement debate.[1], [2]
