Lessons from the Libyan war
Eight months 2011 of the year were marked by the conduct of hostilities in Libya, in which troops controlled by the regime of Gaddafi and rebel forces controlled by the Transitional National Council and received support from the air forces, naval forces, and NATO.
Despite the fact that many aspects of the war remain unclear to date, this does not prevent us from drawing some conclusions about the problems in the defense capability of the Russian Federation.
During the war, Gaddafi’s army very skillfully used a combination of camouflage and tactics of warfare using small units - a surprise attack, strike, and then the same rapid retreat. The use of such tactics made it possible not only to destroy gas stations, but also to disrupt the supply of ammunition, equipment and food for protesters. More often than not, two or three army companies performed in one battle, which allowed the Gaddafi army to resist the units of the Transitional National Council for a rather long period of time, even though it supported them aviation NATO states.
The PNS propaganda actively used the accusations of the leader of the Jamahiriya in attracting mercenaries from Equatorial Africa and the Maghrib to their troops, and later information appeared about the participation in the military actions of the Slavic states - Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.
However, the use of mercenaries has always been inherent in the military branch of Libya. Taking part in any military conflict, the Libyan army exhibited the Pan-African Legion, which was created like the French Foreign Legion and had about 7 thousand people in its composition. Basically, they were immigrants from Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Jordan, Tunisia and Pakistan.
Meanwhile, despite the accusations against the ruling regime, the Transitional National Council itself used private military companies, which not only carried out military operations, but also provided training and consultations to PNS units, as well as logistical support and serviced sophisticated weapons systems.
Libyan troops also used all possible types of camouflage technology. For example, most of the combat heavy equipment was saved only due to the fact that they were hidden in large labyrinths and tunnels up to 4,5 meters in diameter and the so-called Great Man-made River, the largest irrigation system that is thousands of kilometers deep under the 4 .
Very interesting is the fact that the US and NATO intelligence was not aware of the disguise of the Libyan technology. This is all the more strange when you consider that the American intelligence services are the most developed in the world. But many French and Italian pilots later admitted that they often had to drop bombs on unknown objects. And one of the officers of the French aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" even stated that he had never met such agility, which is inherent in the forces of Gaddafi. Thus, they are able to apply such a disguise that does not allow NATO aircraft not only to detect, but also to attack the Gaddafists or their equipment.
The participation of Western states in the military conflict in Libya was due to several reasons. The main one is that the leader of the state, Muammar Gaddafi, without even trying to enter into negotiations with the opposition, immediately transferred troops to the area of popular uprisings, Benghazi. Up to this point, his reputation was far from flawless, and after such actions, supported by the Libyan leader’s address with threats to his compatriots, he finally made him a monster in the eyes of the world community. In addition, Western leaders urgently needed to save their own reputation in the eyes of the Arab world, since in Egypt and Tunisia they actively supported local dictators. Gaddafi has managed to turn against literally everyone against himself - from politicians to common people in the East and the West, therefore it was impossible to find a better candidate for public flogging.
Special forces of NATO, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates were deployed to the territory of Libya. They were engaged in sabotage and conducted rear reconnaissance in the Qadhafi troops, and also identified objects for helicopter and aircraft strikes. British and French Special Forces were assigned the task of developing a plan to capture Tripoli and coordinate the actions of the rebels. And the military from Qatar and the Emirates led the capture of the government building "Bab al-Aziziyah."
At the same time, a real information war broke out in Libya, the peak of which was the coverage of events connected with the assault on Tripoli. And although the city has not yet surrendered, CNN and Al-Jazeera have already shown footage of the victory of the opposition shot in the Qatar desert. These frames became the signal for the beginning of the attack of saboteurs and Protestants. And almost immediately, groups of Protestants began installing roadblocks and broke into the homes of loyal Gaddafi officers.
Recently, a second war has already occurred in the world, in which money played a decisive role. They, and not air operations or blockades, brought greater success. In fact, the US government in Libya did the same thing as in Iraq, when the CIA officers bribed local military commanders. Besides the fact that the traitors received a lot of money for treason, they were also provided with the export of their families outside of Iraq in the final stages of the operation. Then, we recall, four corps at once surrendered to the mercy of the American troops.
Something similar happened in Libya. The NATO command was well aware that the air operation failed and would not help the opposition to seize power in the country, so the task of eliminating the Gaddafi regime was assigned to intelligence and special forces of France, Italy and the United Kingdom, as well as the American CIA. Their main goal was to bribe the Libyan politicians and the military. So, for example, the Italian special forces transferred five families of Libyan generals to the territory of Italy, and then they actively cooperated with approximately 100 high-ranking caddaphist officials.
Thus, the betrayal of the ground forces and their transfer to the side of the opposition, as well as the desertion of military pilots with airplanes, is a completely natural and predictable phenomenon. What else can you say, if even the most devoted Gaddafi man, General Abdul Fath Yunis, who was at the post of Minister of the Interior for more than twenty years and was considered an ardent opponent of the opposition, in February 2011 fled from Tripoli to Benghazi and took the units military police, which he himself created.
At the same time, there was a split in the Libyan army, as a result of which a part of the military simply deserted or joined the opposition, and only a small part of the troops remained loyal to Gaddafi. A similar trend was developed in May, when some officers disappeared in an unknown direction.
In addition, the war proved that NATO is also not omnipotent, and that without the help of the Americans, a victory over the Gaddafi regime would be postponed indefinitely. A vivid example of this is that during the operation, the British and the French had “smart” bombs. Therefore, they were forced to turn to the United States with a request. "Tomahawks", which were used to destroy the air defense system of Libya, in sufficient quantities are only among the Americans. Moreover, the unmanned aerial vehicles used to destroy the disguised Libyan vehicles are also American.
It is worth noting the fact that many of the member countries of the alliance either did not take part in hostilities at all, or their participation was purely nominal.
Military actions in Libya again proved the obvious - the rules of international law can be violated at any time when Western states consider such a measure necessary to achieve their interests. International politics has double standards, and aggression directed against the Russian state will be possible if its military, economic and moral potential is weakened, and its people are not ready to defend the borders of their home country.
Thus, Russia must take certain conclusions for itself from the war and understand that an unfavorable situation for the state can develop so rapidly that the government will not have time to create a new army equipped with new types of weapons. It is also necessary to think about the creation of special operations forces, and not to abolish them. And another equally important aspect is the need to create informational arms of service in order to counter informational aggression. It is also necessary to think over the program of the exercises, paying more attention not to fighting terrorism, but to conduct maneuvers with neighboring states, thus teaching the troops to act in a situation that may arise in real conditions.
Information