Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Politics and Geopolitics / Great Arab Revolution / Articles
Tripoli after the assault: an analysis of the reasons for the defeat of Gaddafi
Material posted: Publication date: 30-08-2011

In the Libyan capital Tripoli are in heavy fighting, and Gaddafi disappeared, the city at the mercy of looters and murderers. Western media continue to stuff the townsfolk staged shots. Will try to do an analysis of what we saw in the last days, based on publicly available information and logic.

Unfortunately, little information, about the current situation can be judged only in the most General terms. One side, subduing leading media and suppressing uncontrolled sources, deliberately misinformed in the information struggle. The other side, network activists and sympathizers, for the most part standing on the ground of bad idealism, is often inadequate, often indulge in wishful thinking: that the war to help go (and still get) some mythical tribes, the soldiers of which, des, have some Olympic virtues; it is from Iraq (!) hurry to help fifteen thousand men; behold here in the case interfere the great armies of Algeria and Egypt; then, generally, it is expected that God will help you (approximately will punish America or something), in General, I trust in a miracle. Let us therefore build on what is, for the paucity of base don't blame me.

In addition, the enthusiasm and some passion in the fight things, of course, useful, fundamental and devastating critique of the defending side in the battle, misplaced, will try to avoid both extremes.

1. Assessment of the situation

What happened in Tripoli in the last days? Was carried out a ground operation limited forces in Tripoli was planted landing. Information about the planned operations against Tripoli began arriving even before landing (this was emphasized and directions of strikes in the West of Libya), i.e. preparing the attack, in General, for anybody was not a secret. For Libyan intelligence, if it works, I think, even more so.

It's hard without knowing specifics, to judge the justification or unjustified action (can there was a positional defense of the city under the rule of enemy aircraft, would be enough resources to cover all directions, etc.), special issues and professional military is more visible (they are not stupid and have the specifics).

1.1. The quality of the defense
A number of moments suggests that the defense was inefficiently managed, and the defenders were caught off guard.


To the surprise of the attack indicates that the volatile group was the ability to easily take content and make money some sites (such as residences, offices or services of the hospital). Some of these objects, indeed, could be given for tactical reasons, but in this case, their contents would be destroyed in advance. The other part could not and had to fall into enemy hands under any circumstances. This includes, e.g., mobile field hospital. Inside there were wounded kazanis.

Relaxed the authorities

In Libya there is a war against the invaders. In this case, always done in our country (and in Europe)? Right, declared martial law and General mobilization. Freedom and democracy is over, the involved mass be placed at the disposal of military commanders. Have already seen that in Libya such mobilization was not. Met photo from which it was evident that while military personnel fought and died in the wilderness, urban residents freely sipping coffee on the beaches. There was constant talk that the tribes must send some sort of militia and other "democracy". In war there is no place for democracy, they are incompatible. Our own hierarchical Russian society because hierarchical, the whole story we had to constantly fight (and in that ugliness that we have now, the military hierarchy has evolved because in times of peace it is unnecessary because the body is not loaded ACC. function, for which performance he, in fact, was created, decays and rots, becomes unnecessary and harmful burden).
After the invasion in Tripoli, Gaddafi speaks. Here, many admired her depth. At me she made a painful impression. Not only is it slightly less than fully consists of some semi-esoteric Labuda (the feeling is that it was written by P. Coelho), so there is still Gaddafi addresses a request to all conscious people to come and liberate Tripoli. It's about the same that organize the children's crusade. The scattered patriots, even if they are not so demoralized by the incident, to sestritsa together with family far away, and makes comments arrive in the city "to war", will be easily localized and broken as a why should you live (with some "nastradavshimisya" happened, see below). To this point must already exist a partisan network that should already know what to do, in collaboration with the army/the other cells or offline, depending upon the circumstances, should have reserves for operations (time for the organization was enough). And the rhetoric in circulation should be completely different (a General call to stand up to the fight, no surrender, "the enemy will be defeated, victory will be ours," etc.). The treated call to go to the city to fight, they say, have a conscience, read as a cry of despair. In the event of their hours, the guerrillas have to know what to do and where to go if they don't know, late to brush broken teeth.

Now. So, what does this have to do with the defense of the city? The most direct one. Try, for example, to imagine such a gay-parade in Grozny fighting. But in Grozny, the situation in terms of resources and capacity was, in General, similar. But even a pair of three snipers, I think that would be enough for a short time to knock all this gadabout crowd. And the survivors would have had such a warm welcome that the other would forever sworn never to go in Tripoli, even in peacetime, even as tourists. Tripoli was posing let this rabble to do their job.

1.2. The ambiguity of perspectives (weaknesses of the invaders)
About the weaknesses of the defense we have talked, now let's focus on attacking weaknesses.

So, NATO is all well-calculated, prepared and massive landing forces struck at the defenders of Tripoli unexpected blow, somewhere destroying, somewhere aside, somewhere desorganizacao, somewhere demoralizowa Libyan government forces, bases and taking foothold in the city. While Western media claim that the city is under complete control, with a seat in the TV/photo - picture work volatile agit-already (type described above). On the basis of this defeat of the loyalists, many network activists have slobbered, they say, it's over, all is lost, etc.
Is it really all over? Possible. If exactly the same snot dissolve loyalists, going on about Western propaganda. But in the General case — no.

There are a number of points, which makes the prospect of development of events is not as straightforward as we claim in this spin-doctors. These following points:

- The limited contingent. Landing small forces of a few thousand to keep a huge city under control of problematic physically. Will have to work hard (bloody sweat). Or to organize a safety zone, sit in them and to believe that these areas now are the city.

- Logistic support. For successful control of the city will need to build up the group. At the same time, landed the group requires the provision of: food, ammunition, fuel and so on. If the city is hostile and there are not that partisans and survived the army, the procurement itself can become a problem. Not to mention the fact that both of these needs — consolidation of forces and its security — in contradiction: the more the grouping, the harder it is to ensure its adequate supply.

Mass support. Landing group alone will not be able to conduct efficient military operations. If they're going to be active, they will use tactics of sabotage and raids, to act as guerrillas. However alien insurgents (not to mention the units of the interventionists) are deprived of mass support on the ground, and this is one of the key conditions for the sustainability of the guerrillas. The loyalists, if you believe their assurances, that's all right. It can be assumed that the main method of struggle against interventionists will be an ambush, hence the factor of air superiority (at least in terms of air strikes) would not be too great an advantage.

- The element of surprise. If the loyalists kept fighting capability and controllability, the element of surprise disappears and the invaders will lose their advantage, they will have to defend their bases and supply routes from, apparently, the superior numbers of the enemy.

- The quality of human material. Fighting qualities of the elite NATO commando, of course, higher than the average Libyan military, but in General is overrated. By and large this is a persistent myth, generated by the movies a La "Rambo" and so on. military fiction. In reality there are many confirmations. So, e.g., in the spring the farmers of the desert in Eastern Libya disarmed and sent home a group of special forces terrible English that English-speaking is still a cause for ridicule. We can recall examples, etc., e.g. the same Somalia, where armed and untrained old shit "gangsters" (in the sense of members of street gangs) gave shit to the American Marines (I think), being able to get even helicopters. Training and education is of course a major advantage, but there are factors, etc. e.g. what the visitor to a stressful environment for the local resident of the home, what for one outrageous extreme, which can be withstand only for a limited time, for the other normal mode, to which he was accustomed since childhood.

So, objectively, the possibilities of struggle have not been exhausted and, moreover, as we have seen, are not even the opportunities that a crime was not to use. How to behave like Libyans — it's show time. In fact, now in scales of Tripoli repeated the scenario that was done with Libya, taking advantage of the same weakness of the regime.

2. Patterns of intervention

Yes, the same scenario is repeated and repeated the same tactics, which we observed previously in the Libyan campaign.
As a result of poor organization of defence, the Libyan military were caught off guard again. Again captured. Sneva were executed. Again, media pocket aggressors blame others for your crimes.

(Approved: Abu Slim area in Tripoli August 25, 2011).
"A body is seen at a field hospital in the Abu Slim area in Tripoli August 25, 2011. More than 30 men believed to be fighters loyal to Muammar Gaddafi have been killed at a military encampment in central Tripoli and at least two were bound with plastic handcuffs, indicating they had been executed. Five of the dead were at the field hospital nearby, with one in an ambulance strapped to a gurney with an intravenous drip still in his arm."

A field hospital. Mayhem and corpses. Whose actually the bodies is not clear, because they are dressed in civilian clothes, and green bandages on the hands and on the head they could wind rebelski propagandists. But most likely, it was killed by the loyalists: patients and possibly hospital staff.

In addition, mention of the 30 presumably Gaddafi fighters, killed allegedly on the site of a military camp in Central Tripoli, and cu. at least 2 of them his hands were tied behind special plastic handcuffs (these, they say, consists in the equipment of Western forces), which indicates the penalty (the execution of prisoners of war, generally speaking, a war crime, but I, for the record, it is clear that none of the civilized liberators to care).

Now democracy has come to Tripoli

I, frankly, don't understand the motives of those soldiers who surrender now, after what they saw in the spring. Do they believe roskazni about the "hot soup"?

Such cruelty and its constant repetition is no accident. This practice follows from the Western military tradition and was used regularly in many wars. And almost always worked. Unlucky, perhaps, only Hitler: he was picked on unrequited, and those who were able to stand up for themselves. Since Hitler is a loser. And healed was another hero of the civilized world, like some Sherman.
About the continuity of tradition in detail in the book, which I have already quoted: Yakovlev N. N. War and peace American tradition of militarism in the United States. — M.: Education, 1989. — 128 p. Ought to give one more extract from there, Yes long time to type (and "digitize" the scanned text I cannot yet do).
See, also, the current doctrine of Shock and awe ("Shock and awe"). Deal with Libya, in fact, in accordance with its provisions.

And, of course, our "free and independent" journalists-combatants do their thing.
Bodies found in Tripoli hospital

Here they are again "found" the bodies and told the world about the "atrocities of Gaddafi". Exactly like it was in the spring, without unnecessary digressions and variations. Clean according to instructions. Spring them a similar lie perfectly got away with it.

Gaddafi has already blamed and branded. To prove? Sorry! Can't. Then began to powerfully shoot, we gotta go.
Yeah, so it works, Democracy™. Goebbels happy.


- The defense is organized inefficiently, and this advantage who have. Libyan government forces do not implement the existing potential.

- Maplejuice and liberalnaya in the war, and yet no one brought nothing good (historical examples of the darkness; and if we are talking about the revolution (I mean 1969), interested persons may contact, e.g., to Lenin's opinion on this issue).

- Foreign journalists hostile countries and organizations are combatants, with all the consequences. They should be shut down (I mean, direct, direct kill, though. [just kidding]). Technically, if you want, you can enter a visa regime, accreditation and declare the presence on the territory of the country without ACC. permission illegal, what to pursue; to justify all this is possible because the country is unsafe, and the proof can serve as a "resurgence of death or abduction of journalists", and the acceleration can be as much as help, if I don't get it. With the frankly unfriendly journalists can never be any punches, declaring them persona non grata.

To allow participation only of journalists, who observe the norms of decency (at least neutrality). At the slightest suspicion of bias and impropriety, to deny access. In this situation, better information blockade by broadcasting via a few sources, then the open information war is one-sided (even the Libyan private informational power, let me remind you, without hesitation destroyed). And the media is not going anywhere, will repost what others produce and, even a little, but to lose popularity, at the expense of the secondary, and trace. and profits.




Tags: war , NATO , Libya , Africa

RELATED MATERIALS: Politics and Geopolitics