You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa: North
Libya's Disarmed Forces
2004-12-22
December 22, 2004: Libya is rivaling Syria for the position of having the worst military in the Arab world. Both countries' military equipment is obsolete and its personnel poorly trained, but Libya's military is among the most unprofessional and poorly-trained in the world.
I wonder if that's why Muammar can't get promoted? Good thing they don't have an up or out policy.
The Libyan Army currently consist of about 45,000 personnel. Out of those 45,000, about 40,000 are conscripts, leaving only 5,000 career officers and NCOs to lead the force. This low ratio of professional to conscript is almost unheard of, even among the poorer Arab states in North Africa. Libya's neighbor to the east, Egypt, also retains conscription, but about one third (around 30 percent) of its manpower is professional careerists. With such a shortage of capable leaders, it comes as little surprise that the Libyan military has performed so poorly in combat. Essentially, the Libyan army is a force of compulsory servicemen with little training led by understaffed, inadequate leaders. For all of the problems facing the country's military, this may be the biggest one.

Another major obstacle to any modernization that Libya might want to undertake is money. Libya's military budget is only about $1.3 billion annually. This is significantly larger than, say, Syria's which is only $858 million, but its certainly not enough to undertake massive modernization and repairs of equipment on a large scale. By contrast, Egypt's defense budget is around $2.4 billion a year, in addition to over a billion dollars in US military aid annually.
Posted by:Steve

#3  This may not be such a bad thing, and should be encouraged elsewhere. The Cold War created an unfortunate belief among third and fourth world nations that they actually *needed* a serious army. Dozens of little spats started to parody the great arms race, a terribly expensive waste of resources. So, except for arms manufacturers, who really needs or wants a heavily militarized Libya, Costa Rica, Paraguay or Mozambique? In fact, if you look at the Middle East, what countries really *need* an offensive army? What countries really need a world-class defense?
Posted by: Anonymoose   2004-12-22 7:26:04 PM  

#2  Also explains why Libyan forces had extremely poor (to put it mildly) performance in Chad.
Posted by: Pappy   2004-12-22 3:57:42 PM  

#1  Syrian forces given a border would over run Libya in 10 days.
Posted by: Shipman   2004-12-22 12:17:22 PM  

00:00