Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1068582437-scaled

Libya has been Flooded with Mercenaries and Private Military Companies

Russian private security firm Wagner has a significant presence in Libya and Vladimir Putin can keep his hands clean.

Analysis | Middle East

The war in Libya is one that might have ended a long time ago, if not for the intervention by a variety of actors, including foreign states and, all too often, their proxies, including private military companies (PMC) and outright mercenaries, who are fighting for both sides and enabling a war that might already have ended to continue, with all the attendant suffering for the Libyan people.

Increasingly, it resembles a real life version of Abbot and Costello’s Who’s on First comedy routine.

Since last fall, Russia’s Wagner Group has been supporting renegade General Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army, which is bankrolled by both Saudi Arabia and the UAE — the same countries that are using mercenaries and PMCs in Yemen — as well as France, Egypt, and Jordan. Russia’s main goal is to secure port and energy access, regardless of how many Libyans have to die to accomplish it. Russia has reportedly flown hundreds of fighters to Libya, most likely via Cham Wings airlines from Damascus to Benghazi. Wagner fighters have reportedly supported Haftar’s assault on the Libyan capitol of Tripoli.

It is no secret why Russia uses companies like Wagner. Using PMCs allows Putin to lower the political costs of achieving his goals in North Africa. Using such groups avoids the political scrutiny that comes with the deployment of conventional armed forces. When PMCs increase Russia’s prestige abroad, the state can acknowledge and take credit for their actions; when they do not, the state can distance themselves.

Over 30 Russians have died fighting there. The first of those casualties started arriving back in Russia last fall. As a reflection of the sensitivity surrounding those killed, neither the Russian government nor Wagner itself has formally notified the families of any combat deaths. This is contrary to Wagner’s typical practice, which is to send death certificates and any military decorations to the relatives of combatants who are killed. Last month it was reported that Russian contractors fighting in Libya and Syria had received treatment at an elite St. Petersburg hospital owned by individuals close to Putin.

According to an analysis by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Wagner’s forces include drone jamming capabilities and snipers on the frontlines who have killed forces associated with the Government of National Accord (GNA), as Libya’s internationally recognized government is known.

The analysis also notes that Wagner poses command and control problems:

Their behavior does not fit within standard Western military definitions. Their activities overlap between contractors, mercenaries, and other categories—there is no clear separation between military and private like one sees in the West. There is also no clear policy or legal framework for Moscow’s actions; technically, PMCs are illegal even under Russian law.

… One must also keep in mind that Russian PMCs are not entirely controlled by Putin—the interests of the various cronies and oligarchs in his circle can differ from his own, since they are chiefly interested in money. For instance, Yevgeny Prigozhin, owner of the Wagner PMC firm, is mainly focused on Libya’s energy resources.

Last month, it was reported that two other Russian companies, including Moran Security Group, have joined Wagner in supply mercenaries to fight in Libya.

Russia has been coy about Wagner in Libya. President Putin recently said, “If there are Russian citizens there, they do not represent the interests of the Russian state and do not receive money from the Russian state.” But, Wagner is, at least theoretically, considered a private military company acting at its own peril and risk, and also at its own interest. So officially it is not representing the Russian state.

The presence of Wagner has made some difference on the battlefield, causing the Libyan government to rely even more on Turkey, its only foreign military sponsor. Just like Russia, Turkey also has economic motives. Ankara signed a deal in November with the GNA that gives it exploration rights to offshore oil and gas fields in the Mediterranean.

Turkey, as part of its support for the GNA, has reportedly sent at least two thousand fighters mainly from the Free Syria Army (FSA), from Syria to Libya to join pro-government forces. The FSA is reportedly paying a salary of US$2,000 a month to each fighter. The FSA is reportedly not just sending fighters but also civilians who are poor and willing to go. The Turkish mercenaries have also suffered casualties.

Last December it was reported that Pro-Turkey armed factions in northern Syria opened four centers in the city of Afrin to attract militants to register and to go to Libya.

Ironically, Abdel Hakim Belhadj, now a Libyan politician and military leader, but formerly head of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which was banned worldwide as an affiliate of al-Qaeda, is reportedly helping Turkey send fighters to Libya, primarily flying fighters into Libya from Turkey, via the Libyan Wings Aviation Company.

But Syrians are hardly the only fighters to be imported. Recently, Sudanese protested in Khartoum, “alleging that their relatives had been recruited by UAE firm Black Shield as security guards but were despatched to war-zones in Libya and Yemen.”

This has actually been going on for some time. The United Nations said in a December report that five Sudanese and four Chadian armed groups had contributed thousands of combatants to fight in Libya.

A separate U.N. report on Sudan released in January also found that many Arabs from the conflict-wracked region of Darfur were fighting as “individual mercenaries” alongside Libyan warring parties.

Although it is difficult to be definitive about all the African mercenaries, most of them seem to be supporting Haftar.

Some think that their involvement could be destabilizing for their home countries in the future. An article published last December by Turkish state-backed international news outlet TRT World noted, “Years ago, officials in Khartoum raised alarm over the Minnawi faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement’s participation in Libya’s conflict because of concerns about what this group could potentially do after returning to Darfur.”


Analysis | Middle East
Kim Jong Un
Top photo credit: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visits the construction site of the Ragwon County Offshore Farm, North Korea July 13, 2025. KCNA via REUTERS

Kim Jong Un is nuking up and playing hard to get

Asia-Pacific

President Donald Trump’s second term has so far been a series of “shock and awe” campaigns both at home and abroad. But so far has left North Korea untouched even as it arms for the future.

The president dramatically broke with precedent during his first term, holding two summits as well as a brief meeting at the Demilitarized Zone with the North’s Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un. Unfortunately, engagement crashed and burned in Hanoi. The DPRK then pulled back, essentially severing contact with both the U.S. and South Korea.

keep readingShow less
Why new CENTCOM chief Brad Cooper is as wrong as the old one
Top photo credit: U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Brad Cooper speaks to guests at the IISS Manama Dialogue in Manama, Bahrain, November 17, 2023. REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed

Why new CENTCOM chief Brad Cooper is as wrong as the old one

Middle East

If accounts of President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Iranian nuclear facilities this past month are to be believed, the president’s initial impulse to stay out of the Israel-Iran conflict failed to survive the prodding of hawkish advisers, chiefly U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) chief Michael Kurilla.

With Kurilla, an Iran hawk and staunch ally of both the Israeli government and erstwhile national security adviser Mike Waltz, set to leave office this summer, advocates of a more restrained foreign policy may understandably feel like they are out of the woods.

keep readingShow less
Putin Trump
Top photo credit: Vladimir Putin (Office of the President of the Russian Federation) and Donald Trump (US Southern Command photo)

How Trump's 50-day deadline threat against Putin will backfire

Europe

In the first six months of his second term, President Donald Trump has demonstrated his love for three things: deals, tariffs, and ultimatums.

He got to combine these passions during his Oval Office meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Monday. Only moments after the two leaders announced a new plan to get military aid to Ukraine, Trump issued an ominous 50-day deadline for Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire. “We're going to be doing secondary tariffs if we don't have a deal within 50 days,” Trump told the assembled reporters.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.