US Furious After Source Of "Mystery" Libya Bombing Raids Revealed

Tyler Durden's picture

Over the past week a new geopolitical mystery emerged: an "unknown" party was launching airstrikes against Libya, which is already reeling in its latest political crisis where headlines such as this have become the norm:


The strikes puzzled all media outlets, including Reuters which just over the weekend reported that "Unidentified war planes attacked positions of an armed faction in the Libyan capital Tripoli on Saturday, residents and local media said. Local channel al-Nabaa said the planes had attacked four positions of the Operation Dawn, an umbrella of Islamist-leaning forces from Misrata which has been trying to expel brigades from Zintan, also located in western Libya." This follows a similar report when on Monday, the government said unknown fighter jets had bombed positions from armed factions in Tripoli, an attack claimed by a renegade general in Benghazi.

Turns out the renegade general was lying, and merely trying to take credit for another party's intervention. That party, or rather, parties has been revealed as Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, which as the NYT reports, "have secretly teamed up to launch airstrikes against Islamist-allied militias battling for control of Tripoli, Libya, four senior American officials said, in a major escalation between the supporters and opponents of political Islam."

But what is surprising is not the intervention: after all, hardly a day passes now when there isn't some small to medium political invasion taking place somewhere, in a world in which newsflow no longer affects anything. It is that both countries decided to roundly ignore advising the one country which previously had made it quite clear it has explicit national interests in Libya: the United States.

The United States, the officials said, was caught by surprise: Egypt and the Emirates, both close allies and military partners, acted without informing Washington or seeking its consent, leaving the Obama administration on the sidelines.

It gets worse: Egyptian officials explicitly denied the operation to American diplomats, the officials said. It is almost as if the theme of ignoring and/or mocking US superpower status exhibited most recently by both China and Russia, is gradually spreading to even the more "banana" republics around the world. Because while one can debate the pros and cons of any previous administration, it is very much improbably that any regime, especially ones as close to the US as the UAE, and to a lesser extent Egypt, would have conducted such military missions without preclearing with the Pentagon first.

So now that the "mysterious" owners of the punitive bombing raids has been revealed, the next question is: why? The answer is simple - to keep Islamists in check. And since the US can no longer be relied on to do the bidding of formerly key petrodollar allies, the UAE decided to take the law into its own hands.

The strikes are another high-risk and destabilizing salvo unleashed in a struggle for power that has broken out across the region in the aftermath of the Arab Spring revolts, pitting old-line Arab autocrats against Islamists. Since the military ouster of the Islamist president in Egypt one year ago, the new Egyptian government, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have formed a bloc exerting influence in countries around the region to rollback what they see as a competing threat from Islamists. Arrayed against them are the Islamist movements, including the Muslim Brotherhood, backed by friendly governments in Turkey and Qatar, that sprang forward amid the Arab spring revolts.

And while "old-line Arab autocrats" may see the military invasion as justified (they can simply point to what the US is doing in Iraq), that doesn't mean that the US is happy in being ignored. In fact, quite the contrary: the US is "fuming" (perhaps because it is not the one conducting the airstrikes?)

Libya is the latest, and hottest, battleground. Several officials said that United States diplomats were fuming about the airstrikes, believing they could further inflame the Libyan conflict at a time when the United Nations and Western powers are seeking a peaceful resolution.


“We don’t see this as constructive at all,” said one senior American official.


The U.A.E. has not commented directly on the strikes. But on Monday an Emirati state newspaper printed a statement from Anwar Gargash, minister of state for foreign affairs, calling questions about an Emirati role “an escape” from the recent election that he suggested showed a desire for “stability” and a rejection of the Islamists. The allegations about the U.A.E. role, he said, came from a group who “wanted to use the cloak of religion to achieve its political objectives,” and “the people discovered its lies and failures.”

Most important, however, is that as the NYT notes, this latest escalation in direct political intervention in a sovereign state, means the middle-east is no longer a playground for proxy wars: after all, who needs to beat around the bush when one can directly bomb a proximal country without fears of repirsals by the international community, as Abu Dhabi and Cairo have done:

Officials said that the government of Qatar has already provided weapons and support to the Islamist aligned forces inside Libya, so the new strikes represent a shift from proxy wars —where regional powers playout their agendas through local allies —to direct involvement.

All of this ignores whether or not the strikes have actually achieved their objective of halting the militants' progress. They haven't.

The strikes have also proved counterproductive so-far: the Islamist militias fighting for control of Tripoli successfully seized its airport the night after they were hit with the second round of strikes.


American officials said Egypt had provided bases for the launch of the strikes. President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt and other officials have issued vigorous but carefully worded public statements denying any direct involvement inside Libya by Egyptian forces. In private, officials said, their denials had been more thorough.


American officials said the success of that earlier raid may have emboldened Egypt and the U.A.E. to think they could carry off the airstrikes without detection. Or the brazenness of the attack may reflect the vehemence of their determination to hold back or stamp out political Islam.

The biggest irony in all of this is that, just like in the case of ISIS, the U.A.E. is said to have one of the most effective air forces in the region, and is now using it to engage its own enemies directly, all of which is possible excluslively thanks to American aid and training.

Which means that at this point one can start the countdown until the US, seemingly in aattempt to halt the progress of another ascendent regional hegemon, will now arm the very Islamists that it was backing in Egypt before the whole Morsi fiasco, in the process making even more enemies, while the rest of the world awaits as the latest batch of weapons are used either against US interests in the region, or, as ISIS has shown, against the US itself.

Clearly, however, what is needed, is even more US intervention in a region which is rapidly bacoming nothing but rubble thanks to US weaponized "assistance and training", which benefits nobody except a few US military/industrial conglomerates, and the global money-laundering banking consortium of course.

Comment viewing options

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

"Egypt and the United Arab Emirates" bombing 'islamist insurgents in Libya?

Hmm...  -But, NOT bombing 'islamist insurgents' in Syria or Iraq?  Hmm...


                                                   ...I wonder WHY...

knukles's picture

Quote of the Century:

"We don't see this as constructive at all."

Ignatius's picture

Beat me to it, knukles.  Priceless.

"We don’t see this as constructive at all,” said one senior American official.

ThroxxOfVron's picture

"Let us give this another year before we reach a verdict."

Keyser's picture

Seems like Barry and the spooks at Langley were left out of the loop...  How dare they play the US game without Uncle Sugar being consulted... 

SafelyGraze's picture

"Reuters reported that ..."

I keep forgetting

who owns reuters, anyway?


knukles's picture

Rothschilds, maybe
(churchlady voice)

Liberal's picture

Now now...let's not use this opportunity to criticize innocent contributors to our President's fundraisers.

Manthong's picture

How damn dare they bomb our Islamists in Libya!

john39's picture

the bombing is obviously proof that in Libya you have real local resistance to NWO terror, whereas in Iraq and Syria, you simply have NWO terror...

espirit's picture

Just because we gifted them our weapons doesn't mean we can tell them how or when to use them ;)

palmereldritch's picture's Egypt.  In reading that headline I thought that maybe JPM now had its own air force

BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

Aside from Libya which I thought the world had forgotten, if the US start bombing Syria won't they be assisting ISIS? 

espirit's picture

Sshhhh... they haven't thought that one out yet.

MontgomeryScott's picture

George W. and the Neocons/libs are really pissed (along with Hussein-Soetoro and the Neolibs/cons).

How DARE they use the weapons WE gave them to 'decide' in OUR region? WE are the 'DECIDERS'!

The UAE and Egypt are just BEGGING for some CIA interdiction...

Billary and 'songbird' McCain are co-ordinating a strategy speech as we speak. They'll give the speech to Lurch and Barry as soon as they have cleared it with Dov Zackheim and Paul Wolfowitz and Zbignew Brezinski.

QUICK! Call Soetoro back from Martha's Vineyard! We need to rally the 'Merkuns! Catchphrases like 'progress' and 'democracy' and 'humanitarian crisis' will no doubt be employed...

Wild Theories's picture

No no, they are trying to stop ISIS, that's why they are going to bomb them in Syria, and not bomb them in Iraq.


Even though the Iraqis are pleading for help, and Assad sure isn't...

Quus Ant's picture

Check out this vintage exchange between pre-death Gaddafi and the Sith Lord Abdullah.

and again:


Set your neighbor's house on fire and you may join him in the flames.

john39's picture

if abdullah wasn't so evil and arrogant, he could see that his turn to burn was planned from the beginning...  or at least his country.  He probably doesn't care about that... 

FL_Conservative's picture

Barry wasn't "on the sidelines", he was busy playing golf.

VATICANT's picture

And snorting blow/getting his asshole dug-out.

SoilMyselfRotten's picture

Let me touch that up FL,

He wasn't on the sidelines, he was in the rough

Ying-Yang's picture

The USA not knowing about ISIS, now air attacks on Libya from 2,500 miles away?

Does the USA really have intelligence? Lately it seems, not so much!

OpenThePodBayDoorHAL's picture

Wait until everybody gets drones just like ours, the US has set such a wonderful precedent: it's OK to drone bomb anyone you want, anywhere, for any reason. Pre-crime drone murder with no due process? No problem!

China may think the mayor of Cleveland is going to do something bad someday...WHAM there goes his house. 

disabledvet's picture

Yeah, no shit. "Now please close the pod bay door Hal.

I said "please close the pod bay door" Hal.

Hal? Why aren't you listening?

Listen to me opened the pod bay door now hurry the phuck up and please...

Greenskeeper_Carl's picture

"Does the US even have intelligence?"
Of course. Unfortunately they have been all tied up spying on innocent US citizens the past couple years, and are way to busy doing that to worry about trivial matters such as which country is bombing their neighbors. Plus, Ron Paul supporters are way more dangerous...

Escrava Isaura's picture


Because domestic population is the state worse enemy.

Eyjafjallajökull's picture

They're busy elsewhere, like waching the Hainan island, Ukrainian-Russian border, ISIS, Taliban Afg, Taliban Pak, Iran, Guardians of the Galaxy 3D version, and last, but not least, US citizens, especially in Ferguson. Everybody has limits...

MontgomeryScott's picture


They're watching, all right, but not anything relevant.

They're too busy downloading PORN.

Straight porn, gay porn, midget porn, child porn, trannie porn, group porn, BDSM porn, softcore porn, hardcore porn, ametuer porn, porn, porn, porn...

Keyser's picture

The US exceeds at bombing brown people that have no defense... 

MalteseFalcon's picture

Are these raids war crimes?  Is it possible to charge these guys?

oudinot's picture

A Canadain  family, the Thompsons; not Jewish.

DavidC's picture

Thomson Financial. You might just as well ask who owns Bloomberg (i.e. how much does it matter).


Dubaibanker's picture

More and more countries are detaching themselves from the US and US dollar, every passing day and some of the biggest ones like Russia are standing up and saying NO to military expansionism based on their national self interest.

As Putin said in April, it is better if the friendly Americans/NATO visit Sevastapol base into Russian territory instead of Russians having to visit Sevastopol into friendly 'NATO' territory!

Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, now UAE, Saudi... Brazil, Colombia... all countries attacked by US in the past decade such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc.....and then thanks to the Russian sanctions, large cracks have finally appeared between the EU nations. If Scotland breaks or Germany cannot bail out Deutsche (when it fails) or the banks / economies of the weak EU countries...then this very large group when it trades in Chinese Renminbi or EUR, the final link with US dollar will give way to a new way of trading after which the national interests of every independent nation will be respected equally and not viewed from the eyes of the MIC.

Democracy and freedom (brought to you courtesy of the US of A) will be left behind and jobs will hopefully increase due to more dynamic domestic economies and relationships based on mutual respect with no US relationship to worry about.

China mostly does it right by buying or investing or building a nation's infra with a strict code of non intervention in politics. It has it's negative side but for the most part, jobs and economic growth truimphs 'freedom and democracy', almost all the time. This reduces crime, improves infra which in turn improves standards of living among various other benefits and the economy moves faster too (just ask the Top 7 out of Top 10 global growth economies, of Africa who have flourished ever since US went bust and could not 'help' them and ever since China arrived in Africa a decade ago.

If Russia received freedom and democracy like Iraq or Libya, then the world is doomed! Just ask Russia's neighbour Ukraine where freedom and democracy is being currently delivered! 

hot sauce technician's picture

Very interesting. I just didn't get what you were saying about "if Germany can't bail out Deutche", then the Euro would or wouldn't be ditched? 

Dubaibanker's picture

EUR may not be ditched by the EU nations until the very end. But EUR will be ditched by the non-EUR nations for trade purposes which has been ongoing due to barter trade, Russian sanctions, Chinese asking to trade in CNH etc.

I have been advocating the disintegration of EUR post the Greek/Spain crisis since 2011. But despite the political, fiscal and productivity differentials, 'they' wish to continue with this EUR currency experiment which costs the public very heavily because when a country goes down, it is unable to price itself to an advantage just like Brazil or Russia or India can do. This will lead to a fatal downfall of the weakest countries first and subsequently the stronger ones too (due to bail outs of the weaker ones until they themselves collapse) due to this EUR currency connectivity that all the disparate EU nations have.

Germany may bail out Deutsche and we can see the coming demise of Deutsche in its ever declining price over the past 2 years despite all the cost cutting and thousands having been laid off. From 120 EUR in 2007, highest price since 2008 has been EUR 60, last year was below EUR 40 and today is EUR 25.

There is no direct correlation between EUR and the Deutsche fiasco. But it will only increase pressure on the German Govt and they will have to choose between bailing out Deutche and the next domino outside Germany. One of the reasons all countries are putting bail-in requirements is due to this. Because the good old days of bail outs are coming to an end as signalled by the reducing QE in the US. Eurozone will, however, continue with its easy monetary policy till a much longer time, perhaps the longest, continuing with the fake economy of insolvent companies and employed though really unemployed and bankrupt citizens.

Trade reduction in EUR currency (hence declining demand) and internal conflicts within Eurozone should bring EUR currency down, not just the Deutshce bail out. Who knows, with all the mumbo jumbo that goes on, maybe Deutsche will not need a 'public' bail out.

Doña K's picture

Germany does not have to bail out Deutsche, the FED will attempt to do that as the 1 quadrillion derivatives will unravel and bring down the top 6 banks if not all banks.

Attempt...... because either hyperinflation, war or total financial destruction will follow that attempt. 

Machu Picchu time

WhackoWarner's picture

I think Germany will bail-out before their economy fails.  I think Germany is the pivot nation for this USA desire for Eurasia control; all tied to the concept of (USA)  "What the frig are you doing sitting on "our" oil??? So what if it is anywhere on the planet..."What the frig are you doing sitting on "our" resources??"

Jendrzejczyk's picture

Comment withdrawn

(and a selfie down arrow for presuming to put words in the Banker's mouth)

Not Too Important's picture

Save Deutche! Fire Bill Gross!

El-Erian saw this coming, and got out while the getting was good.

Jambo Mambo Bill's picture

Well said, and because all that, something tells me that we are getting closer and closer to a major rift...meaning WWIII ! NO EMPIRE in history, EVER, gave up their foreign lands, their political influence and their financial grip on others without fighting to death... Folks have to realise that we are in an unstoppable countdown at the moment, we are getting closer...and our lives are on the line either way you look.

If our democracy ‘tries’ Russia or China, we will see mushroom clouds popping all over the lands...and that...will be the end of a 1000 years of evolution, unfortunately

We are heading there, human nature tells me that.

Good luck to all.

Jendrzejczyk's picture

At some point in the recent past, we really began to devolve didn't we?

Was there a defining moment when THE CLOCK reversed and started spinning backwards?

unrulian's picture

I'm sure there are many answers to that question but for me it was when we gave up our self reliance to corporations and globalization really took hold. It wasn't that long ago that people had a cow and a few acres and knew how to put food by. That ability is unfortunately lost and when this debt system fails if the war doesn't get us then starvation will.

Jendrzejczyk's picture

My Grandfather's favorite book was "Five Acres and Independence"


His land/dream is now a Pizza Hut in Joliet.

Soul Crusher.

Citxmech's picture

This is what happens when there is a lack of selective pressure favoring "the fittest." 

nmewn's picture

And yet Obamao & Hitlary couldn't get to Benghazi and their "good friend Chris" all the way from Aviano.

(Or anywhere closer)

Stunning what the UAE has done with their air force these days ;-)

Lumberjack's picture

Aviano plays a lot more into things than many realize. Think energy.

onthesquare's picture

NO EMPIRE in history, EVER, gave up their foreign lands, their political influence and their financial grip on others without fighting to death...

Hold on there Jambo.  I am 6th generation Canadain and my parents were born British subjects.  They were too young to go to wwII but in 1948 they were made 100% Canadian.  The Empire gave them up.

My point is this can be done peacefully.

The USA has invaded Canada 3 times when the Brits were here and we sent them packing all 3 times.  Now we live as seperate nations with the longest international boarder in the world and it is lamely protected.  The majority of the time they do things differently than we do.  We are more socialistic and have a higher tolereance of minorities.

Just saying

Doña K's picture

Those days there was no need for natural resources and it is cold there. Since they have no army, the US is keeping it for last.