An autonomous drone may have killed people in Libya without any human input...

The STM Kagru. Armyinform.com
 

An autonomous drone may have killed people in Libya last year without any human input. Asia Times. A UN report said the drone may have killed people during a skirmish between the Government of National Accord and supporters of General Haftar in March of 2020. The drone was a Turkish made quadcopter that has the ability to recognize and fire on targets without human input. The use of autonomous drones is controversial to say the least with fears of the drones picking wrong targets or going rouge a real danger. It is unclear if anyone actually died in the drone strikes. 

My Comment:

Troubling news to say the least. The fact that the Turks, of all people, have a drone that can operate without human control is disturbing. And the fact that this technology was used last year and nobody knew about it until now is even worse. 

It's unclear how powerful this drone actually is. The STM Kagru is, according to Wikipedia, a kamikaze swarm drone that crashes into its targets. It can apparently recognize specific targets. It can be deployed in swarms and it too small to be taken out with most anti-aircraft weapons. It is, in short, a terrifying weapon system. 

It's unclear how well the drone works. The UN report did not say whether or not the drone actually killed someone, only that it may have done so. It's very possible that it failed in its mission. That may have been due to design flaws, bad luck or effective countermeasures but it's also very possible that it worked. And even if it only works some of the time I can see why governments would want to use them. 

Should this technology exist? I do think there is a danger here. It's not a Terminator war of the machines kind of threat but it is very possible that these weapons will fail and kill civilians or even their own military if they get confused. 

I also think that these weapons could be a very effective terrorist weapon. Presumably they would have less concern if the weapons go rogue and they would be perfect for an assassination attempt or for general terrorism. Keeping these weapons out of the hands of terrorists would be a major goal but it's complicated that they have been developed by the Turks. I trust the Islamic government of Turkey about as much as I can throw them, they have supplied terrorists with weapons before.

But I don't think the genie will go back into the bottle at this point. These weapons now exist and have been used in combat. Other countries will have to develop their own and/or develop countermeasures to defeat them. An international ban won't work as I think non-state actors will be able to develop these weapons as well. After all, before their defeat, ISIS was already experimenting with drone technology. 

Turkey warns Libya's Haftar that his forces could be considered "legitimate targets" if they continue their attacks.

Smoke from combat in Libya. DW/AFP.

The government of Turkey has warned Libya's strongman Khalifa Haftar that his forces could be considered "legitimate targets" if they continue their attacks. DW. Turkey has backed the UN supported Government of National Accord based in Tripoli. Haftar's forces launched attacks in Tripoli which hit the airfield and came close to hitting the Turkish and Italian embassies. 

My Comment:

Turkey has deployed troops to Libya, so these threats are not empty ones. Turkey has the forces to attack Haftar's troops and it would be a major escalation to an already fragile situation. If they want to pick a fight with Haftar's government they can do so. 

This situation seems like another situation similar to Syria. The international community is making things a lot worse by making sure neither side can win the civil war there. Haftar is probably strong enough to beat the GNA, but with Turkey and other countries backing them the war will continue and more people will die. 

That being said, Haftar isn't helping his cause with indiscriminate rocket attacks. These rockets can hit things they are not targeting specifically and it will cause many civilian deaths. Launching attacks like this is bad optics and it isn't helping his cause. 

However, I think Turkey would be wise to not pick a fight with Haftar and his forces. Turkey hardly has the economy and will to fight a long war in Libya. Turkey already has a mess on it's southern border with Syria and has an insurgency with the Kurds to deal with. Turkey has also been devastated by the Coronavirus as well, so it's not like they need to pick a fight here. 

Could Turkey win though? It's unclear. They have a large and powerful army but it would be difficult for them to supply. They also have war fatigue with their population and I doubt a full scale war in Libya would help Recep Erdogan's popularity. 

My guess is that if they do anything at all it will be limited in nature. Perhaps air strikes or advisors fighting with the GNA's forces. A large scale war is probably not in the cards, and the fact that they are just issuing threats after the rocket attack instead of actually doing something is probably good evidence that we will continue with the status quo ante. 

Turkey likely to send troops to Libya to defend Tripoli.

Recep  Tayyip Erdogan. 

Turkey is holding a vote to deploy troops to the Libyan city of Tripoli to defend one of the rival governments there. AP. Libyan Prime Minister Fayez Sarraj invited Turkish troops there after signing a military cooperation agreement with Turkey. Sarraj's government has been under siege in Tripoli from forces loyal to the rival government based in Eastern Libya under the command of General Khalifa Hifter. Turkey has gone so far as to recruit fighters in Syria in order to ship them to Libya. The vote will likely happen in early January and is extremely likely to pass. Support between the two governments of Libya is split with Turkey, Italy and Qatar supporting Sarraj while the United States, Russia, Egypt and France support Hifter. 

My Comment:

Yet another example of Turkey being an extremely poor ally to the Untied States. America has backed Khalifa Hifter but Turkey insists on backing his biggest rival. The why here isn't important it's the fact that yet again Turkey is actively acting against US interests internationally. 

I'm not sure why America supports either side in the Libya quagmire as the country has been a mess since the overthrow of Gaddafi. My guess is that we decided to back a winning horse after it was clear that Sarraj couldn't control the country. We know what can happen when Libya is unstable and it isn't pretty so I am guessing they just want someone in command of the whole country.

Can Turkey's forces actually save Tripoli though? I am not so sure. I haven't been too impressed with Turkey's military performance. They have been mildly successful in Syria against the Kurds but that was because they had heavy armor and air support. I am not sure if those things are going to be available in Tripoli. 

Indeed, I wonder how effective Turkish troops will be in an overseas deployment. They don't strike me as a military that has effective logistics. How will they be able to supply and support there troops and will the be able to deploy heavy weapons? I really don't know. 

What I do know is that Turkey is going to cause this war between the two governments of Libya to go on for much longer than it should. Whatever the pros and cons of Sarraj and Hifter, keeping them both in the game fighting each other will cause the war to continue and for more people to suffer. If one side were to win, and it looked like Hifter was winning, the war would end and Libya could rebuild. Turkey is preventing that from happening. 

Egypt launches airstrikes in Libya after another terrorist attack targeting Coptic Christians kills 29

The wreckage of the bus that was attacked by militants. Egyptian TV/Reuters. 

Egypt has launched a retaliatory series of airstrikes against Islamic militants in Libya after another terrorist attack targeting Coptic Christians killed 29 and wounded 24 more. Reuters. President al-Sisi ordered the raids targeting Majlis al-Shura, a group that has connections to al-Qaeda, in Eastern Libya near Derna. The group has not taken credit for the attack and the attack has the hallmarks of an attack by ISIS, which has a active campaign against Coptic Christians in Egypt. The attack against the Copts targeted a bus convoy which was on its way to a monastery in southern Egypt. The attackers killed all the men in the convoy, robbed the woman and children and then shot them in the legs. 

My Comment:

Another brutal attack against Coptic Christians in Egypt. It appears that there is an effort to ethnically cleanse or genocide Christians out of Egypt. This is horrible since Egypt is home to one of the oldest Christian communities still left in the Middle East. The Coptic community is one of the oldest in existence, almost as old as Christianity itself, and it has faced persecution for years. It would be a massive tragedy if the Coptic community were to be wiped out or forced to flee Egypt. 

Nobody has taken credit for this attack, as far as I have been able to determine, but it has all the hallmarks of an ISIS attack. Specifically Sinai Province, ISIS's Egyptian branch. They took credit for the recent bombings of Coptic Christian churches and consider them to be worthy of death. They also have been very active in Egypt. 

Which makes me wonder why al-Sisi targeted the Majlis al-Shura group. From what I have been able to gather, al-Shura is part of Hamas and has connections to al-Qaeda. I haven't found any evidence of them being involved in attacks on Coptic Christians. I doubt they had anything to do with the attack in Egypt, even though I think they probably are a genuine threat. 

So why hit them then? I think al-Sisi is under extreme pressure to show that he does support the Coptic Christian community. Ideally he would have attacked ISIS in the Sinai peninsula but for whatever reason he wasn't able too. Perhaps he didn't have any good targets, but whatever the al-Sisi had to do something. And I am guessing an airstrike against some unrelated militants at least looks like it is doing something. 

I personally like al-Sisi as a leader and greatly prefer him to the Muslim Brotherhood government he replaced. But I do think that he does need to do more about ISIS in Egypt. Sinai province should be wiped from the earth and I think that Egypt needs to deploy more forces and weapons to the Peninsula to wipe them out. If that means they have to lessen their commitments to Yemen and other places then so be it. Still, there is only so much that can be done and we may be in the "diminishing returns" point already. 

This attack might be a prelude to a very violent Ramadan. Ever since ISIS has existed, Ramadan has been a bloodbath. In one day in 2015 ISIS killed hundreds of people in five separate attacks, two in Syria, one in Tunisia, one in Kuwait and one in France. Last year they murdered a cop and his wife in France and bombed the airport in Turkey. Plus, the worst terror attack in the United States, the Pulse nightclub shooting, occurred during Ramadan last year. 

There is a huge precedent for ISIS attacks during the Muslim holy month. Why? Because Muslims believe that if they are martyred or kill in the name of their faith during Ramadan, they will gain favor. It's basically a free ticket to heaven and it is very attractive for them to pull off attacks during the time. 

The bloody Ramadan may have started. We have already had this attack along with the major raid against Marawi city in the Philippines and the devastating attack against children attending the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester. It is very possible that there will be more attacks coming. I am especially worried about the UK because it seems like the cell there is still active and the bombmaker(s) have not been caught, but everywhere is at risk.

Another worry I have is that the Manchester attack, and whatever else ISIS has in the pipeline, could overshadow this attack in Egypt. Though all attacks are important, I do feel that the genocide occurring against Christians in the Middle East is one of the most under-reported stories in the world. We should make sure to cover these kinds of attacks when they occur. 

In Barack Obama's probable last military action, B-2 bombers strike ISIS training camps in Libya.

Smoke rises from an airstrike in Libya last November. Reuters. 

In what is likely to be President Barack Obama's last military action, B-2 bombers have struck an ISIS training camp in Libya. Reuters. More than 80 ISIS militants, some of which were suspected of planning attacks in Europe were killed in the attack outside of the former ISIS stronghold of Sirte. The B-2 bombers dropped more than 100 precision bombs on the target. The ISIS fighters were probably survivors from the battle of Sirte, a recent defeat that left ISIS with no territory in Libya. US airstrikes were deployed in that battle and were helpful in winning the battle. 

My Comment:

Barack Obama's last military action (hopefully) is one I approve of. Of course if he hadn't authorized the overthrow of Momar Qadaffi, ISIS never would have had a chance to get a foothold in Libya in the first place... but that's a discussion for another time. The attack though is notable for that alone and will go down in the history books despite being a rather minor incident in the Libyan war. 

This action against ISIS is welcome. I have no doubt in my mind that the ISIS fighters killed in this attack were plotting further attacks, either in Europe or North Africa (targeting Europeans). ISIS fighters in Libya were responsible for the terror attacks in Tunisia and may have been involved in smuggling terrorists in with the massive migrant waves that have Libya as their last stop before Europe. 

Destroying these terrorists makes Europe and North Africa slightly safer. I am guessing multiple terror attacks were disrupted. But that is not the only benefit of this bombing. After a bitter defeat in Sirte where many ISIS fighters died to the last man, the survivors were trying to regroup and rearm. Libya is still an unstable country so it is very possible that if the pressure was let off of ISIS they would have retaken territory and expanded. 

I have to say that using B-2 bombers and 100 bombs seem like overkill. I am guessing that a few F-15's and F-16's could probably have done the same thing. Perhaps we had nothing stationed in the area? I know we didn't have any Navy assets right now. From what I understand all of our aircraft carriers are docked right now, or at the very least, aren't anywhere near the Mediterranean. Perhaps our expensive and valuable B-2 bombers were the only planes available to pull off this strike? If so that's a potential embarrassment. The most powerful nation in the world couldn't even blow up a terrorist camp without using our most expensive weapon? 

It's really amazing to me that ISIS has suffered so badly in Libya. I had not expected that they would have been beaten back so fast. I am sure Barack Obama wants to take credit for that, but I don't think he deserves full credit. Though US airstrikes did help in the battle of Sirte, and he can have some credit for that, it was the government and their soldiers that won the battle. They are the ones that won the battle, not Barack Obama. 

I have said in the past that the fate of ISIS in Libya will probably be a sneak preview of what will happen if/when ISIS is finally defeated in Syria and Iraq. In Libya ISIS is no longer a state. It is now a more traditional terrorist organization, less focused on taking territory and more focused on terror attacks. Though they don't have the credibility they once had they are still a dangerous force and will continue to be so in the future. 

ISIS all but eliminated from their Libyan stronghold in Sirte, but the threat remains.

A Libyan fighter takes cover during the battle against ISIS in Sirte. Reuters. 

The Islamic State is on the verge of defeat in Libya as they only control one square kilometer in their former base of operations in Sirte. Reuters. No quarter is offered or expected in a brutal battle that has lasted since last May. ISIS fighters and Libyan soldiers and militiamen fight close enough to throw insults at each other and ISIS fighters are fighting to the bitter end. The few surviving ISIS fighters have inflicted heavy casualties on the Libyan forces fighting against them, killing as many as 660 and wounding 3000 more. And even when the last fighters are cleared out of Sirte, the threat to Libya remains as hundreds of fighters were able to escape before the military was able to take control of the city. These fighters are now launching raids and terror attacks against the Libyan's rear areas. ISIS leader Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi has called for new Jihadist recruits to travel to Libya to join the fight. There is also fear that the Libya's two rival governments will pick up fighting after the last holdouts in Sirte are killed. 

My Comment:

Sirte and Libya have largely fallen off the radar, overshadowed by bigger battles in Iraq and Syria. The local government there has declared victory in the battle several times already, but it's clear to me that the battle will continue as long as at least one of these ISIS fighters still draws breath. ISIS has held out well here, despite overwhelming odds and US air support. 

Part of the problem is that the people fighting ISIS aren't really professionals. Many of them are local militiamen, poorly trained and under immense pressure. I recently posted an excellent piece of journalism from RT showing how intense the battle is. That video showed how amateurish and unprepared the Libyan fighters are. Given that most of them are just guys that picked up rifles, either during the revolution against Qadaffi, or during the recent civil war, they deserve credit for doing as well as they have, but it's clear that their lack of expertise is what is prolonging this battle. A more professional army with better weapons would probably have won this battle by now. 

I have to admit, that these ISIS fighters are being pretty brave. Don't get me wrong, I despise ISIS and I hope every single one of the fighters currently fighting in Sirte dies, but it takes courage to fight under these conditions. It's a pity that they are showing such courage in service to such an evil cause. Either way though, these men are going to fight to the end. 

The battle for Sirte is an ominous warning for the battle of Mosul in Iraq. Currently Iraqi forces are engaged with heavy fighting and ISIS hasn't been surrounded yet. When that happens though, expect the battle for Mosul to end up the same way as Sirte did. Some ISIS fighters will escape, but those that do not will fight and fight hard. They know that their is no mercy to be had for them and they will fight like hell. Plus, unlike Sirte, Mosul is still full of thousands of civilians, many of whom are going to be caught in the crossfire. 

Indeed, brutal close range fighting in urban areas might be the norm for awhile. ISIS still controls several major cities and city fighting is nothing if not horrible. I am guessing that each of these battles, Mosul, Raqqa, Dier Ez Zor, and Tal Afar will be just as bloody and excruciating as Sirte was. Once those cities are liberated, ISIS will continue to fight, but they will probably morph into a more traditional terrorist group, launching raids and terror attacks as opposed to taking and holding territory.

No matter what though, it looks certain that Sirte will fall. It may take a while to clear out the holdouts, but it will happen eventually. What happens to ISIS in Libya then? I agree that it isn't the end of the line for ISIS in Libya. They still have a couple hundred fighters that escaped the battle and there is even a tiny chance that a few might escape from the Sirte pocket. Those survivors will try and regroup and reorganize and will probably eventually emerge again, either in Sirte again, or somewhere else where their enemies are vulnerable. Either that or they go underground and revert back into a terror organization. 

There are also more terrorist flowing into Libya. Border security isn't really something that exists in Libya and I am guessing it's not that hard to get into considering how many miles of coast and border that would have to be covered. With the route to Syria and Iraq largely cut off, Libya might make a much easier and more attractive destination for terrorists, especially those that are from North Africa and Europe. 

And it's not like their is any unity in the country right now. Libya has two government and also has several other factions that control large swaths of the country. ISIS isn't even the only Jihadist faction in the country, and all of these factions mostly hate each other. The fear is that when these other factions start fighting each other again in earnest, that will leave a new opportunity for ISIS to rise from the ashes. That is how they gained control of Sirte and several other cites in Libya in the first place.  

Still, the destruction of ISIS's main stronghold in Libya has broken their back. There was a great fear that ISIS would use Libya as a backup plan after their territory in Syria and Iraq was liberated. That is still a possibility, but it is looking quite a bit less attractive then it did before. When Sirte is finally completely liberated it will be a major victory for anyone and everyone opposed to ISIS. 

There are other candidates for a backup base for ISIS though, some of which are closer than Libya. ISIS is active and holds territory in both Eygpt and Yemen, and they have been expanding in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well. If we do end up kicking ISIS out of Iraq and Syria, that means that the threat will still remain. 

RT news crew in Libya documents the final battle against ISIS in Sirte

A quick post this morning about the above video. RT has a film crew documenting the battle of Sirte in Libya. Sirte was the stronghold for ISIS in Libya for most of the war and they are now on their last legs in the city. Most of the city has been liberated and now only pockets of resistance remain. The ISIS fighters, somewhat unbelievably, asked the Libyans for free passage out of Sirte, which was of course denied. ISIS is trapped between government forces in the city and Libyan gunships in the Mediterranean Sea.

It's a very bad situation as the above video shows. If you can't watch it or it gets removed, I will summarize it for you. The reporter comes up to the front lines and comes under fire from ISIS fighters while crossing a street. They then meet up with the main Libyan force, engaged with the enemy. At least two car bombs explode and a mortar round hits the building that they are in. Libyan fighters are shown shooting an RPG at ISIS and firing with heavy machine guns, both mounted on trucks and from the hip.

Though I have seen some very impressive combat footage, rarely is it from the press itself. The reporter, William Whitman and his crew were right on the front lines here, and it was very brave to say the least. Especially since ISIS likes to murder members of the press when they get their hands on them. Say what you want about the accuracy and bias of RT, but you have to admit that they get their people to some crazy locations and events. And the guys in this video are risking their lives to get this video out to the rest of the world. For that I am thankful.

Libyan fighter toying with an Islamic State sniper #Sirte #Libya

A photo posted by William Whiteman (@willmwhiteman) on Sep 5, 2016 at 2:00am PDT

As for the Libyans, the whole affair seemed rather slapdash. In any of the shots I saw, it was mostly just a couple of guys shooting while the rest of them were standing around yelling. And the ones that were shooting were firing from the hip. That's kind of excusable for the guys firing the heavy machine guns, but there is no reason for the riflemen to do the same thing. Still, I have seen more disorganized attacks. It's about par for the course in that part of the world

ISIS seems to be on their last legs in Libya. It's pretty clear that the holdouts in Sirte are doomed. They don't seem to be ready to surrender and they are outgunned and outnumbered by the Libyan military. Not only have the Libyans deployed their heavy armor, tanks and APC's, their Navy is getting involved with gunship patrols. There doesn't seem to be any escape for these ISIS fighters and pretty soon they will be purged from Sirte for good. I am not sure that end means complete destruction or some kind of surrender, but either way the writing is on the wall.

Which brings something else up. If ISIS does surrender in Sirte, what the hell does the Libyan government do with them? ISIS fighters have all committed crimes and are probably not worth the effort to reform. And if you put them in prison, you risk having them radicalize the other prisoners and collecting potential recruits if they ever get out of jail. You can't just execute them either, as practical as it would be, because I think even for ISIS people would be upset with that. It's a difficult question for sure, and one that I think will be answered soon, one way or the other...

US deploys Marine Super Cobra attack helicopters to Libya to fight ISIS.

USMC AH-1W similar to the ones uses in Libya. US Military photo.

The US has begun using Marine attack helicopters to attack ISIS in Libya. AFP. The deployment of AH-IW Super Cobra's comes after the US joined the campaign to retake the city of Sirte from ISIS. The attack helicopters will be used in a precision close air support role. The Super Cobra's are based off the USS Wasp, an amphibious assault ship which is also the home of Harrier jump jets that are also attacking ISIS. The US forces in the country are their at the request of the Government of National Accord, (GNA) one of two competing governments in the country. Though no official ground troops are on the ground in Libya, the US government admits that there have been some special forces in the country. 

My Comment:

Very interesting deployment in Libya. It's clear that we are pulling out all the stops to win the battle in Sirte against ISIS. The problem is that I thought ISIS had already been kicked out of Sirte. From what I understand that most of the city is under the control of GNA forces. That has been true for a couple weeks now. It seems as thought the battle has stalled.

ISIS has also been very active in sending raids and bombings into the city. Sirte is pretty much their last stronghold in Libya so they are fighting hard to keep it. I have said in the past that if ISIS loses Sirte, they pretty much lose the entire country. Sirte is the last major city they had control off. They still have troops in Benghazi and a few smaller towns in the coast, but other then that, they have lost most of their possessions in Libya. 

This is, of course, a very good thing. ISIS has been using Libya for their goals for far too long. They have staged multiple terror attacks out of Libya. Most of those attacks targeted the neighboring country of Tunisia. But there was also fears that ISIS would use the Libyan migrant route to send infiltrators into Europe. They may have done so already, but with ISIS's power base in Libya dissolving, that option may no longer exist.

The next question is what happens after ISIS is defeated in Libya for good. Sirte is basically their last stand and once they are completely out of the city they will essentially have lost the war. But even after that happens, ISIS won't be gone completely. They still control some minor areas and could also go underground. 

If ISIS does go underground in Libya, it will be a preview of what will happen in Iraq and Syria. My guess is that ISIS won't go away completely. They will still launch raids and terror attacks and they will also bide their time. Libya is not a stable country and given that they have two competing governments as well as several different insurgencies, it is very possible that ISIS could rise again from the ashes. 

Indeed, their Nigerian affiliates, Boko Haram, have done the same multiple times. The ISIS affiliate was essentially defeated to the point where they didn't control any cities or towns. But they still launch raids, commit terror attacks and kill many, many people. And they have somewhat reversed their losses. 

I do have to say that I don't think the government is being completely honest about there not being troops on the ground in Libya. Why? If they are deploying attack helicopters that means that they probably have forward air controllers on the ground. This is an absolute requirement for close air support. If you don't have FAC's you risk killing the very troops that you are their support. My guess is that we have troops on the ground to direct their helicopters and attack jets. 

I am not sure how much these strikes will accomplish. Airstrikes make for a good force multiplier and morale boost but they can't win the war by themselves. That falls onto the troops on the ground. I don't know what the quality of the GNA's soldiers are, but it's going to be up to them to win the battle of Sirte. 

Airstrikes begin against ISIS in Libya.

Libyan fighters fighting near Sirte. Reuters. 

US planes and drones have launched airstrikes against ISIS in Libya. Reuters. The Libyan Government of National Accord, one of two competing governments in Libya, requested the airstrikes to support their offensive against the ISIS held city of Sirte. Sirte was ISIS's main base of operations in Libya but they have been mostly pushed out of the city. A few holdouts remain and these holdouts were just bombed by US drones and airplanes. The airstrikes were limited in scale and only targeted an ISIS tank and two other vehicles. The strikes will continue but will be limited to Sirte. Several hundred ISIS fighters still remain in Sirte.

My Comment:

I am surprised it took this long for anyone to target ISIS in Libya. Libya was ISIS's third biggest holding outside of Syria and Iraq, and the logical place to go if those countries are liberated. ISIS took over Sirte and a lot of the coastline in the center of the country due to the chaos after Libya's government was overthrown. 

ISIS was also using their bases in Libya as a way to target other countries. ISIS was using their western bases to attack Tunisia and may have used the Libyan refugee route to sneak fighters into Europe. The attacks in Tunisia were terrible and who knows how many people managed to sneak into Europe from Libya?

The good news is that ISIS has been pushed back throughout the country. Their losses in Libya are even worse then their losses in Syria and Iraq. At their peak they controlled Sirte, a huge swath of the coastline, had bases in the western part of the country and had a major presence in Benghazi. Now they have been mostly pushed out of Sirte, lost much of the coastline, seen their western bases destroyed. They still have a presence in Benghazi but it's clear that ISIS is nowhere near the power they once were in Libya. It's to the point where I don't think Libya is a credible backup plan for ISIS anymore.

When Sirte falls, and it is a question of when not if, ISIS's power base in Libya will be completely broken. They really have nowhere else to retreat to in Libya. They will have to move underground and act like a more traditional terror organization. That doesn't mean that ISIS in Libya will no longer be a threat. They will still conduct terror strikes and may still use Libya as a base to attack countries. But they will have to be a lot more careful about it and won't be nearly as effective as they once were. 

After Sirte is liberated we will get a preview of what will happen in Iraq and Syria after Mosul and Raqqa are defeated. That's a long way off but we have never seen what happens to a country that ISIS had major control in. It's uncharted territory. 

My guess is that ISIS will go underground and will continue terror attacks. And they will wait for another opportunity. Libya is still not a stable country. There are about four other factions fighting each other, including two rival governments. As long as Libya remains a chaotic unsafe nation, ISIS has a chance to rise from the ashes. 

I don't think these airstrikes will have all that much of an effect. ISIS control over Sirte was doomed no matter what. And it's not like the Libyan military doesn't have their own fighter jets. They could have used their own airplanes. The only major difference is accuracy. Using US assets probably saved some collateral damage but likely did not have a major effect on the battle. 

Libya has liberated the ISIS held city of Sirte.

Libyan soldiers fire on ISIS near Sirte. Reuters.

Libya's government has taken back the port city of Sirte from ISIS. Reuters. Libyan troops from Misrata advanced to the city center. The fighters are loyal to the UN backed Government of National Accord (GNA). The GNA units swept around the city surrounding it and then moving in. The advance has been much swifter then anticipated but the troops have come under heavy sniper fire and had to deal with suicide bombers and mines. 100 GNA fighters have died since the offensive began in May. ISIS had controlled a large stretch of Libya's central coast but they have now lost territory as the GNA forces have started to target them. GNA allies have also targeted and pushed back ISIS in the east, near the town of Harawa.

Combat footage from Sirte. RT. 

My Comment:

This is yet another major defeat for ISIS. Sirte was one of their major cities that they had captured and now they seem to have lost it. Sirte was a port and a large source of income for ISIS. Losing it will hurt their ambitions in Syria and hurt them badly. If for no other reason they desperately needed to hold onto the area after losing so much territory in Syria and Iraq. Libya is their backup plan but it's a plan that won't work if they don't have anywhere to retreat too. It's not 100% clear if the city has been totally liberated but it does seem like their power base in Sirte is gone.

And Sirte isn't the only place they have lost. From the maps I have seen they have lost a lot of territory on the central coastline. They used to control a huge uninterrupted strip, which consisted of basically all of central Libya. That is no longer the case and they have been pushed to a small strip between Sirte and Harawa. This is a huge setback for ISIS and a welcome one as far as I am concerned. 

Of course the coast isn't the only place that ISIS had troops. They also have a large presence in northwestern Syria. These base are almost more dangerous then the ones near Sirte because they have used those bases to stage terror attacks across the border in Tunisia. Tunisia has stepped up security since those terror attacks and raids but the fact remains that the threat is there. Remember, last year there were three major terrorist attacks targeting the Tunisian government and various tourist enclaves, as well as some border skirmishes.

Liberating Sirte also might not help as much as one would hope. ISIS has been using the migrant crisis to infiltrate Europe and it's possible that they could have used Sirte as a route into Europe. I'm somewhat skeptical of that since who in their right mind would go to an ISIS controlled city to try and get into Europe? Especially if you are trying to go to Europe to get away from violence and destruction? My guess is that ISIS infiltration is happening from cities controlled by other groups. ISIS fighters can blend in with the migrants and get to Europe that way instead of the direct route.

Still, losing Sirte probably did disrupt some terrorist attacks just because ISIS will have to try and conserve their forces now. They will be looking to keep what territory they have and perhaps even attacking new areas. I am kind of surprised that they aren't attacking Libya's second government, the Council of Deputies. Their area of control is large but the only area ISIS really contests there is the notorious city of Benghazi. The Council of Deputies doesn't have Western backing so it might be weaker and thus a prime target for ISIS, if they can even get to that part of the country.

Speaking of Western involvement I wonder how much is going into this new GNA offensive? I didn't hear of any major airstrikes but I have heard that British and French special forces may be operating in the country. If they are, then ISIS would be their primary target. My guess is that they are mostly providing an advisory role and aren't actually involved in the combat.

Also, looking at the pictures and video from the scene it seems that the GNA is better equipped then ISIS. Unlike in Syria and Iraq, ISIS doesn't have the large cache of stolen US made weapons and vehicles. Having access to hundreds of US made Humvees and even some heavier vehicles was a critical factor in their success the last couple of years, but that is not the case in Libya. Instead they have whatever they could steal from the ruins of the former Libyan regime. Most of Qaddafi's equipment was outdated and it's unclear how much of them ISIS was able to get. The GNA by comparison has at least some tanks and other heavy vehicles, even if though they look much less well equipped then the troops in Syria and Iraq. 

As for ISIS itself, the terror group is having a rough time lately. My guess is they already reached their peak and will continue to lose territory. The question of whether or not Raqqa and Mosul will be liberated seems like a matter of "when" and not "if". Libya was one of the few bright spots left for ISIS, and if they continue to lose there then the group may be on the way out as a de-facto state. 

Of course the threat of terrorism from ISIS is still sky high. It's Ramadan right now and I am still worried that there will be an ISIS terror attack soon. There was a shooting in Israel but that just seems to be another incident in the cycle of revenge there. It's been very quite since the bombings in Belgium and I am worried something is coming... 

Libyan war spilling over the border to Tunisia. 50 dead in a border town shootout with ISIS.

A police officer picks up an RPG round in the aftermath of the fight. Reuters. 

A major raid targeting police and civilians in Tunisia has killed at least 50 people and was carried out by ISIS fighters based in Libya. Reuters. The ISIS fighters hit the border town of Ben Guerdan and were repelled by Tunisian police and soldiers. The town is on lock down and the nearby town of Djerba, a resort area popular with Europeans, was sealed off. 33 ISIS militants were killed in the attack, while 10 Tunisian soldiers were killed, along with 7 civilians. Tunisia has had problems with Islamic extremism ever since the Arab Spring, and the problem has grown worse since the rise of ISIS in Libya. In addition to this border raid, ISIS has conducted several major terrorist attacks in Tunisia, including the Bardo Museum attack and the Sousse attack. Tunisia has taken strong measures to shore up their defenses on the border with Libya, including building a wall. 

My Comment:

This is a very disturbing development. The situation in Libya is now threatening its neighbors. The spillover is starting to threaten Tunisia as well. It seems as though they handled this attack relatively well. At the very least, they killed more ISIS fighters then the casualties they suffered. And they prevented ISIS from driving security forces out of the town. That's a small comfort to the people killed in this attack though, and the threat of ISIS sending in a follow up attack is high. 

What is worse is that ISIS is continuing to expand in Libya. Most of their strongholds are in the center of the country and in the east, far away from the Tunisian border. But it's clear that they are getting quite a bit of operational capabilities in the western part of the country as well. The Bardo Museum and Sousse terrorist attacks were launched from this region, and now the fighters stationed there are confident enough to launch attacks across the border. 

One wonders what local Libyan forces are doing. Both governments of Libya, and yes, Libya still has two competing governments, hold territory along the border. What are they doing to stop these attacks? Very little it seems. My guess is that they are too busy fighting each other and other militant groups to care if ISIS wants to attack their Tunisian neighbors. Indeed, it may help the Libyans if more fighters go fight in Tunisia and die because it will mean less troops for them to fight. 

There was a major US airstrike in the western border area of Libya then ended up killing quite a few ISIS troops and commanders, as well as two Serbian hostages. Apparently that attack did not do much to stop cross border attacks into Tunisia. When the airstrike happened I suspected that the people at the base were planning attacks, either on Europe or in Tunisia. I also thought that destroying them would have lessened the chances of a cross border raid/terror attack. 

That may still be true, as this attack may have been worse without that airstrike, but it's clear that the threat posed by ISIS in Libya is larger then we thought. If ISIS is able to mount a major raid into Tunisia so soon after a major US airstrike that killed a bunch of their fighters, then they are much more powerful in the Western part of Libya then we suspected. Indeed, the attack may have been in response to the airstrike. ISIS is showing that a single airstrike won't derail their plans, and they can strike outside of Libya. 

I am wondering if Tunisia will take military action in response to this raid. They can't really cross the border with Libya unless both governments there are cool with it, but they can beef up their border defenses. They may station more troops to the border and will have to train them in defensive warfare. I have mentioned before that Tunisia is building a border wall which could at least slow down ISIS fighters, either by forcing them to breech the wall, which would draw attention to the raid, or attack border posts which would be well defended. 

As an aside, I find it hilarious that Reuters referred to the wall as a "barrier and trench". It's like they can't admit that building a border wall has national defense implications. The Tunisians can't be building a border wall since only "racists", like Donald J. Trump, want to do that. If they admit that Tunisia has good reasons to build a wall they might have to admit that Trump has a point about border security. Hence the misleading terminology....

Finally, I am going to again repeat my call for someone to do something about ISIS in Libya. Yes the French have some secret warfare going on against ISIS, but it doesn't seem to be enough. The major ISIS strongholds are going unmolested and ISIS is gaining strength in the country and taking more territory. With this territory under their control, they can launch more attacks like this and may even threaten Europe itself. 

Remember, the massive migration of economic migrants from Africa has tapered off due to it being winter. As temperatures increase, tens of thousands of migrants will try to cross the Mediterranean. It would be trivial to for ISIS to smuggle people into Europe this way and launch attacks. This border raid in Tunisia may be the shape of things to come, but next time it might be Europe.  

France's secret war against ISIS in Libya. Reuters.

 ISIS fighters training in Libya. AP/SITE intel group. 

In a new report by France's largest newspaper, Le Monde, the French government has started a secret war against ISIS in Libya. Reuters. According to the report French President Francois Hollande has authorized unofficial military action against ISIS using French special forces as well as the DSGE intelligence agency. France's strategy is to use occasional strikes against ISIS leadership as well as covert action by their special forces. The report also claims that France is working closely with the United Kingdom and the United States. French defense officials refused to comment on the report and will investigate who leaked the information. It has been confirmed that France has conducted reconnaissance missions over Libya and that they have a base in the northern part of Niger, which borders Libya. 

My Comment:

Interesting report if true. I said that someone needed to step up and go to war with ISIS in Libya and it looks like the French have done so. It is possible that this report is false though. I don't deem that very likely, Le Monde is a respectable newspaper, equivalent to the New York Times or Washington Post in terms of stature, and I doubt they would publish this without confirming it. The fact that the French government isn't denying it and is instead trying to go after whoever leaked this to the media means that I think it is true.

Which brings up another issue. Was it right to publish this report? Obviously the operational security of the French soldiers are at risk now. ISIS knows that they are there now and may take action to take these special forces out. They could even try to capture one and everyone knows what ISIS does to captured westerners. It could also derail French plans to hit ISIS targets. ISIS could spread their forces out and instruct them to look out for French ambushes. There is a threat here, that is for sure.

But I also think that the French people deserve to know if their troops are getting deployed. Though France has declared war against ISIS, that may not have translated to the French people that they are going to hit them in Africa as well as Syria and Iraq. And given the fact that French officials have said that they were not going to get involved in Libya, the people need to know that their government wasn't being honest. I am never a fan of any government that deploys troops into harms way and doesn't mention that fact to the people that put them into power. 

Personally though I am glad that someone is taking what is happening in Libya seriously, even if I wish they hadn't kept it a secret. I have said for awhile now that more needed to be done in Libya before it turned into a situation like Syria and Libya. ISIS has made huge gains in the country recently and they need to be checked. I was hoping someone would take a lead role and I am doubly happy that it is a European country, especially one that is partially responsible for the situation in the first place. After all, France had pushed for the overthrow of Qaddafi, a descion that had massive international consequences. It's only fair that the French help with cleaning up the mess they made. 

The only problem is that I don't think it will be enough. Don't get me wrong, the French have a very competent army. Anyone that still uses the "cheese eating surrender monkey's" meme in 2016 has not been paying attention. France has been very effective at controlling Jihad in West Africa and has done serious damage to the various insurgent groups fighting their, including al-Qaeda's Africa branch, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. They have also sent quite a few forces to fight in Syria and Iraq as well. 

The problem is that even highly competent French special forces won't be enough to counter ISIS in Libya. ISIS has at least 5,000 troops there and are recruiting more every day. And they have taken and hold quite a bit of territory. What needs to happen is for ISIS leaders to be killed and for that territory to be taken away from ISIS. The French troops can help with the first task, but not so much with the second. 

What is needed is a full army, not a few special forces fighters and limited airstrikes. But just like in Iraq and Syria, there isn't one available. Libya's two governments (a huge sign of trouble right there) are too busy fighting each other and the various other terrorist groups and militias to focus too much on ISIS. Nobody else will deploy ground troops and until that changes I don't see much happening to defeat ISIS in Libya. Though welcome, this French deployment is largely a band-aid on a bullet wound. It's just not enough. 

Two Serbian nationals held by ISIS are believed to have died in the US airstrike in Libya. Reuters

Damage caused by the US airstrike in Sabratha, Libya. Reuters 

Two Serbian nationals, taken hostage by ISIS, are believed to have been killed in a US airstrike in Sabratha, Libya. Reuters. The attack, that killed around 50 people, was targeting a ISIS training camp and an ISIS coordinator named Noureddine Chouchane, who is thought to be responsible for two terrorist attacks in neighboring Tunisia. The airstrike may have killed two Serbian men, Sladjana Stankovic, a communication officer and Jovica Stepic, a driver, who were abducted last November. The two men were captured in an incident when Serbian embassy personnel, including the ambassador, came under fire in Sarbatha. Their deaths have yet to be confirmed but the Serbian government has already filed a protest against the United States. Serbia had been negotiating for the men's release but neither the family or the government was able to pay what they were asking for.  On the ground in Syria, there are conflicting reports about if ISIS was even at the location bombed. The Libyan government claimed that some of the survivors claimed to be ISIS members, but the local mayor said the building was just a house used for meetings, not training. 

My Comment:

I covered this story yesterday, but this is a major development. I had no idea that ISIS had captured Serbians in Libya. Perhaps the Serbian government was keeping it quiet? Either way, I am hoping that this report is wrong and that these two men are still alive. It doesn't look good though. And of course this happens right after I decided to give credit for Obama for pulling off this attack. The presence of these two hostages and their probable death certainly changes the calculus for ordering this airstrike. I have no idea whatsoever if the United States government knew that these two men were present in the building that was destroyed. 

If they didn't know then this is nothing more then a tragic mistake. But what if they did know and sent the strike anyways? Could it be justified? I think you could make the argument that it might have been. I went over yesterday how big the threat this camp could have been. It was very possible that the ISIS fighters that were there were preparing for another major terrorist attack in either Tunisia or Europe. Chouchane has been accused of plotting the two major terrorist attacks in Tunisia last year so he certainly was a threat. Killing him may have prevented a serious terror attack that could have killed dozens of people. That alone justified the airstrike if the government didn't know these two hostages were there. 

Is that worth the lives of these two hostages though? That's a tough call, and I am glad that it isn't one I have to make. I am sure that the Serbian government and the families of these two men are furious with the United States government right now, and that is probably with the assumption that this was an accident, not on purpose. If it was on purpose expect them to be apoplectic. It's again important to note that I have no idea if the government knew about these two men before they launched the mission. I think it is much more likely that this was just a tragic mistake, though I can see a scenario where the United States took the option anyways because the threat was so severe. 

I do feel rather bad for the F-15 pilot that conducted this mission. In any case I doubt he or she knew that these hostages were there. Having the lives of those two men on your hands would be tough for anyone to deal with. People get PTSD just from killing the enemy, so killing innocents is probably even worse...

I wonder if the presence of these men at this camp was a deliberate attempt by ISIS to use them as a human shield. After all, ISIS has used human shields before to try stop airstrikes, so it wouldn't be without precedence. If it was, then we are going to have to think long and hard about how we order these airstrikes. It's a win win scenario for ISIS if they are using that tactic. Either they are much safer from airstrikes, or their enemy gets a huge PR embarrassment when they attack you. And it's not like there is much else for these hostages to do when they are waiting to be ransomed off. I almost wonder if it wouldn't be worth it for ISIS to stop trying to ransom Western hostages for this very reason. This camp was certainly worth protecting for ISIS so I would not be suprised if that was the role they were playing there. 

As for the Libyans on the ground, I am not sure if I have a whole lot of respect for the local government in Sarbatha. First of all, the claim by the mayor that the building destroyed was not a training camp strikes me as a pointless statement. It might not have been a traditional training camp but it was where ISIS fighters were first introduced to Libya and inducted into the organization. It was also probably a place were operations were planned, due to the presence of Chouchane. Though the deaths of the two Serbs was tragic, this was a legitimate target. Arguing about if it was a terrorist training camp or simply a meeting place is semantics at best. 

Second, it sounds like everyone on the ground knew that this was a terrorist held building. But nobody did anything about it. Sure, ISIS is a very scary bunch of people. Killing everyone there could have had consequences. And sure, the Libyan government has more then enough problems of their own right now. But nobody on the ground thought about sending in their own troops to attack this place? Had that happened perhaps the hostages would have lived. Of course it is possible that someone did do something and fed intelligence to the United States, but even so, I think a ground operation might have been called for.

As I said yesterday, this strike won't have much of a long term impact, outside of Serbia. ISIS is still very strong in Libya and haven't really come under any kind of sustained attack. Sooner or later someone is going to have to step up there and take ISIS on. It might be one of the Libyan governments, one of the militias on the ground, or the United States and/or Europe in the skies. But right now it is no one and as long as that is the case, ISIS will continue to expand. This is a temporary setback for their greater plans in Libya at worst. They may have lost a good planner and a bunch of recruits but that is a drop in the bucket for ISIS. 

US airstrike destroys ISIS training camp in Libya. AP.

ISIS Islamic Police officers. AP

The United States has conducted an airstrike in Libya that has destroyed an ISIS training camp and killed at least 40 people, including a major leader. AP. As many as 60 ISIS fighters were at the camp when a F-15 from Europe destroyed the camp. The leader, Noureddine Chouchane, is believed to have been killed in the strike. Chouchane was a high ranking facilitator and a Tunisian national. His role was recruiting fighters, creating ISIS bases and perhaps even planing terrorist attacks. The strike took place near the Tunisian border in the city of Sabratha. The city serves both as a major hub for ISIS fighters making their way to ISIS strongholds in the eastern half of the country, but as a major hub for the migrant waves heading into Europe. The airstrike does not mean that there will be a major uptick in operations in Libya as it is being described as an attack of opportunity. Though US and European special forces are active in the country, US President Barack Obama has refused to launch a major air campaign due to worries over the instability in the country caused by having two competing governments. 

My Comment:

I think that the Associated Press and other news agencies are downplaying the threat that this training camp posed. Given the camps location, not only next to Tunisia, but on the main route that migrants are making it to Europe, the threat was massive. I would not be surprised at all if these fighters were being trained for a terrorist attack. I can't know that for sure, but my guess is that the timing of this attack indicates that this base was a major threat. 

There are a couple of targets they could have been after. The most simple one would be Tunisia. ISIS has pulled off three major terrorist attacks in that country, and they know that they can be effective there. Two of those attacks, the Bardo Museam attack and the Sousse attack, killed dozens of westerners and are generally considered to be one of ISIS's more spectacular attacks. The third, a major bombing right in the capital, didn't get nearly as much press, but it did send a message to Tunisia that they are vulnerable. So vulnerable that the Tunisians are building a security wall on the border with Libya, both to keep ISIS out, but to also keep local militants from joining ISIS across the border. (hmm, building a wall to prevent terrorist infiltration, where have I heard that before? Is it still "racist" if the Tunisians do it?)

Certainly, another major attack in Tunisia would be tragic, but I doubt that is anyone's main concern here. The much greater threat is possible attacks in Europe. Getting the newly trained ISIS fighters into Europe would be largely academic at this point for this particular training camp. They would just have to wait a few months for the traffic to pick up again and then just blend in with the migrants. Sabratha is a major hub for people trying to get to Europe, so the opportunity is there. Getting weapons and explosives into Europe would be the most difficult thing, so I am guessing that they would just have to buy weapons there, which is where the plot would most likely fall apart. I do think that if they had made it into the country there is a decent chance that they could pull something off. 

If either of these possible plans had been pulled off, it would have been a disaster, and I think this airstrike may have slightly lowered the risk of a major terrorist attack in both Tunisia and Europe. The destruction of this camp is a major accomplishment and for once I will give the Obama administration a little credit. Not only was the threat of a terrorist attack originating from this camp rather severe, the camp was likely serving other purposes as well. Sarbatha is also a major artery for North African militants from Tunisia and Algeria joining ISIS in Libya. As ISIS has expanded in Libya they have become reliant on these new recruits to grow their numbers. Every day more militants arrive to join up with the 5,000 or so ISIS fighters that are already in the country. Perhaps this strike will slow the numbers of  new fighters down. Destroying this camp was a very good thing, and I would like to see more decisive strikes like this one. 

As for Libya itself, it is disturbing how active ISIS is in the country. In about a year they have expanded from a toe hold to controlling a huge strip of land in the middle of the countries coast line as well has having a major presence in Benghazi, Derna and even in Tripoli itself. The fact that they have enough of a presence in a place like Sabratha, which is far from their major strongholds in the east and center parts of the country, shows that they can operate almost everywhere in the country. With Libya as fragmented as it is, it seems as though ISIS is having an easy time expanding and operating throughout the country. The rapid pace reminds me of how quickly they were able to take over Iraq back in 2014, a victory that still hasn't been reversed. Perhaps in time, ISIS will be able to expand so much in Libya, it will no longer matter if ISIS is defeated in Syria and Iraq. Instead of a backup base and minor theater in the global war against ISIS, Libya may end up being the main stage... 

It is unfortunate that this attack seems like it will be a one-off strike. There just seems to be no will from any of the players involved in this drama to actually take ISIS seriously, even though the threat is so obvious and so severe. The Libyan governments are divided, and the other militias on the ground, some of them jihadists themselves, are too busy fighting each other to really focus on ISIS. And Barack Obama has no stomach for yet another major military deployment during the last year of his presidency. To be perfectly honest, our military is so overworked and over deployed in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, with more forces tied down by North Korea, I am starting to wonder if we are even capable of mounting an effective campaign. 

That leaves one option and I am surprised that nobody else is calling for this. The Europeans need to step up and take care of Libya. I know France and the United Kingdom are tied down with their military operations in the Middle East and Africa, but there are other countries in Europe that could help out. The Italians and the Germans, who are especially threatened by ISIS bases in Libya, should do their part as well. They haven't contributed nearly as much as our other coalition partners. That isn't to say that they aren't helping, but given the threat that Libya is posing, it would be nice if they were to launch a major campaign as well. In addition to whatever Europe is doing in Libya right now, I would recommend that they start an air campaign in the country as soon as possible. 

ISIS is continuing to expand in Libya and has been capturing oil fields. LA Times.

Libyan firefighters battle a blaze set by ISIS.  LA Times/AFP/Getty.

ISIS is continuing to expand in Libya and are capturing oil and other resources. LA Times.  ISIS has taken more territory in the country and are levying taxes and selling oil. Satellite reconnaissance shows that ISIS is also fortifying their positions and are creating new training bases in the country. ISIS has at least 5,000 fighters in Libya, which is nearly double the amount that they had last fall. Libya has been chaotic at best since the fall of Muammar Qaddafi, with two competing national governments and jihadist groups and militias all vying for control. Recently, African Jihadist fighters have begun to pour into Libya instead of Syria and Iraq, due to setbacks for ISIS in both of those countries. Europe and the United States are weighing their options, including sending in ground troops, advisers and launching airstrikes. Only one airstrike, targeting an ISIS leader, has been launched by the United States by Libya. ISIS has used Libya as a base to launch attacks in other countries, including two major ones in Tunisia. In response, Tunisia is building a wall between their country and Libya and the United States is recommending that Egypt does the same thing. 

My Comment:

First of all I have to point out some hypocrisy here. According to the US government, it's perfectly fine for Tunisia to build a security wall to protect their country from bad people. It's such a great idea that they are recommending that Egypt do the same thing. But when Donald Trump says that America should build a wall to keep people out, he's the anti-Christ? This doesn't have much to do with the article, so I will leave it at that. Just strikes me as hypocritical. 

As for ISIS, Libya is becoming just as large as a threat as Syria and Iraq are. ISIS is growing in Libya and has taken quite a bit of territory. Just off of my rough eyeball estimate from a map that may or not be accurate, they seem to control about 1/3rd of the coast of Libya, which is where the vast majority of people live. It is also where most of the oil is located in the country. Which of course means that ISIS can extract both taxes and oil revenue from the region they captured. 

They can use those funds to stage new attacks and capture new territory. Already ISIS has staged three separate attacks on Tunisia from Libya, which have killed many western tourists. The greater fear is that they could use Libya as a launchpad to attack Europe. Italy is not that far away from Libya, and Libya is right on the path that refugees and migrants are using to enter Europe from Africa. It would be trivial to sneak fighters into Europe and launch attacks. They already do that from Syria, but given how close Libya is to Europe, it would be even easier. 

Given how big the threat is, it is amazing to me that nobody is doing anything concrete against ISIS in Libya. There is some talk of airstrikes or special forces, but nothing has been decided and any action seems far away in the future. Sure the militias on the ground are fighting them, but given how ISIS was able to capture most of Syria and a decent chunk of Iraq by exploiting chaos caused by civil war, isn't it possible that they could do the same thing in Libya? To a certain extent they already have. After all, ISIS has only been in Libya since September of 2014. It didn't take them much time at all to capture what they have taken in Libya, and I wouldn't be too surprised if they took even more before this year is over. 

There just doesn't seem to be the political will to do anything in Libya. I understand why that is in America. President Obama doesn't want to admit that his war in Libya was not a success. Removing Qaddafi was a mistake and what replaced him was chaos. Sending in airstrikes or troops would be an open admission that Obama screwed up and it could cause problems for his party as well. After all, Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State when Libya happened, and her fingerprints are all over what has happened in the country since the fall of Qaddafi. Doing anything in Libya militarily would damage Obama's legacy and hurt his party's chances in the 2016 presidential elections. 

What I don't understand is how Europe can be so blase about Libya. They are the ones that are going to suffer from the terror attacks launched from the country and ISIS has shown that they can kill a huge amount of people in Europe when given half a chance. The United States can afford to ignore the problem because Libya is an ocean away from America, but that isn't the case for Europe. Part of it is the diplomatic nightmare that is Libya right now, with all the competing sanctions. But you would think that they would be sending in airstrikes, right? I guess France is pretty distracted with Syria and Iraq right now. Their aircraft carrier is stationed where it can hit those targets, not Libya, and they are also committed to fighting al-Qaeda in northwest Africa. But it doesn't explain why Italy or other EU countries aren't sending in their bombers. 

Even though the media is covering ISIS's rise in Libya, I think it is going to take a major terrorist attack in Europe, comparable or worse then the Paris attacks, to really wake people up. The Bardo Museum attack and the Sousse assault didn't quite reveal the entire scope of the threat Libya poses. I see it as a dagger pointed at the throat of Europe and militants based out of there could do an extreme amount of damage. I would not be surprised if there is a major terror attack in Europe this year that was planed and executed from Libya. 

What would I do in Libya? A massive bombing campaign targeting not only the leadership of ISIS, but their sources of income as well. There is no reason why ISIS should ever control an active oil well. If environmental or other concerns prevent us from bombing the wells, any trucks or logistical supplies in the area could be destroyed instead. Targeting oil trucks and wells in Syria, by Russia and the United States, has damaged ISIS severely in that country, so I don't understand why it wouldn't work in Libya as well. I wouldn't deploy ground troops though. Libya is a mess, and I don't think any of the governments or militia groups there are worth fighting for. 

None of that is likely to happen. Obama wants to secure his legacy, and Europe appears to be distracted by other things. ISIS will continue to grow in Libya and there power base there will expand. They will collect million of dollars from their oil wells and tax base and they will continue to raise a cadre of battle hardened veterans. And the longer that they are able to do so, the worse the problem will get. But nobody will do anything about it until it is too late... 

ISIS is consolidating its position in Libya and may use it as a backup plan if Syria and Iraq fall. AFP.

Benghazi burns in Libya during a battle between government forces and rebels, including ISIS. AFP.

ISIS's foothold in Libya is expanding and may end up being a base should they lose their territory in Iraq and Syria. AFP. After the collapse of the Libyan regime, the country has become a spawning ground for terrorist groups. In the chaos afterwards, ISIS was able to capture the city of Sirte, the former home of Momar Qadaffi. With Sirte and several other towns and villages captured by ISIS, it is feared that they will use the area as a base to attack further into Africa, including Chad, Niger and Sudan. ISIS is also using Libya as a base to plan an execute terrorist attacks, especially in the neighboring country of Tunisia where they have attacked three times this year so far. ISIS also has European ambitions, including the unrealistic one of reclaiming Spain, and the much more realistic one of infiltrating into Europe via Italy, which is just across the Mediterranean. However, Libya isn't quite as welcoming as Syria and Iraq are. Libya is a much poorer in both resources to exploit and population to draw taxes and recruits from. ISIS is also much more vulnerable to attack then they are in Syria and have to compete with at least two governments and multiple militia groups, including those loyal to al-Qaeda. Europe and the United States are not dealing with the threat, as almost all attention is focused on Syria and Iraq. 

My Comment:

This is why ISIS is so very dangerous. Even if we were to completely destroy all of the forces ISIS has in Syria and Iraq, they would still control territory throughout the world. Libya is far from the only place outside of those two countries that ISIS has territory in. Their allies in Egypt control part of the Sinai Peninsula, where they just launched a major terrorist attack against a Russian Jet. In Yemen, ISIS has control of a few cities as well, and they are making inroads in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Palestine. And their Nigerian allies, Boko Haram, may offer up support for ISIS fighters as well. 

And it't not like anyone is taking ISIS seriously either. Even though the UK joined the war, and the French and Russians have stepped up their commitments, ISIS is still in control of vast stretches of territory, holds billions of dollars in assets and own the fates of millions of people. Raqqa and Mosul still stand. And Ramadi, under siege, still stands as well. Only now are efforts underway to destroy their oil business, and even those efforts won't cripple the state. Ground troops will, but nobody will deploy them.

In Libya, ISIS is in a weaker position then they are in Syria and Iraq. They really only control Sirte and a few surrounding towns and villages. It is still an alarming amount of territory. Libya is a huge country and ISIS controls a decent chuck of the coast. The problem for ISIS is that there are so many other factions vying for the country as well. At least three other major factions, the two Libyan governments and other Islamic militants under the banner of Ansar al-Sharia. All of these factions fight each other and ISIS as well, and none of them are in a position to take and hold the entire country. ISIS is one of the smaller factions in Libya as well, with only 3000 to 5000 fighters.

Still, the threat isn't that ISIS is going to take over the entire country. It's the fact that they have yet another base to attack from. I do think that ISIS is planning to attack further into Africa. They want to link up with the Islamic militias there, and taking more territory is a major objective for them, even if that territory is largely useless to them. If they were to take territory in Niger or Chad, they could possibly link up with Boko Haram and have joint operations between the two groups. Right now, Boko Haram is an ISIS affiliate, but they have little in the way of direct contact with ISIS due to the geography involved. Still, such an offensive doesn't look very realistic at this time. They would need a much larger foothold and a large increase of troops in Libya to mount offensive operations to take and hold territory outside of it.

The much larger threat is terrorism. ISIS is already using Libya as a base to send out terrorist attacks to Tunisia. These attacks have been brutal and the Bardo Museum attack and the attacks in Sousse  killed dozens of westerners. They were also a preview of the kind of tactics that ISIS would use in Paris France, and perhaps in San Bernadino as well. More attacks on Tunisia are coming, either targeting whatever Western tourists brave or foolish enough to visit the country or at the government itself.

Of greater concern is ISIS using Libya as a major base to attack Europe. ISIS has their hands in the human smuggling business that is shipping hundreds of thousands of migrants over the Mediterranean. It would be trivial for them to bring in a few attackers disguised as these migrants, and indeed, they have already done so. Libya is one of the main corridors for the migrant crisis, and it would be crazy if ISIS isn't exploiting it somehow. Even if it means they are just collecting money from the enterprise.

Another major terrorist attack is coming to Europe and I think it will happen soon. Maybe not before the year is over, but I would be stunned if ISIS doesn't pull something off before Winter is over. I'm actually kind of worried about the Pope. I have heard multiple reports of the Pope being threatened and plans being disrupted. But he is a huge target for ISIS and he is known to be a man of the people, highly vulnerable to assassination. Even if he isn't attacked, the Vatican and other tourist spots in Italy, are prime terror targets, and those attacks could be launched from Libya.

Again though, this is just for the attacks that ISIS is directly responsible for. The threat of more homegrown terrorists, like the ones in San Bernardino is sky high right now. ISIS has to do very little to pull off these attacks. Simply by existing they are inspiring these kinds of attacks. All they have to do is encourage them a little and dozens of radicalized Muslims could attack.

One thing is for sure, nobody is going to do anything with Libya. The United States has washed its hands of the disaster after the attack on the consulate in Benghazi that killed our ambassador there. After that happened everyone tried to pretend that Libya never happened. But it was all our fault. Taking out Qadaffi was a mistake as it brought chaos and destruction, two ingredients that always cause ISIS to thrive. And just a reminder, one of the main architects  for this mess is currently running for president...