Is US Involvement in Mali War Really ‘Limited’?

Washington claims its only direct involvement in France’s military intervention in Mali includes the US Air Force flying in French soldiers and 124 tons of equipment. Beyond that, the Pentagon will only admit vaguely to “intelligence support.” Whether the US is flying drones in Mali, whether Special Operations teams are secretly conducting operations inside Mali, and whether the CIA is covertly involved – the Pentagon has no comment.

Danger Room:

[George Little, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman] wouldn’t discuss any unarmed U.S. surveillance drones reportedly considered for use over Mali at French request. Nor would he discuss the use of any special-operations forces in the conflict. Since 9/11, unconventional forces and surveillance aircraft have often been a vanguard for a direct U.S. role in campaigns against terrorist organizations that relocate to areas where they perceive they won’t be pursued.

But the emerging line from the Pentagon is that, for now at least, the Mali war isn’t going to be like that. U.S. troops are “not contributing” to a training effort for African forces that France wants to conduct ground operations in Mali, Little said. The Pentagon is still considering a French request for midair refueling aircraft. And outside a handful of Air Force communications specialists who helped direct traffic at an air base near Bamako, U.S. personnel haven’t been on the ground in Mali.

“Our support of French operations in Mali does not involve what is traditionally referred to as boots on the ground,” Little told reporters during a Tuesday briefing. There’s a caveat: “We don’t have any plans to put on the ground at this time in support of French operations.” And Little wasn’t speaking to any possible CIA involvement in Mali; it’s worth noting that the CIA has placed operatives on the ground in places where the U.S. has publicly stated it wouldn’t send ground troops.

There has already been some evidence that in the months preceding the French intervention, the US had been flying drones over Mali and secretly conducting special operations inside the country. They didn’t tell us about that; I’m not sure why they’d tell us whether it was going on now.

24 thoughts on “Is US Involvement in Mali War Really ‘Limited’?”

  1. How about US telling France.., go ahead we back u up.., but don't forget we share 50/50 as we did in Libya…, Balkan, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Mali…, and other countries in Africa.

  2. the US is now creating its new hole. This war will cause US government bankrupt. It had much better to improve US economical condition than involves in this war. Really this is much much better for the US people

  3. Pingback: Is US Involvement in Mali War Really ‘Limited’? ~ Antiwar « Stop Making Sense
  4. Pingback: ZGR 1/23/2013 | Zephyr Global Report

  6. How tiresome. US was al over sub-Saharan Africa since Bush administration in the name of fighting 'terrorism". In fact, training camps, equipment, airfields — all were funded by our Congress, no questions asked. They were part of the trained "rebels" in Libya, and still use uniforms that Qatar provided for Libyan"rebels".

    US, in the name of fighting AQIM (orderly bureaucratis naming conventions are not common in rag tag groups). trained soldiers from Mali in US, and they staged a coup, just to prevent elections. . After a little "consernation", the coup leadership is now getting all the help it needs. AQ in Maghreb is now the "bad guy". First use the "trainees" to stir up the trouble, then justify the attack to save the world. Remember Afganistan, Balkans, Chechnya, "Awakening" in Iraq, rebels in Darfur, etc. Now, that European population is in economic pickle it will approve everything. Terrorism, the gift that keeps on giving. And thus, investments in building the terrorists up, just to smash them down and rearrange a map of a region — is well worth it.

  7. I am not the greatest supporter of the US and the West in general but this situation is somewhat different. I feel like most of the comments above show no real understanding of the situation in Mali. The terrorists within Mali might not be a direct threat to the US but they are endangering local populations and have a very negative influence on the livelihoods of the people of that region (destroying National Heritage – the biggest source of revenue for local population – because they consider it blasphemous, applying extreme Sharia law on populations that have an extremely different view of Islam…). I can say with great conviction that the overwhelming majority of Malians Want foreign aid to deal with the extremists up north (as the Malian army is basically non-existent and under trained while the opposing side has access to advanced arms – from Lybia- and well trained soldiers). The past few months, everyone was extremely angry at the transitional government for not acting more aggressively towards the extremists who would have taken the capital were it not for France's intervention.

    While it is always good to question the US motives, it this situation they would act in accordance with the will of the local population.

    1. Give the US an inch and they take your arm off. Don't give Uncle Sam any "credit" for doing anything right. That's your first mistake. Because when you do they use that to excuse everything else they've done. Big mistake.

  8. of course the U.S. is covertly using drones. how else do you explain such precision air strikes. it ain't the french war planes.

  9. Pingback: Zephyr Global Report 1/24/2013 | Zephyr Global Report

  10. Beyond that, the Pentagon will only admit vaguely to “intelligence support.” Whether the US is flying drones in Mali, whether Special Operations teams are secretly conducting operations inside Mali, and whether the CIA is covertly involved – the Pentagon has no comment.

  11. Oh, and another thing, it's a Malian "problem" and neither the US nor France's to "answer" to. If they want them gone they'll get rid of them in their own way. You didn't see the US or France bombing anyone in Rwanda when over half a million were butchered, did you? Why? Simple really. There wasn't anything worth "stealing"!

  13. Unquestionably consider that that you said. Your favourite justification seemed to be on the net the simplest thing to understand of. I say to you, I definitely get annoyed while other folks consider concerns that they just do not recognise about. You managed to hit the nail upon the highest as smartly as defined out the entire thing with no need side-effects , other folks could take a signal. Will likely be again to get more. Thank you

  14. I’m not certain the place you’re getting your info, however good topic. I needs to spend a while studying much more or working out more. Thank you for magnificent information I used to be looking for this info for my mission.

  18. o the extent that communities divert law enforcement resources from violent crimes to illegal drug offenses, the risk of punishment for engaging in violent crime

  19. and probably little money in running a government section whose most important job is taking your call when you get drunk in Riyadh. You don't get a great job at an influence mill with that on your résumé. You do if Ambassador to Saudi Arabia means what doing the "important work" needed under current policies. "We have to protec

  20. e money in running a government section whose most important job is taking your call when you get drunk in Riyadh. You don't get a great job at an influence mill with that on your résumé. You do if Ambassador to Saudi Arabia means what doing the "important work" needed under current policies. "We have to

  21. asdrnment section whose most important job is taking your call when you get drunk in Riyadh. You don't get a great job at an influence mill with that on your résumé. You do if Ambassador to Saudi Arabia means what doing the "important work" needed under current policies. "We have to

  22. whose most important job is taking your call when you get drunk in Riyadh. You don't get a great job at an influence mill with that on your résumé. You do if Ambassador to Saudi Arabia means what doing the "important work

  24. thanks for sharing the information keep updating, looking for.Hope that you will continue with Nice to very useful info

  28. But we’re uniquely qualified to make up for that. Premise makes your words work with copywriting advice delivered directly from your WordPress interface for each type of landing page.

  34. Now for those that haven’t heard of HCG, and you’ve been struggling to drop the weight, then you are going to remember this day as the one that forever changed your life.

  45. I really loved the way you have written this article. It really helped me complete my project. Thanks for this great information. I'll share this with my friends also so that they can also get a hand in their project. Thanks a lot mate.

  48. Excellently written! Well directed and well comprehended article. Great thanks to the author for this. Very very thank you. I'll share this to others also.

Comments are closed.

viewpoint highlights
breaking news
© 2024 Antiwar.com. All rights reserved.
Antiwar.com Blog Stock Photos provided by our partner Depositphotos