Exclusive - Turkey, Qatar and the Return of ISIS to Libya

Militias allied to Libya's GNA fight rival groups in Tripoli in September 2018. (Reuters)
Militias allied to Libya's GNA fight rival groups in Tripoli in September 2018. (Reuters)
TT
20

Exclusive - Turkey, Qatar and the Return of ISIS to Libya

Militias allied to Libya's GNA fight rival groups in Tripoli in September 2018. (Reuters)
Militias allied to Libya's GNA fight rival groups in Tripoli in September 2018. (Reuters)

Are Turkey and Qatar openly backing terrorists in Libya? And if so, why has the international community remained silent over the issue? Why hasn’t it taken serious action to address the situation and resolve the Libyan crisis once and for all?

As it stands, the Libyan National Army (LNA) is trying to rid the country of terrorism and terrorists. Simultaneously, intense efforts are underway to bring in ISIS members, who have fled Syria and Iraq, into Libyan regions that are controlled by militias. International intelligence agencies have the evidence to prove this.

Turkish meddling

It is no secret that Turkey and Qatar are behind the developments in Libya. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who failed in spreading his Islamist agenda during the so-called Arab Spring, is now attempting to make up for his losses by meddling in Libya. It represents his last hope to revive his illusions. He believes that if extremists succeed in Libya, then their influence may spread to neighboring Tunisia in the west and Egypt in the east. Egypt, he believes, spoiled his plans in recent years when the people revolted in June 2013.

Developments in Libya have exposed Ankara’s supplying of weapons to militias in flagrant violation of the arms embargo imposed on the country since 2011. Intelligence agencies received information in the past two weeks of the arrival of several Ukrainian aircraft to Tripoli from Ankara loaded with weapons for the pro-Government of National Accord (GNA) militias.

The GNA, which has lost its aerial firepower, is in much need of aerial support. It is working tirelessly to bring in drones from Turkey in an attempt to cause as much damage as possible against the LNA. Ankara has so far supplied the GNA with eight attack drones, in violation of the arms embargo.

In addition to weapons, Turkey has sent intelligence agents to support the Tripoli-based militias and terrorist groups, revealed a Libyan military source. The LNA has obtained the names of 19 Turkish officers, whom Ankara has dispatched to Libya to operate the drones.

As for Qatar, militias it supports planted French-made Javelin rockets in LNA weapons storehouses to make it appear as if it was violating the embargo. Doha has also helped the militias purchase advanced weapons from Bulgaria and later smuggled them to Libya.

ISIS return

Are Turkey and Qatar facilitating the return of ISIS to Libya? It is no secret that extremists residing in Qatar, who are affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups, are active these days in bringing in terrorists from Iraq and Syria to Libya. While Doha exploits its transportation companies to that end, Erdogan has opened up his airports for these terrorists.

Libyan MP Ali al-Saeedi confirmed Turkey’s involvement in transporting terrorists to his country. He stressed that the extremists seek to fight the LNA during its operation against Tripoli.

Moreover, the ISIS affiliate in Libya recently reemerged in the country. The group released a video of Mahmoud al-Baraasi, known as Abu Musab al-Libi, the founder of the ISIS affiliate in Benghazi, vowing to wage attacks against the LNA. The video, which showed dozens of militants pledging allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was likely shot in the southern region of Sabha.

In May, ISIS claimed responsibility for an attack on an oilfield in the town of Zillah, some 650 kilometers southeast of the capital Tripoli. The attack was seen as an escalation against LNA-held regions in the South.

Returning to Erdogan, what does he really want from Libya?

He is seeking to make up for his political losses in Turkey and his country’s deteriorating economy. He is set to face even greater challenges should Washington impose sanctions on Ankara over its purchase of the S-400 missile defense system from Russia.

Erdogan is ultimately eyeing Libya’s oil and gas reserves to make up for his losses back home.

During the rule of late leader Moammar al-Gaddafi, Turkish companies operated in Libya and made billions of dollars in profits. This changed with Gaddafi’s ouster. Ankara managed to establish close ties with the GNA, allowing its companies to again regain a foothold and reap interests. This again came to halt, this time when the LNA launched its operation against Tripoli in April. The army therefore, became a major threat to Turkey’s economic and financial ambitions, pushing it firmly to side with Fayez al-Sarraj’s GNA against the advancing forces.

Any end in sight?

It is obvious that the situation in Libya is complicated, compounded even further by ISIS’ threat. The crisis is now an issue of global security and Europe must step up this time and compensate for the losses that led Libya down its destructive path in the first place. The international community must also take a stand and take decisive positions against Turkey and Qatar’s ambitions.

As for the United States, its stance remains vague, but the administration of Donald Trump is definitely opposed to terrorism. As it stands, however, it is currently distracted by the crisis with Iran.

At any rate, a resolution to the Libyan crisis is unlikely in the near future, which is the best environment for radicals and terrorists to thrive. Will the world therefore, sit idly by as ISIS aspires to open a new bloody chapter, this time on the shores of the Mediterranean?



Will Israel’s Interceptors Outlast Iran’s Missiles?

The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
TT
20

Will Israel’s Interceptors Outlast Iran’s Missiles?

The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)

Israel has a world-leading missile interception system but its bank of interceptors is finite. Now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them.

On Thursday, The New York Times reporters spoke to current and former Israeli officials about the strengths and weaknesses of Israeli air defense.

Aside from a potentially game-changing US intervention that shapes the fate of Iran’s nuclear program, two factors will help decide the length of the Israel-Iran war: Israel’s reserve of missile interceptors and Iran’s stock of long-range missiles.

Since Iran started retaliating against Israel’s fire last week, Israel’s world-leading air defense system has intercepted most incoming Iranian ballistic missiles, giving the Israeli Air Force more time to strike Iran without incurring major losses at home.

But now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them. That has raised questions within the Israeli security establishment about whether the country will run low on air defense missiles before Iran uses up its ballistic arsenal, according to eight current and former officials.

Already, Israel’s military has had to conserve its use of interceptors and is giving greater priority to the defense of densely populated areas and strategic infrastructure, according to the officials. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak more freely.

Interceptors are “not grains of rice,” said Brig. Gen. Ran Kochav, who commanded Israel’s air defense system until 2021 and still serves in the military reserve. “The number is finite.”

“If a missile is supposed to hit refineries in Haifa, it’s clear that it’s more important to intercept that missile than one that will hit the Negev desert,” General Kochav said.

Conserving Israel’s interceptors is “a challenge,” he added. “We can make it, but it’s a challenge.”

Asked for comment on the limits of its interceptor arsenal, the Israeli military said in a brief statement that it “is prepared and ready to handle any scenario and is operating defensively and offensively to remove threats to Israeli civilians.”

No Israeli official would divulge the number of interceptors left at Israel’s disposal; the revelation of such a closely guarded secret could give Iran a military advantage.

The answer will affect Israel’s ability to sustain a long-term, attritional war. The nature of the war will partly be decided by whether Trump decides to join Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear enrichment site at Fordo, in northern Iran, or whether Iran decides to give up its enrichment program to prevent such an intervention.

But the war’s endgame will also be shaped by how long both sides can sustain the damage to their economies, as well as the damage to national morale caused by a growing civilian death toll.

Israel relies on at least seven kinds of air defense. Most of them involve automated systems that use radar to detect incoming missiles and then provide officers with suggestions of how to intercept them.

Military officials have seconds to react to some short-range fire, but minutes to judge the response to long-range attacks. At times, the automated systems do not offer recommendations, leaving officers to make decisions on their own, General Kochav said.

The Arrow system intercepts long-range missiles at higher altitudes; the David’s Sling system intercepts them at lower altitudes; while the Iron Dome takes out shorter-range rockets, usually fired from Gaza, or the fragments of missiles already intercepted by other defense systems.

The United States has supplied at least two more defense systems, some of them fired from ships in the Mediterranean, and Israel is also trying out a new and relatively untested laser beam. Finally, fighter jets are deployed to shoot down slow-moving drones.

Some Israelis feel it is time to wrap up the war before Israel’s defenses are tested too severely.

At least 24 civilians have been killed by Iran’s strikes, and more than 800 have been injured. Some key infrastructure, including oil refineries in northern Israel, has been hit, along with civilian homes. A hospital in southern Israel was struck on Thursday morning.

Already high by Israeli standards, the death toll could rise sharply if the Israeli military is forced to limit its general use of interceptors in order to guarantee the long-term protection of a few strategic sites like the Dimona nuclear reactor in southern Israel or the military headquarters in Tel Aviv.

“Now that Israel has succeeded in striking most of its nuclear targets in Iran, Israel has a window of two or three days to declare the victory and end the war,” said Zohar Palti, a former senior officer in the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency.

“When planning how to defend Israel in future wars, no one envisaged a scenario in which we would be fighting on so many fronts and defending against so many rounds of ballistic missiles,” said Palti, who was for years involved in Israel’s defensive planning.

Others are confident that Israel will be able to solve the problem by destroying most of Iran’s missile launchers, preventing the Iranian military from using the stocks that it still has.

Iran has both fixed and mobile launchers, scattered across its territory, according to two Israeli officials. Some of its missiles are stored underground, where they are harder to destroy, while others are in aboveground caches, the officials said.

The Israeli military says it has destroyed more than a third of the launchers. Officials and experts say that has already limited the number of missiles that Iran can fire in a single attack.

US officials said Israel’s strikes against the launchers have decimated Iran’s ability to fire its missiles and hurt its ability to create large-scale barrages.

“The real issue is the number of launchers, more than the number of missiles,” said Asaf Cohen, a former Israeli commander who led the Iran department in Israel’s military intelligence directorate.

“The more of them that are hit, the harder it will be for them to launch barrages,” Cohen added. “If they realize they have a problem with launch capacity, they’ll shift to harassment: one or two missiles every so often, aimed at two different areas simultaneously.”

The New York Times