Prince Under Investigation

https://theintercept.com/2021/10/30/fbi-libya-erik-prince-weapons-trafficking/

Erik Prince is once more in the news. His star has faded somewhat, especially when compared to his days of fame and notoriety during the Bush and Trump administrations. And yet he hasn't gone away.

Publications like The Intercept and others associated with the Democratic Party want to paint him as a rogue – a wild card, part of the crew of comic book characters associated with Trump. But I've never quite bought into that narrative. Prince is something more, and has deep connections to US intelligence, the military, and probably other elements in the corporate world – elements that overlap with the aforementioned sectors. You can reach a place where these elements begin to merge.

His greatest domestic enemies are to be found in the DNC, the bureaucracy of the State Department, and probably within elements of the FBI. These are all powerful institutions and part of the Establishment but they only represent a part of it. And it must be understood that even in the most harmonious times, the Establishment contains factions at war. And at times like these, it's almost a state of civil war. For some of these factions, Prince remains an important asset. He's not a rogue.

Returning to The Intercept article, the fact that Prince was working with Jordan – one of America's closest allies in the Middle East, to support Libyan general Khalifa Haftar is no surprise, and I don't believe it's a rogue action – at least not anymore than the reality that many CIA actions are 'off-books' or officially 'illegal'. That's the nature of that kind of work. The praetorians of the American Empire will act regardless of what the official policy is or whether or not such actions are in defiance of bureaucratic procedure. Prince is not one of these, but he's backed by some of them.

With regard to Haftar, I've been writing about him for years. Officially the US supported the UN-sponsored Tripoli government, the Government of National Accord (GNA) which in the spring of 2021 merged with the Tobruk-based 'rebel' government to form the new Government of National Unity – officially ending the Libyan Civil War which had raged since the 2011 overthrow of Qaddafi.

During the course of the Civil War, while the US diplomatically supported the Tripoli government, in reality there was considerable support given to the LNA forces of Khalifa Haftar – who holds US citizenship and lived in the Washington DC area for years as an Anti-Qaddafi dissident and CIA asset.

It's always been clear to me that the relationship has not changed. Haftar (or in some cases Hifter) re-entered the Libyan theatre in 2011 and then assumed the role of warlord during the Civil War. He was backed in part by Russia, a point repeatedly emphasized in US media and even US-friendly international outlets. However, these same journalists usually neglected to report that he was also backed by US allies Egypt, Israel, and other nations like France. Everything pointed to the fact that the US was actually supportive of him and had little interest in backing the official Tripoli government.

The fact that Jordan, alongside figures like Erik Prince would be involved in support for Haftar is not only unsurprising but is to be expected. The Intercept's reporting doesn't really contextualise the story. It's more of a hit piece meant to tie Prince's 2019 support for Haftar with either his own illegality or the illegality surrounding the Trump administration – of which his sister Betsy DeVos was a cabinet member. With Prince, there's plenty to criticize (he's a morally repugnant figure) but not if its lets the US government (and the Obama administration for that matter) off the hook.

Haftar's subsequent failures in the field may have turned away some US support for him. Had he won, captured Tripoli, and set up a government, the US might have publically condemned him and yet quietly accepted his rule and over time forge official ties with him. That would be in keeping with what has been seen elsewhere.

But he failed and then forces once allied with him invaded Chad – a confusing episode as the Chadian government had supported Haftar. But the Libya-based Chadian rebel's (FACT) relationship with Haftar has been rocky at best – sometimes allies, sometimes enemies. It's unclear if Haftar (who fought against Chad in the 1980's) is blamed in part for this episode (which resulted in the death of the Chadian president Idriss Deby on the battlefield in April 2021) or if the blame is limited to his failure to govern the area of Libya under his responsibility.

With the new government and the peace deal, Washington may have finally turned a page – all the more with Biden now in office. With the new arrangement and the fact that Haftar has now become an international pariah (and is seemingly doing what he can to upset or subvert the new unity government), it may be that Washington is finally washing its hands of him.

That being the case, some elements within the US government, in organisations such as the FBI for example would take the policy-shift as a green light to go after men who have been on their radar – figures like Erik Prince.

The question is this – Does Prince still have enough pull and enough friends to beat the indictments and circumvent the Justice Department? I'm guessing the answer is 'yes', but time will tell. He wouldn't be the first to be abandoned by one-time allies. It depends how dangerous he is, should he talk or cut a deal. I think Prince is probably too big a figure for that and the scandal would be too great. I think he'll be investigated but it's likely he'll escape prosecution as evidence and witnesses will be blocked in the name of national security. It's not uncommon for such investigations to fizzle and be reduced to little more than token attempts at 'justice'.

Once again, The Intercept piece was meant to attack Prince, not to reveal US machinations. In keeping with the Intercept's Sanders-like role, its reporting is oriented toward the Left, but its task is to bring these elements into the DNC. It's an unofficial but fairly obvious policy. At one time the outlet was oppositional – it came into being during the Obama presidency and in the aftermath of the Edward Snowden revelations. The shift back to mainstream-oriented political reporting is a compromise made by many on the Left to oppose Trump. The crisis of his election moved many in such oppositional and alternative journalistic organisations to make compromises as (in their view) the stakes were too high, the situation too dire. and the threat too great.

The Intercept along with some other alternative media publications shifted gears and went down a different road. The original model had only lasted a few years. New people were brought in and others (like Glenn Greenwald) departed. Sadly in the case of Greenwald, he has increasingly moved in a more radically libertarian direction, leading him to make common cause (or at least to run in the same circles) as the Trumpites. Trump was (and is) one of the most deplorable to figures to enter the US political stage and yet at the same time the behaviour of the mainstream media during his tenure became increasingly problematic and politically driven. Lies abounded and yet some justified them in the desire to take down the evil Trump. But when they did so, they became like the liars who surround and support Trump and they lost their moral standing.

That's what happened to The Intercept and many other outlets. Half-truths, deliberate miscontextualisations and obfuscations are lies too. They may be less egregious than the blatant disinformation propagated by the likes of FOX, but it doesn't mean that mainstream outlets and increasingly The Intercept are somehow more truthful. It just means their deceptions are more subtle and come in a more credible and attractive packaging.

With regard to Prince, it's obvious that elements within the US Establishment want to take him down. He has connections to some Establishment factions and he has powerful backers, but he's also made his share of enemies and his associations with Trumpism have only amplified their desire to see him eliminated from the circles of power.

It should offend anyone of moral concern and conscience that this evil man walks free in the world. It's far more troubling that he views himself and his life-mission in Christian terms and at one time he received support and attention from the Evangelical community. If he's indicted and imprisoned, it will not be a cause to weep. But it's no cause to celebrate either. The moral narrative at that point will be seized by elements within the US Establishment and law enforcement. They have no moral standing either. There are no 'good guys' in this scenario.

Our task as Christians is simply to watch, learn, discern, and proclaim the truth – weighing what we know with what is taught in the Scriptures and proclaiming it.