Time for talks: It’s the only way to save Libya and Syria

Maybe it’s the new year — or, more likely, a sense of responsibility by the international community — but negotiators have signaled a new willingness to tackle two of the world’s most stubborn conflicts, Libya and Syria.

Libya has not shown itself able to reach a new equilibrium with a unified government since 2011, when combined forces overthrew Moammar Gadhafi. Those who forced him out were Libyan elements, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, the United States and some Arab countries. Now Libya has two governments, one in the capital, Tripoli, and the other in the east. Fighting continues among various tribal and local militias to the degree that even the country’s oil production, its only asset, has been severely disrupted.

The sheer number of the competing parties in Libya, the fact that all of them are heavily armed and the additional complication of the number of foreign countries with a dog in the fight, including Egypt and Turkey, make negotiating an end to the conflict a major challenge. Nonetheless, the United Nations has stepped up to take it on, with talks to begin in Geneva shortly.

The conflict in Syria, which also dates from 2011, has claimed 200,000 lives and driven an estimated 10 million from their homes, creating large refugee camps in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. It has also made the Islamic State group possible, as governments in Iraq and Syria have been incapable of controlling the group’s hold on their territory.

Secretary of State John Kerry tried in vain in 2013 to launch Syrian peace talks. Russia and the United Nations have now expressed interest in trying again to bring the civil war to an end. Talks are scheduled for Geneva and Moscow later this month.

The United States should stay out of the way in both sets of talks, apart from urging various American clients in the conflicts to participate constructively. Washington should encourage, in particular, the moderate Syrian elements it supports to sit down and negotiate.