An HPR column about things you don’t really understand, and it’s just too late to ask.
Benghazi Embassy Attack edition
With headlines like “Hillary’s Legendary Lies,” Urban Dictionary defining Benghazi as a verb, and days long congressional hearings on the topic, it can be easy to get caught up. But before you accept Benghazi as a verb, you should understand how it became a term in the Urban Dictionary and not just a little-known city in Libya. Here’s how it happened.
The What:
On September 11, 2012, at least 60 persons armed with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades attacked and set fire to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The United States has one embassy in Libya—located in the capital city of Tripoli—and many consulates, which serve as satellite offices and are located in other major cities, such as Benghazi. During the attack, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed. Two men believed to be involved were later captured by U.S. special forces. Ahmed Abu Khatallah, who helped orchestrate the attack, was captured in 2014 and was tried in the United States in October 2017. He was convicted on four counts, including terrorism, and faces life in prison. Mustafa Al-Imam was captured in October 2017 and has not yet been tried.
The Political Climate:
Muammar Gaddafi took over as Libya’s head of state after leading the September Revolution of 1969. Protests against his long and nationalistic rule broke out in February of 2011 leading to a nine month rebellion that ended in his public murder, without trial, and with the National Transitional Council (NTC) governing Libya. The country was subsequently plagued by local militias, which refused to recognize the autonomy of the NTC or the General National Congress, which was elected in June of 2012. This unrest and instability in Libya created an environment conducive to terrorism.
The Senate Intelligence Committee report after the attack on the U.S. Consulate included excerpts from prior reports made by the Pentagon, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the U.S. Africa Command that detailed the growing terrorist threat in the region. A July 6, 2012 CIA report stated that “Al-Qa’ida-affiliated groups and associates are exploiting the permissive security environment in Libya to enhance their capabilities and expand their operational reach.” A report by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff on August 19, 2012, just three weeks before the attack, reported that “there are no near-term prospects for a reversal in the trend towards a terrorist safe haven in Libya, and areas of eastern Libya will likely become a broader safe haven by the end of 2012.” A U.S. Africa Command report dated September 5, 2012, read: “The threat to Western and U.S. interests and individuals remains high, particularly in northeast-Libya.”
The Reason:
Originally, information shared with the public stated that the attack was a response from an angry mob to the anti-Islam film “Innocence of Muslims.” These initial, misinformed intelligence reports referred to the existence of a mob outside of the mission before the attack. This was disproven a week later after the FBI and CIA reviewed video footage, but a correction to the official statement came only on September 24. It is now believed that the attack, although not extensively premeditated, was carried out by members of at least four different terrorist organizations.
The Players:
Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya who was killed during the attack, was well aware of the growing dangers in Benghazi according to the Senate Intelligence Committee report. Stephens requested increased security for U.S. facilities and personnel in Libya at least three times between the months of June and September of 2012. No significant action was taken by the State Department in response to these concerns, so security at the mission remained undersupplied and understaffed.
Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, which is why her name is so often associated with this event. Because she handled U.S. foreign affairs and relations, she was criticized for not effectively responding to reports detailing the rebel activity in Benghazi. The Senate Intelligence Committee investigation report states that “given these developments [the state of Libya as a safe haven for terrorists] and the available intelligence at the time, the Committee believes the State Department should have recognized the need to increase security to a level commensurate with the threat, or suspend operations in Benghazi.”
It was during this investigation that it came to light that Clinton had been using her personal email instead of a more secure government email account to send and receive information related to her work as Secretary of State. This prompted an entirely separate investigation, after which Clinton was found to be extremely careless, but not chargeable with any criminal offense.
The Sides:
The debate over who should shoulder the blame for Benghazi fell along party lines. Although those who place much of the blame on Hillary Clinton are primarily within the Republican Party, the official report issued by the Republican-headed House Select Committee found no specific fault with Clinton. It instead outlined broader problems with role definition within the State Department leading to negligence and with the delayed communication by intelligence agencies. Hillary Clinton emphasized in her 11-hour congressional testimony that she was not responsible for specific security requests such as those made by Ambassador Stevens, and the committee agreed. Two House Republicans, Mike Pompeo of Kansas and Jim Jordan of Ohio, felt that the committee report was not exhaustive and released an addendum outlining their beliefs about her role in the situation. It reads in part, “in August 2012 Secretary Clinton had the last, clear chance to provide adequate protection or, failing that, to close the facility and pull our people out. She did neither.”
House Democrats released a report ahead of the one released by the House Select Committee, which aimed to rebut what they thought the report would say. Section titles include “Terrorists Caused Attacks in Benghazi, Not U.S. Foreign Policy” and “Secretary Clinton Was Active and Engaged.” The report finds fault with popular Republican portrayal of the incident, but otherwise mostly echoes the findings of Republican-led House Select Committee. It takes issue with the security presence governed by the State Department and recommends changes to ensure a situation like this is never again caused by administrative failure.
The Now:
This scandal shadowed Hillary Clinton throughout her career all the way to her 2016 loss, yet six years after the Benghazi attack, the event has faded into an overused colloquialism.
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons/U.S. Department of State