Middle East and North Africa 17, where everything is what it seems

[Arakan]

Sorry I didn't mean to imply you were, rather a judgment on the commentary I'm increasingly reading that Libya was an entirely European operation, and as such it has no bearing on the administration's strategic decision in the middle east, clearly that's rubbish. Yes Cameron and Sarkozy were pushing for a bombing campaign but there's equally no doubt that without America's express approval and aid it would have remained talk. Clearly a strategic goal of the Obama admin was to get rid off Gaddafi and clearly the result has been a FUBAR of epic proportions.

Basically we have no disagreement ;). You are of course absolutely right: without the greenlight of the US, neither France nor the UK could have started their bombing campaign.

The Gaddafi business is very strange, considering he was "best buddy" of Sarkozy, Berlusconi and Blair only a few years prior (ffs France even wanted to help him built a nuclear power station hahaha).

And the "altruistic" reasons given for overthrowing Gaddafi are shady to say the least. The total ignorance of the anarchy, chaos and mass murdering in Lybia afterwards is prove enough.

It seems Cameron and Sarkozy wanted to get their entry in the historic books.

[Arakan]

Libya capital under Islamist control after Tripoli airport seized

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/24/libya-capital-under-islamist-control-tripoli-airport-seized-operation-dawn

[Horza]

# some real talk about the US, Iraq and IS

# US mooting air strikes against key IS leaders in Syria, regime says ask permission first - not sure how much airspace is in Syrian air defence range now that Raqqa's completely gone

# everyone's favourite green newspaper reminds us that the GCC committee monitoring Qatar's compliance with an agreement to abstain from committing the grave and serious offence of 'interfering in the internal affairs of other GCC states' (Why are you laughing? What's so funny?) will report in September

[Arakan]

# some real talk about the US, Iraq and IS

# US mooting air strikes against key IS leaders in Syria, regime says ask permission first - not sure how much airspace is in Syrian air defence range now that Raqqa's completely gone

# everyone's favourite green newspaper reminds us that the GCC committee monitoring Qatar's compliance with an agreement to abstain from committing the grave and serious offence of 'interfering in the internal affairs of other GCC states' (Why are you laughing? What's so funny?) will report in September

Thanks for the first link. Very interesting read. Sounds like a thoughtful and reasonable analysis and evaluation.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

# some real talk about the US, Iraq and IS

# US mooting air strikes against key IS leaders in Syria, regime says ask permission first - not sure how much airspace is in Syrian air defence range now that Raqqa's completely gone

# everyone's favourite green newspaper reminds us that the GCC committee monitoring Qatar's compliance with an agreement to abstain from committing the grave and serious offence of 'interfering in the internal affairs of other GCC states' (Why are you laughing? What's so funny?) will report in September

Thanks for the links. The first one was very enlightening, except for one line:

This is why politics should stop at the water’s edge: partisan tussling makes for bad national security policy and makes us less safe.

I'm not sure exactly what Fishman means by this and I might be attacking a strawman, but it seems like he's implying that the electorate shouldn't be influencing foreign policy at all. It should be left to the Sir Humphreys, who know what's best for us. While that may be more effective, it's against the principles of democracy.

He's probably only saying that politicians shouldn't use foreign policy to attack their political opponents, but the only real way to stop that is to remove all real influence elected politicians have on foreign policy.

[Clueless Northman]

Libya is a major oil exporter into southern Europe and generally most Europeans were pretty happy to leave Gaddafi alone as long as he kept pumping the oil. The main drive to remove him definitely came from the US. Yes the French and British supplied most of the bombers but without US logistical aid and support the military operation would have been impossible.

Well, Europeans were often annoyed by his antics. Still, what probably sealed his fate is when he became berserk when UK and France criticized his violent repression, and he more or less told them that he would consider them as enemies and would retaliate - including by letting hundreds of thousands of refugees flood Europe in the next months. That wasn't going to go well and convinced Cameron and Sarkozy that they had to get rid of him.

[daskool]

Well, Europeans were often annoyed by his antics. Still, what probably sealed his fate is when he became berserk when UK and France criticized his violent repression, and he more or less told them that he would consider them as enemies and would retaliate - including by letting hundreds of thousands of refugees flood Europe in the next months. That wasn't going to go well and convinced Cameron and Sarkozy that they had to get rid of him.

The Europeans had been busy signing trade deals for years before. There was massive foreign investment into Libya and relations could be called cordial between the likes of Berlusconi and Gaddafi. So what changed? Simply western politicians saw the Arab spring and pretty much crapped themselves. They didn't want to be on the wrong side of history. Despite every indication that the rebels consisted, at least in part, of extremist jihadis, the decision was taken to back them in as not to do so would leave the west out in the cold when the dictators fell like dominoes. Call it a bout of collective insanity, a monumental foreign policy fuck up of epic proportions, given the result we're now witnessing to argue otherwise is delusional.

[Arakan]

The Europeans had been busy signing trade deals for years before. There was massive foreign investment into Libya and relations could be called cordial between the likes of Berlusconi and Gaddafi. So what changed? Simply western politicians saw the Arab spring and pretty much crapped themselves. They didn't want to be on the wrong side of history. Despite every indication that the rebels consisted, at least in part, of extremist jihadis, the decision was taken to back them in as not to do so would leave the west out in the cold when the dictators fell like dominoes. Call it a bout of collective insanity, a monumental foreign policy fuck up of epic proportions, given the result we're now witnessing to argue otherwise is delusional.

There is truth in your post. Much and more.

It is IMPORTANT to add that France's/Sarkozy's eagerness to show the world how MUCH they cared for freedom/democracy/younameit in North Africa might have been influenced by the FACT that the French government initially offered Tunisia's Ben Ali to send him French special police in order to train their Tunisian counterparts in proper riot fighting.

Actually this is fucking hillarious :).

[snake]

# some real talk about the US, Iraq and IS

# US mooting air strikes against key IS leaders in Syria, regime says ask permission first - not sure how much airspace is in Syrian air defence range now that Raqqa's completely gone

# everyone's favourite green newspaper reminds us that the GCC committee monitoring Qatar's compliance with an agreement to abstain from committing the grave and serious offence of 'interfering in the internal affairs of other GCC states' (Why are you laughing? What's so funny?) will report in September

I would think the Russians will use any bombin in Syria without Syrian permission to scold the US about violating another countries sovereignty.

But in reality bombing won't do much good. It's hard to know what would.

[Fez]

Also, it would be nice to know who the mystery air force belongs to.

According to the New York Times, it was in fact UAE planes operating from Egyptian bases; in an operation that they did not inform the US would occur. In fact they explicitly denied it to US officials. The Times also adds this tidbit:

The officials said this was not the first time that the Egyptians and Emirates had teamed up to strike against Islamist targets inside Libya. In recent months, a special forces team operating out of Egypt but possibly composed primarily of Emirates personnel had also successfully destroyed an Islamist camp in eastern Libya without detection.

[Arakan]

According to the New York Times, it was in fact UAE planes operating from Egyptian bases; in an operation that they did not inform the US would occur. In fact they explicitly denied it to US officials. The Times also adds this tidbit:

Is this a good thing or a bad one? I am not yet sure. On the one hand, it is clear as day that something has to happen in Libya but undercover military operations when virtually half of Middle East is on fire and the other one is on the brink of getting burned as well...

Well one thing is for sure: military actions alone will not suffice in Lybia. I read some articles stating that Lybia is factually on the brink of inevitable disintegration.

[jarl the climber]

According to the New York Times, it was in fact UAE planes operating from Egyptian bases; in an operation that they did not inform the US would occur. In fact they explicitly denied it to US officials. The Times also adds this tidbit:

That's very interesting.

[Fez]

Is this a good thing or a bad one? I am not yet sure. On the one hand, it is clear as day that something has to happen in Libya but undercover military operations when virtually half of Middle East is on fire and the other one is on the brink of getting burned as well...

Well one thing is for sure: military actions alone will not suffice in Lybia. I read some articles stating that Lybia is factually on the brink of inevitable disintegration.

An interesting subplot in this is what this says of US power in the region these days, and the lack of respect it incurs. Both from Egypt and the UAE obviously, but also possibly Israel; our supposed bestest ally. It seems to me that Israel would be aware that 1) unannounced military planes were flying in its general direction from the Gulf and later that 2) unannounced military planes were taking off from Egyptian air bases. I would think Israel would be deeply concerned about both of these developments, enough to take pre-emptive actions, unless they were given the heads up about what was going on. If that was the case though, it would seem that Israel did not go on to share this information with the US, because if they had then US officials would not have been in the dark when asking Egypt about the matter.

[snake]

I would suspect any nation with an military airforce would be capable of making airstrikes.

The US was caught off guard apparently and they are none too pleased. Egypt is denying any involvement and the UAE is silent.

Story.

One statement from the story I did find amusing,

On Monday, the US, France, Germany, Italy and the UK issued a joint statement denouncing "outside interference" in Libya

With success stories like Libya I would hate to see one of NATO's failures.

[Suttree]

With success stories like Libya I would hate to see one of NATO's failures.

Again?

As was pointed out that quote you provided a while back was referring to the initial strikes. Not sure why you keep bringing this up out of context?

[snake]

Again?

As was pointed out that quote you provided a while back was referring to the initial strikes. Not sure why you keep bringing this up out of context?

Because I want to..

I guess the part I'm confused about is whether there's some cut-off line between "Technically has an air force but is pretty limited to just defending it's own turf cause it's not capable of much more" and "has an air force easily capable of striking a nation 2,500 miles away if it just decides to."

If the stories are correct the UAE needed Egyptian airbases to be able to carry out the strikes. Since they have US hardware they would be in breach of agreements that were attached to the sale of said hardware. Which is why everyone involved is denying or saying nothing. That being said, not a lot of nations have long range attack abilities.

[Horza]

If that was the case though, it would seem that Israel did not go on to share this information with the US, because if they had then US officials would not have been in the dark when asking Egypt about the matter.

If they detected the flights then the guys with Aegis destroyers, airbases and listening posts running from the eastern Med to the Gulf sure as shit knew as well.

I confess that I didn't even know that UAE had the capability to launch airstrikes. How many nations in the world do?

UAE's got a very good air force, latest model F-16s and mid-air tankers. Not an airforce nerd, but even with Egyptian facilities co-ordinating refuelling and the other logistics over that sort of distance is something very few countries in the region could pull off.

[Darzin]

Yeah the UAE has our planes most of the Gulf Countries do, so they can do what we can mostly. Many countries can do airstrikes but they're limited by lack of carriers and air bases.

[Fez]

If they detected the flights then the guys with Aegis destroyers, airbases and listening posts running from the eastern Med to the Gulf sure as shit knew as well.

I am often less-than-impressed with US intelligence capabilities, at least regarding what is publicly revealed/leaked. However, even if the US knew that military jets were flying from somewhere to somewhere else, they wouldn't necessarily have a clear picture of what was happening. I'm not saying Israel would either, but they'd probably be more paranoid about it and more likely to act rashly unless explicitly told what was happening.

[Horza]

I am often less-than-impressed with US intelligence capabilities, at least regarding what is publicly revealed/leaked. However, even if the US knew that military jets were flying from somewhere to somewhere else, they wouldn't necessarily have a clear picture of what was happening. I'm not saying Israel would either, but they'd probably be more paranoid about it and more likely to act rashly unless explicitly told what was happening.

This is pretty basic stuff. Radar, SIGINT, that sort of thing, massive concentrations of which the US has situated far closer to the UAE than Israel, not to mention the military-to-military contacts that exist between the US and both Egypt and UAE armed forces.

As for the broader picture, Qatar-Rest of Gulf proxy conflict in Libya wasn't unknown to US intelligence prior to this, and the objective of a westward flight path wouldn't be hard to guess.