Russia Accuses West Of Arming Mali "Al-Qaeda" Rebels

Tyler Durden's picture

Define irony? Here is one, or rather two, tries.

Back in the 1970s, it was none other than the US that armed the Taliban "freedom fighters" fighting against the USSR in the Soviet-Afghanistan war, only to see these same freedom fighters eventually and furiously turn against the same US that provided them with arms and money, with what ended up being very catastrophic consequences, culminating with September 11.

Fast forward some 30 or more years and it is again the US which, under the guise of dreams and hopes of democracy and the end of a "dictatorial reign of terror", armed local insurgents in the Libyan war of "liberation" to overthrow the existing regime (and in the process liberate just a bit of Libya's oil) - the same Libya where shortly thereafter these same insurgents rose against their former sponsor, and killed the US ambassador in what has now become an epic foreign policy Snafu.

But it doesn't end there as according to Russia, it is the same US weapons that were provided to these Libyan "freedom fighters" that are now being used in what is rapidly becoming a war in Mali, involving not only assorted French regiments, but extensive US flip flops and boots on the ground.

Via Al Jazeera,

Russia said on Wednesday the rebels fighting French and African troops in Mali are the same fighters the West armed in the revolt that ousted Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

 

"Those whom the French and Africans are fighting now in Mali are the [same] people who overthrew the Gaddafi regime, those that our Western partners armed so that they would overthrow the Gaddafi regime," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told a news conference.

 

"It's important to lift one's head a bit and look over the horizon, look at all those processes more widely, they are interconnected and carry very many threats," Lavrov said, speaking of unrest across the Middle East that could play into the hands of militants.

 

"This will be a time bomb for decades ahead," he said.

That is our definition of irony.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LawsofPhysics's picture

This Act II, scene I; aaaannnnndddd go...

The Juggernaut's picture

Operation Cyclone, to be exact.

Kitler's picture

Looks like it won't be long before American boots are on the ground to assist in defending the Malian military hunta that was trained by the good ole U.S. of A.

With oil and gold and uranium resources it is important to make sure that these don't fall into the hands of the Chin... err... Al Qaeda terrorists.

The race to save Africa's resources is on.

redpill's picture

Background checks and 5-round mags for American citizens, full auto kalashnikovs for everyone else.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture

+ 1

Because African terrorists are no threat to the Obama regime.  

They don't care.  They did not care about Benghazi (witness Hillary's meltdown today), they do not care about Syria, they do not care about anyone other than their own agendas and pocketbooks.

Armed US citizens are, however, perceived as a threat to their royal ambitions.

palmereldritch's picture

"Al Qaeda" to be re-branded as "B*-Causa"

*...aaand the B stands for..

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

"Mission Accomplished!"

With successful operations in Pakistan, Oman, Syria, Libya, et al., and now Mali and Algeria, the US has guaranteed an abundant supply of 'terrists' for the next 30 years.

With this good supply of fuel for generating fear, the "War On Terra" should be going strong for at least another two wasted generations.

trav777's picture

reminds me of the Simpsons episode where they had the lizards to eat the birds, then the snakes to eat the lizards, then the gorillas to eat the snakes, and so forth...that is our plan for all this

Matt's picture

Maybe their betting the Jihadists are not organized enough to fight in 35 countries at once, in addition to all the open fronts they are already engaged in.

Fortunate Fool's picture

"it is the same US weapons that were provided to these Libyan "freedom fighters" that are now being used in what is rapidly becoming a war in Mali, involving not only assorted French regiments, but extensive US flip flops and boots on the ground."

 

Except that this is not accurate. First, there is no US boots on the ground, except maybe some special forces in limited number that "nobody" is aware of. The only troops on the ground currently are the french, the malian, and some from Chad and other african nations. In the front line, it's only the french and the malian for now. 

Second, it's not the US that armed the rebels in Lybia, but mostly Qatar (granted, it's a US "ally"), and likely Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

Third, the weapons currently used by the rebels in Mali come from the stolen stocks of weapons from the Lybian army following the fall of Ghadafi, and not from the rebels in Lybia.

However, unlike in Lybia, in which Qatar was an "ally" of the West coalition and armed the rebels, this time their expressed their disagreement of the french intervention in Mali, along with the Saudis, Egypt and Tunisia. So yes, it is very likely that, at some point, we'll see Western weapons used against the french and the malian army, but these will come from these "ally" countries.

 

Tyler, you're progressing, but you're not there yet. Keep up your hard work, eventually you'll let the facts speak for themselves.

Cyrano de Bivouac's picture

 Fortunate Fool, Everything in your post is wrong. You spelled Libya incorrectly for one. If there are special ops troops in Mali then there are "boots on the ground". The US can arm "rebels" through proxies- it's SOP nowadays.

Fortunate Fool's picture

"If there are special ops troops in Mali then there are "boots on the ground".

Except that nobody knows if there are US special forces in Mali. Unless you can confirm it, there is no US boots on the ground.

The US can arm "rebels" through proxies- it's SOP nowadays."

Except that the US never wanted to arm the rebels in Libya, no more than they want to arm the rebels in Mali. The point is, the interests of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE are diverging from the ones of the West, and it won't bother them to arm the rebels with weapons they bought from the west to fight the french and africans in Mali.

With Allies like that, you don't need ennemy.

Nothing is wrong about what I said. I agree though, I got the spelling of Libya wrong.


Nels's picture

Except that the US never wanted to arm the rebels in Libya

If they did not want to do that, then why did they do just that?

If they thought it possible to overthrow a corrupt muslim tyrant with a few peaceful and unarmed protesters, then I want some of what they were smoking.

Fortunate Fool's picture

The US did not send weapons to arm the rebels, Qatar did, with the approval of the US:

"The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year, but American officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants, according to United States officials and foreign diplomats."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-re...

In Libya, the interests of the US and Qatar to get rid of Qaddafi were somewhat converging.

 

In Syria, the interests are converging as well, but the duplicity of Qatar is now a cause of concern:

"The Obama administration did not initially raise objections when Qatar began shipping arms to opposition groups in Syria, even if it did not offer encouragement, according to current and former administration officials. But they said the United States has growing concerns that, just as in Libya, the Qataris are equipping some of the wrong militants."

Now in Mali, it's clear on which side Qatar is:

The first accusations of Qatari involvement with Tuareg separatists and Islamist groups came in a June 2012 article in respected French weekly the Canard Enchainé.

In a piece title “Our friend Qatar is financing Mali’s Islamists”, the newspaper alleged that the oil-rich Gulf state was financing the separatists.

It quoted an unnamed source in French military intelligence saying: “The MNLA [secular Tuareg separatists], al Qaeda-linked Ansar Dine and MUJAO [movement for unity and Jihad in West Africa] have all received cash from Doha.”

A month later Sadou Diallo, the mayor of the north Malian city of Gao [which had fallen to the Islamists] told RTL radio: “The French government knows perfectly well who is supporting these terrorists. Qatar, for example, continues to send so-called aid and food every day to the airports of Gao and Timbuktu.”

http://www.france24.com/en/20130121-qatar-mali-france-ansar-dine-mnla-al...

 

Trying to understand what's going on in Mali without looking at the influence of Qatar is pointless.

Here is a good piece to read:

Qatar, Sponsor of Islamist Political Movements, Major Ally of America

The Qatar/Brotherhood marriage of convenience has created the natural incubator of Islamist armed fundamentalists against whom the U.S. , since September 11, 2001, has been leading what is labeled as the “global war on terrorism.”

The war in the African nation Mali offers the latest example on how the U.S. and Qatar , seemingly, go on two separate ways. Whereas US Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, was in London on January 18 “commending” the French “leadership of the international effort” in Mali to which his country was pledging logistical, transportation and intelligence support, Qatar appeared to risk its special ties with France, which peaked during the NATO-led war on Libya, and to distrust the U.S. and French judgment.

(...)In a relatively older example, according to WikiLeaks , Somalia ’s former president in 2009, Sharif Ahmed, told a U.S. diplomat that Qatar was channeling financial assistance to the al-Qaeda-linked Shabab al-Mujahideen, which the U.S. listed as “terrorist.”

In Syria, for another example, the Brotherhood is the leading “fighting” force against the ruling regime and in alliance with and a culprit in the atrocities of the terrorist bombings of the al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front, designated by the United States as a terrorist organization last December; while the Brotherhood-led and U.S. and Qatar-sponsored Syrian opposition publicly protested the U.S. designation, the silence of Qatar on the matter could only be interpreted as in support of the protest against the U.S. decision.

Recently, Qatar has, for another example, replaced Syria , which has been on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism since 1979, as the sponsor of Hamas, whose leadership relocated from Damascus to Doha , which the U.S. lists as a “terrorist” group, and which publicly admits being the Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/qatar-sponsor-of-islamist-political-movemen...

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

Given that Qatar and Suadi Arabia buy a lot of their weapons from the USA, your thinking is a bit odd.

The Qatar Armed Forces are set to purchase almost $10 billion worth of US military technologies including Patriot missile systems, it's emerged.[source 2011]

In October 2010, talks that Saudi Arabia was negotiating a $30-60 billion arms package with the USA were made official with a full multi-billion request that included 84 F-15 Strike Eagles to replace the Kingdom’s Tornado strike aircraft and/or F-15A-D fighters, upgrades for another 70 planes, about 132 UH-60 Black Hawk utility and AH-64 attack helicopters, and armaments to equip them.[Source 2012 finalised agreement]

 

Qatar has a pop of ~250k (less than Iceland, ffs), and is one of the richest nations on earth; there's no taxes, electricity is free and they're [for the region] fairly moderate. Why would they risk all of that?

Or, put this another way; plausible deniability. That's USA foreign policy at work, you berk.


From your source: "Regional geopolitical expert Mehdi Lazar, who specialises on Qatar, wrote in French weekly news magazine L’Express in December that Doha’s relationship with predominantly Muslim north Mali was deeply entrenched." L'Express has very deep ties to the French establishment, and what you're actually seeing is French - American wrangling.

 

You also totally missed the point of your Global research piece:

On January 15, Qatari Prime and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani, told reporters he did not believe “power will solve the problem,” advised instead that this problem be “discussed” among the “neighboring countries, the African Union and the (U.N.) Security Council,” and joined the Doha-based ideologue for the Muslim Brotherhood and their Qatari sponsors, Yusuf Abdullah al-Qaradawi – the head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars who was refused entry visa to U.K. in 2008 and to France last year – in calling for “dialogue,” “reconciliation” and “peaceful solution” instead of “military intervention.”...[1]

Qatar, in all these examples, seems positioning itself to be qualified as a mediator, with the U.S. blessing, trying to achieve by the country’s financial leverage what the U.S. could not achieve militarily, or could achieve but with a much more expensive cost in money and souls...

In the Mali case, the Qatari PM Sheikh Hamad went on record to declare this ambition: “We will be a part of the solution, (but) not the sole mediator,” he said. The U.S. blessing could not be more explicit than President Obama’s approval of opening the Afghani Taliban office in Doha “to facilitate” a “negotiated peace in Afghanistan,” according to the Qatari Foreign Ministry on January 16.

 

You're also missing the internal power bickering that's gone on in Mali - the Southern Government is an illegal military coup at this time (and has had a history of ethnic cleansing on the Northern tribes, which is partly why Gaddafi was involved with brokering peace deals in 2009), the Tuaregs are the national group in N. Mali, and don't like the Salafi jihadis, while the Salafi jihadis[2] are coming from both Libya and Algeria, and have been running roughshod over them as well as the Southern forces.

 

Shit's complicated. But, talk about forest-trees, you did this. DERP.

 

 

[1] And please: if you're attempting to label Hamas as purely a terrorist organisation, you have to be living in Jerusalem.

[2] Turns out we can't use Salafists anymore, Muslim Brotherhood are our friends. So, the Salafists who happen to also be jihadists.

Fortunate Fool's picture

Given that Qatar and Suadi Arabia buy a lot of their weapons from the USA, your thinking is a bit odd.

That's why I'm talking about the duplicity of the Qataris, the same kind Saudis have towards the US... Aren't they financing jihadists everywhere they can while buying weapons from the US?

 

You also totally missed the point of your Global research piece.

No I didn't, the article just proves my point about the duplicity of Qatar. It's funny that when it was (is) about taking down Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, it's ok to use force and arm the rebels, but when it comes to Mali, it's not ok. Maybe there's a piece you're missing here... Aren't the new powers in place in those countries much closer to Qatar and Saudi Arabia than were the previous regimes, and as a consequence less friendly to the West?  Ask yourself why...

 

I agree with you that this shit is more complicated than reported on ZH. 

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

No, they aren't - very specific deals were made over allowing certain MENA states to oppress their "Arab Springs" with no MSM Western media coverage agreed upon [look up the nice lady who quit due to making a documentary on it, and getting shelved by CNN, source] for continued American support.

This is common knowledge.

 

The piece you're missing is simple 101 Colonialism: You can never let an ethnic group tied to the land win. Outside Salafi Jihadists? Fine! Tractable, and ultimately you can burn them out like lice, and the people remaining will hail you as saviours.

 

But... you never, ever, ever allow people with genuine claims and ties to the land win. That was my point about the Tuaregs; off the record, they've been asking for aid / sanctions / mediation / help with the Salafi Jihadists for over 7 months now, and the South Mali people aren't the same as them (thus: ethnic cleansing). Thus the dicking around via Qatar, and the French etc ignoring the military coup.

 

Parse that into the pie, you'll see my angle. A wiser poster than me gave a link to "63", about the revolution in the 90's. 63, and part one of the full documentary, talking about their country [French with subs]. (And then parse that against the Salafi Jihadists - notice the massive cultural differences already?)

redpill's picture

Normally not a stickler for spelling but the country is named Libya.  Lybia looks like one of the words in the female anatomy section of the GED biology book that MDB jacks off to when mom forgets to pay the internet bill and he has to make do.

secret_sam's picture

      Because African terrorists are no threat to the Obama regime. 

You sure it's not because weapons don't kill people?

TBT or not TBT's picture

France will intervene strictly in their national economic interest, securing assets they view as theirs, helping groups they have deals with, while pretending lots of humanitarian stuff(in the press, at the UN, etc).    

Their armies are so weak, too weak to be infected with much hubris, that they'll stick to essential missions and not get the least bit mislead into winning hearts and minds and Three Cups of Tea nonsense.   That crap is for the Fed funded globe spanning ultrasuperpower.

bank guy in Brussels's picture

Mali gold to plug what is missing at the US Fed and needs to go back to Germany:

« Mali - along with Ghana - accounts for up to 8% of global gold production. »

'War on terror forever' by Pepe Escobar

http://atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/OA23Dj06.html

Canadian Dirtlump's picture

Operation cyclone - sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.

 

It is on one level understandable, and on another unfathomable how the average mongoloid in the west cannot see the increasingly transparent scenario where we are overtly creating the monster and using it as our hitman, then justifying the elimination of freedom when it goes off the reservation.

 

In before Hitlery, one of the most respected women in the US, calls the russians despicable. Again. The reset button never looked so good.

 

p.s. anyone who votes this negative is a registered sex offender who works for DHS, and was a NATO heroin mule (up the tailpipe) in a former life.

Urban Roman's picture

If there were flip-flops over the mantel in Act I, they'll be on the ground some time in Act II.

NewAmericaNow's picture

CIA/NSA to do list

 

1-Destabalize Russian efforts to gain control of resource rich Afghanistan-Check

2-Topple Iraq for selling oil in anything other than Dollars-Check

3-Board unwitting Islamists on planes and remotely fly the planes in a false flag to gain broad public support to increase Military industrial complex actions on soverign nations to gain control of resources and Increase Police state restrictions on freedoms-Check

4-Elect a minority president that will gain broad support of the poor and former middle class through bread and circus and eventually be blamed for the planned collapse of the USA and Constitution- In Progress

5-Use US trained Islamists calling them freedom fighters to Assasinate the Libyan leader bent on selling oil in Gold backed currency-Check

6-Use enriched Uranium ammunition in areas of the middle east to insure population reduction of lands high in value.-In Progress

7-Support destabilization of Syria, Iran, Pakistan and Egypt using various methods-In Progress

8-Keep Saudi leaders on notice by assasination of key family members-Check

9-Change clean air and clean water legislation to permit fracking and GMO inclusion to aid in Shale oil collection, and chemtrail initiatives in order to cull US population to more managable levels-In Progress

10-Stage Islamist revolution in Mali to steal their Gold, Silver, Diamonds, etc-In Progress

 

 

rotagen's picture

Gimme a break, yeah taliban and/or al cia-duh did 9-11.   What parallel universe is this idiot living in.  I'm not sure why these articles get written.  Banksters are arming the "bad" guys with US weapons.  Call me master of the bleeding obvious.

WTFUD's picture

. . . good lets keep it simple, you are almost correct apart from the reference to 'us weapons'. for arguments sake lets call them 'special interests weapons'. in doing so they do not represent (us) sheeples.

Everybodys All American's picture

yes it is ... but with a friendly in the WH.

Overflow-admin's picture

I bet Washington has them on a secret KPI

Killtruck's picture

"...only to see these same freedom fighters eventually and furiously turn against the same US that provided them with arms and money, with what ended up being very catastrophic consequences, culminating with September 11."

 

Right. That's the story, gents. Now, everyone stick to it, and repeat it often!

Cathartes Aura's picture

thanks Killtruck.

I had to read that a couple of times, because my brain anti-virus/firewall kept sending up red flags. . .

fuu's picture

Libya, Egypt, Syria, and now Mali.

Like a little cottage industry arming rebels.

IamtheREALmario's picture

The IMF has been doing it for decades.

Oddly enough, it would never work if the global economy was not built on central banker fiat shit paper.

reload's picture

fuu: I agree, but its not going quite to plan in Syria. Even the BBC (where `corespondant` normaly means well briefed government spokesman) ran a report last week about how a lot of the claimed government attacks on civilian populations were in fact `rebels and freedom fighters` attempting to cause anti Assad sentiment by commiting attrocities themselves and then claiming `it was government forces` There were a couple of interviews with Syrians claiming that this is very widespread.

Lets hope there is a special place in hell for the small group of people causing all this suffering.

fuu's picture

Who was arming the governments of Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Mali?

It's like 1949, again.

IamtheREALmario's picture

The irony gets even thicker. The West has been ceding most of Africa to the Chinese to develop.... excluding the already developed oil resources. We have been putting up all sorts of roadblocks in the way of western development, such as the "conflict minerals" scam.

So, the Chinese go in and develop Africa. The West then goes in and destabilizes the countries that China has developed, turning over the Chinese developed countries to "rebels" funded, armed and controlled by the west.

Seems like a natch, right?

Desert Irish's picture

worked out perfectly in Libya after the rebels discovered the Chinese supplied $200 million worth of arms to Ghaddafi during the conflict via Angola. Chinese are now person non-grata in Libya and "Al Qaeda" rebels are now eyeing up Angola - which will need need further US assistance.

WTFUD's picture

nah bruv! angola after 30 years is brutal. like the taliban could defeat any enemy! granted during those 30 years of slaughter the Cabinda oil split 50/50 or 55/45 between USA and CHINA was not interupted even for a day, ya dig? If and it's a big IF were terrorists or freedom fighters ( depending on which day month or week enlisted ) to enter Angola the Russians would be on the scene before us/sino.

MedTechEntrepreneur's picture

Yes, from the CIA website:

Natural resources: gold, phosphates, kaolin, salt, limestone, uranium, gypsum, granite, hydropower note:bauxite, iron ore, manganese, tin, and copper deposits are known but not exploited .

So, I'm guessing there is even more...oil...

bigdumbnugly's picture

will they be giving my rifles and shotguns to those dudes too after they confiscate?

or do the rebels insist on the new stuff.

i'd ask hillary but she is busy lying elsewhere right about now.

jay28elle's picture

no, silly, the rebels get the big guns. 

otto skorzeny's picture

I'm sure all of the Dem feminist dykes were rubbing their strap-ons as she yelled at that senator from WI today-basically telling him everything is over and done with so fuck off. She was probably pissed because Bill is in Davos enjoying all of the pretty little female E European whoor poon while she was in DC missing out.

WTFUD's picture

tad sexist but forgive you! my dream would be a 3some wit Angie M and Hills C after i slipped them a mickey finn

joego1's picture

Are we helping yet?

TPTB_r_TBTF's picture

We are helping all factions involved ...

except maybe those factions which Russia and China are helping.

jay28elle's picture

Hoo, humm... we all know this shit is going on, but as long as Jay Carney, BO or the MSM says nuthing it ain't no problem.  Or if they are forced into a corner will blame it on a video.