While in the summertime of 2011, NATO bombs continued to fall on Tripoli, another kind of predator circulated around Libya's capital with safe shelter in a Manhattan townhouse. late published US Justice Department papers of 2026 uncover that Jeffrey Epstein, a disgraced financier and alleged Israeli intelligence agent, was besides a geopolitical vulture who wanted to feed on the remains of the Libyan state.
Epstein's private correspondence reveals his cold-blooded calculations aimed at circumventing global law and reaching for $32.4 billion in U.S. frozen Libyan assets. The tragedy of the Libyan people was presented as a commercial occasion.
On September 18, 2011, while the streets of Libya were inactive in chaos, a secret plan was set in fresh York City to take over the sovereign property of the country. In an email titled "New York – Optics Is Important" by Jeffrey Epstein, Greg Brown, he urged the financier to finance a high-level gathering with future Libyan leaders during the UN General Assembly. The goal was not to be insignificant; among them were Dr. Mohamed Magariaf, who was shortly to become head of the Libyan state, and his key advisor, Dr. Noah and Fadel Hshad.
Brown identified these 3 as people who will shortly have a mandate to negociate with global giants specified as Goldman Sachs. The prize was a staggering amount of $40 billion in Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) assets invested in Sub-Saharan Africa, in addition to amounts frozen in US banks. By offering “identification, management and monetisation” of these funds, Epstein's environment sought to position as final guardians of the post-war economy of Libya—the “play” that Brown promised would bring them hundreds of millions of dollars.
The operation was in fact a privatised intelligence action aimed at exploiting the vacuum in the Libyan state. Additional e-mails from the same period uncover that Epstein's grid did not operate in isolation, claiming that erstwhile agents of British MI6 and Israeli Mossad were “willing to help” in hunting Libyan billions. This mysterious alliance viewed $32.4 billion frozen funds in the US – as well as an additional $40 billion in an African wallet – not as a protected sovereign wealth, but as a "significant opportunity" to recover them under commission. utilizing the reputation of “intrepid”, which Greg Brown attributed to Epstein, the group sought to convince the emerging Libyan leadership that only their network of spies who became middlemen has the “power” to decision around the global finance network and recover the “stealed” assets of the country.
In order to justify this unprecedented financial intervention, Epstein's network based on a carefully constructed communicative which portrayed all Libyan assets abroad as being "stealed and mistrusted" by Gaddafi's family—a claim that was never proved 15 years later. This was a deliberate distortion; in fact, these assets were legal assets of Libyan state funds, invested in shares of blue chip companies specified as Pearson and global bank giants. In presenting the diversified state portfolio as "a proceeds from crime", Epstein's people and their intelligence associates sought a loophole to circumvent UN sanctions and to collect a "conditional fee" from assets belonging to the Libyan people – not 1 family.
This strategy of criminalising state assets was peculiarly aggressive throughout the African continent. During the 2011 chaos, persistent rumors (often fueled by Western interviews) portrayed the Libyan Investment Wallet in Africa as Gaddafi's individual corruption fund, alternatively than a legal improvement instrument.
This communicative reached an apogee with accusations against erstwhile South Africa president Jacob Zuma. There have been claims that Zuma received $30 million in cash (and even supplies of gold and diamonds) from the late Libyan leader for “storage”. Although Zuma repeatedly and sarcastically denied these reports, pointing out that if he had owned this property, he would not have been faced with judicial costs, the “spectre story” of Gaddafi’s “bilion” fulfilled an crucial role. It allowed hidden players, specified as Epstein, to treat continent's sovereign investment as a "missing treasure" to be taken over alternatively than as state assets that should stay protected by global law.
Epstein's "New York Optics" game was a real threat to the effort to formalise the curatela over Libya's sovereign institutions before it could be rebuilt. By targeting those liable for negotiating the Goldman Sachs settlement, Epstein wanted to make a precedent in which private, irresponsible intermediaries will deal with the settlement of the country's legal disputes.
This was a direct attack on Libya's financial sovereignty, following an attack on its political sovereignty by the NATO military invasion. While the UN mission (UNSMIL) and the global community have spoken of a "transition to democracy", Epstein's papers uncover a parallel reality: a race to keep LIA a black box controlled by Manhattan brokers. This interference most likely contributed to many years of judicial processes and interior divisions that effectively paralyzed billions of dollars of state property – leaving the Libyan people alone, paying the price for the "rebuilding" process, which was designed by predators for predators.
Perhaps the most devastating accusation of this intervention is that it was based on a financial phantom. For 15 years, the global community has been rallied by stories about Gaddafi's "hidden trillions" – a communicative that Epstein's network has eagerly utilized to justify its "recovery" services. However, the reality of 2026 remains brutal: not a single individual bank account or a secret box belonging to the deceased Muammar Gaddafi was always found. Billions frozen in the West are and have always been documented organization assets of LIA. LIA was created in 2006 to, among another things, invest oil money for mediocre families in the country.
Ironically, while the West portrayed the late Gaddafi as a man gathering the nation's wealth, past shows a very different intention. As early as February 2009, Gaddafi publically supported the extremist plan to destruct the state's administrative corruption by direct distribution of oil wealth among the Libyan people. He argued that wealth should fall into the hands of citizens to manage their own affairs – this proposal met with strong opposition from the bureaucracy itself, which later collapsed in 2011. Presenting this proponent of wealth distribution as a specified thief, Epstein's associates created the essential moral shield to attack sovereign state capital. They replaced the plan to strengthen the nation's position with a plan of private plunder.
The predatory interests of characters like Epstein were only the tip of a much larger iceberg in the scenery after 2011, defined by systematic state-sponsored looting. While the global community continued to focus publically on "frozen" abroad assets, the reality in the country was characterised by a violent failure of national wealth. According to reports from the Libyan Audit Office and various transparency supervisors, it is estimated that since the collapse of the state in 2011, the black gap of corruption, organization waste and direct theft has disappeared from $100 to $200 billion.
This corruption is not only an interior failure; it is driven by a deficiency of supervision that enabled the West to "liberate" Libya, and which Epstein attempted to usage in his "private recovery" programmes. The central Bank of Libya and its infamous accreditation strategy are the main driving force behind this large-scale theft. Experts say that this mechanics was utilized to bring out billions of dollars through fraudulent imports – where currency is secured at authoritative rates for the supply of "goods" that frequently do not scope at all. The scale of this drainage is stunning: in just 13 weeks in 2021, accreditations were issued worth $2.5 billion, of which a immense condition simply disappeared in the grey area.
History shows that Libya, like many developing countries, faced serious corruption problems before 2011. However, the subsequent power vacuum and constitutional fragmentation turned this problem into a systemic disaster. In February 2026, according to the Transparency global Corruption Perception Index, Libya ranked 177th in 182 countries. With a consequence of just 13 out of 100, Libya is now officially recognised as 1 of the six most corrupt countries in the planet active in the war, alongside countries specified as Syria and Yemen. This transformation from a functioning, albeit defective, state to a global outsider in the area of corruption is the eventual proof of the failure of the 2011 intervention. The juice that Epstein's surroundings attempted to extract led to the dissolution of the country's institutions, leaving the Libyan people in 1 of the most illegal financial environments in modern history.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are simply the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the RT.
Translated by Google Translator
source:https://www.rt.com/africa/634484-dia-nato-invasion-and-epstein/
