The Civil War in Libya

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
You know Finn there is something very, very fishy about this SAS business. As others have pointed out, that with a RN Warship in Benghazi, all a UK diplomatic mission had to do to make contact with the rebel leadership was walk down the gangplank and hail a cab!

Why the HM Govt send a SF team into Libya in this way? Why did the rebels react the way that they did?

There has been long a suspicion in my mind, that despite all the public hubris expressed by our leaders, that the real policy on this issue centres on one obvious but totally unreported fact; namely that Colonel Gadaffi is someone that they can do business with (because they are doing business with him already) while they have no such certainties from the rebels!

There are certainly people in Europe who just want everything to "quiet down" so they can get on with making money. Especially the Italians. But I think if this SAS team was in the country to fight the rebels or something, they wouldn't have been let go so quickly. In any case, it's a damn embarrassment. Covert missions are supposed to be covert. Instead they got detained and humiliated by their supposed allies.

They should have realized the rebels would be distrustful of foreigners, especially armed ones from a country that did oil deals with Qaddafi and has been party to 2 invasions of Muslim nations recently. I'm not saying that the UK wants an invasion of Libya, but the presence of the SAS team must have looked awfully suspicious to your individual AK-wielding rebel, who probably has some vague anti-Western notions to his political beliefs, and doesn't want foreign ground troops in Libya. They might have thought these men were the vanguard of a larger intervention (which perhaps is what they were indeed supposed to be). I would imagine that the SAS team could have made an effort to escape or something, but they didn't want to ruin the greater purpose of the mission by killing some of the men they were supposed to make contact with, especially when they were allowed to leave quickly and easily.
 

CardSharp

New Member
There are certainly people in Europe who just want everything to "quiet down" so they can get on with making money. Especially the Italians. But I think if this SAS team was in the country to fight the rebels or something, they wouldn't have been let go so quickly. In any case, it's a damn embarrassment. Covert missions are supposed to be covert. Instead they got detained and humiliated by their supposed allies.

This whole thing reminds me of Bravo Two Zero where the SAS sent a team into Iraq to spot and destroy Scud launchers. The team was captured or killed bar one survivor.

These missions along with the Iran hostage rescue fiasco doesn't make for a great track record of special forces operating in middle east, but then again who really know how many were conducted successfully.
 
Last edited:

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
There will be another battle around Ras Lanouf and Bin Jawad. The rebels are regrouping there after running into more serious government firepower around Bin Jawad. It's interesting how this war in North Africa bears similarities to the great battles of WWII that were fought in the same area. The rebels went on a tear across eastern Libya, scattering the government forces in the cities and then making a 150 mile run across the desert to Bin Jawad. These same huge, fast advances were a common feature of the desert war so long ago, too. It's the terrain. There's no clear defensive positions sometimes for hundreds of miles in the open desert, and one breakthrough can lead to a huge advance. But there's a sort of backlash to this in desert fighting. Logistics are very difficult for several reasons that would be familiar to Rommel, Montgomery and Wavell. There's only one road along the coast, so it's vulnerable to attack from the air. The desert offers unique challenges; vehicles break down easily and water is used up very fast. Most importantly though is the speed of the advance itself. In WWII, the Germans and British both outran their own logistics and used up gas and ammunition.

A similar sort of thing seems to have happened to the rebels. They quickly advanced west from Benghazi and handled the smaller isolated government garrisons they encountered. But the speed of their advance meant that they were necessarily leaving men and heavy equipment behind, while getting deeper into territory where resistance was likely to be stronger. They "paid the piper" with the defeat at Bin Jawad. The rebels haven't had to retreat more than 20 miles though, because the government forces haven't truly counterattacked against the rebels in the east. They just turned the rebels back temporarily.

If Qaddafi does truly counterattack with his T-72s and Mi-24s, the blow will probably come along the coast road and fall at what is now the westernmost rebel outpost, Ras Lanouf. Alternatively, the rebels might beat Qaddafi to the punch, bring up some tanks and MLRS and have another try at continuing westward. Or perhaps outside forces will intervene before either side gets a chance for their next move. We'll have to just wait and see, because I sure don't know what's going to happen.

For now, Qaddafi seems to be muddling. His attempts to deal with isolated rebel cities in the west, closer to Tripoli, seem to have been only partially effective, at best, It might be better for him to concentrate his best forces to crush the enemy in the open desert, where his force's superior firepower will have the biggest advantage, and there are less civilians to get in the way, and more international news crews to witness the battle and hyperbolically proclaim a crushing defeat for the insurrection, as they often do.

PS: You can tell that the rebels are complete amateurs, because in photographs and videos, they're all standing around in the open desert. Professionals would dig in because there's no natural cover and at any time they could get artillery or an airstrike. But instead they scatter. That's not a bad idea, but if you have to stay in one place for a while, well, dig a hole in the ground and get in it!
 
Last edited:

MwRYum

Major
PS: You can tell that the rebels are complete amateurs, because in photographs and videos, they're all standing around in the open desert. Professionals would dig in because there's no natural cover and at any time they could get artillery or an airstrike. But instead they scatter. That's not a bad idea, but if you have to stay in one place for a while, well, dig a hole in the ground and get in it!

No surprise there, typically it takes 3 months to impart the very basic skills to turn a civilian into a basic infantry man, and this civil war started less than a month ago. Essentially they now have to switch from Facebook to infantry handbook.

Yet, facing such disorganised, poorly armed militia, the government forces still can't crush them after 2 weeks of fighting, speaks a lot about the quality of the government regulars...
 

delft

Brigadier
I just read in the Daily Telegraph that the MI6 officer carried a personal letter from David Cameron to the rebel leaders. It is quite clearly a violation of the Charter of the United Nations.
This morning the BBC Radio 4 said that the expedition was betrayed by the noise of the helicopter!
 

Mr T

Senior Member
I just read in the Daily Telegraph that the MI6 officer carried a personal letter from David Cameron to the rebel leaders. It is quite clearly a violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

Which part of the UN Charter forbids a country's leader from making contact with a group in a Civil War?
 

delft

Brigadier
Which part of the UN Charter forbids a country's leader from making contact with a group in a Civil War?

The Charter says that the members will not interfere in another country's internal affairs.
Of course that happens often, think of the wars against Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, think of selling arms to a part of China that President Nixon acknowledged was not independent. Still it is as well to learn the rules.
 
Last edited:

delft

Brigadier
There is a difference between the public actions of the Security Council and the secretive actions of a British Prime Minister.
 
Top