Missiles missing from warehouses in Libya |

Missiles missing from warehouses in Libya

TRIPOLI, Libya — Hundreds, if not thousands, of surface-to-air missiles and other weaponry have disappeared from warehouses since Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s regime collapsed, a weapons expert told the Tribune-Review.

“If these weapons fall into the wrong hands, all of North Africa will be a no-fly zone,” said Peter Bouckaert, Human Rights Watch’s emergencies director.

Bouckaert said many of the missing Russian-made missiles are of the “most advanced” type.

He showed Western journalists several of the warehouses on Wednesday.

A senior analyst at the RAND Corp., a Washington-based think tank, described the missiles as “sort of the ideal weapon for terrorists.”

Besides the surface-to-air missiles, or SAMs, the missing weaponry apparently includes anti-tank and anti-personnel landmines, C4 plastic explosives and various mortars and shells.

While SAMs are an obvious threat to military and civilian aircraft, the other missing items have been deadly when turned into car bombs, roadside bombs and other improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, by insurgents and terrorists.

Both have been used effectively against U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as against military and civilian targets worldwide.

Unmarked ammo and weapons warehouses are scattered around this capital, which rebels seized two weeks ago.

Much of the war materiel in those warehouses was moved from Libyan military bases to the nondescript depots, to protect it from NATO airstrikes during the past six months of the anti-Gadhafi rebellion.

Of three such depots examined on Wednesday by the Tribune-Review, two were unsecured and unguarded.

At the third, laborers from the now-ruling National Transitional Council hastily removed boxes filled with landmines.

The three warehouses were located near the bombed and abandoned Yarmouk military base.

The transitional council is a collection of anti-Gadhafi forces. Western governments have expressed concern that its ranks may include extremist elements.

Gadhafi’s military closely guarded the location of its weapons and ammo depots. As loyalist forces fled the capital two weeks ago, those sites were left unguarded and open to looting.

Bouckaert estimated that Gadhafi’s military possessed “as many as 20,000” SAMs before fighting erupted in February.

He said stockpiles of missiles, mortar shells and other weaponry at several warehouses in the capital were undisturbed as recently as three or four days ago.

Determining how many SAMs have disappeared is impossible. Yet a packing document found in one warehouse provides an idea.

Each two-missile crate inside the warehouse was marked with the number of crates in the original shipment; all apparently had been emptied of their contents.

“This is number 84 of 241 boxes … that means 482 missiles,” Bouckaert said, examining a consignment he said was shipped to Libya from Russia in 2004.

“It says right here, ‘Central Moscow to the Central Organization of Research (and) Industry, Libya,'” he said, reading a crate’s shipping label.

Numerous other crates in the warehouse contained different shipment numbers — suggesting they were part of a much larger supply at one time.

The Russian-made missiles are thought to range from older SA-7s to more modern and sophisticated SA-24s.

Commander Wendy Snyder, a Defense Department spokeswoman, said she was aware of the reports of missing weaponry but could not comment.

The missing missiles should alarm U.S. officials, said Frederic Wehrey, a senior policy analyst at the RAND Corp.

“They’re sort of the ideal weapon for terrorists,” Wehrey said. “They’re portable, easy to conceal, hard to detect and relatively easy to use.”

He described them as a “mass-casualty weapon” capable of bringing down an airliner. Civilian airliners would be “particularly vulnerable,” he said.

In 2002, terrorists fired two SA-7s at an Israeli airliner in Mombasa, Kenya, but missed.

“If they had one of these SA -24s, they would not have missed,” Bouckaert said. “That plane would have gone down.”

The Russian-made SA-24 can be mounted on a vehicle or shoulder-fired with the proper triggering mechanism.

Bouckaert said it is “on the top wish-list of Iran.”

In the late 1980s the United States provided thousands of shoulder-fired Stinger missiles to insurgents in Afghanistan during the then-Soviet Union’s invasion of that country. The Stinger’s effectiveness against Russian jet fighters and helicopters turned the tide of that war.

After the Soviet withdrawal, U.S. officials spent millions of dollars buying back Stingers from Afghan jihadis.

More recently, the United States worked to block Russia’s proposed sale of SAMs to Venezuela, partly out of fear that the missiles would fall into Iranian hands, Bouckaert said.

“I am sure Iran is willing to pay a hell of a lot of money to get a couple of these missiles … so they can copy the technology,” he said.

Staff writer Jeremy Boren contributed to this report.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.