« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Blackwater Well-Positioned to Stymie Official Inquiries, Regulation
Blackwater doesn't just operate in a legal black hole in Iraq. The private-security firm has grown expert in protecting itself from oversight and regulation in Washington as well.
Over at POGO, Nick Schwellenbach connects Blackwater to House oversight committee chairman Henry Waxman's investigation of Howard Krongard, the State Department inspector general whom Waxman alleges stifled numerous corruption probes in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of those probes involved an alleged Blackwater scheme to funnel weapons into Iraq, and, Schwellenbach notes, it wouldn't be so difficult for Blackwater to know how to get around an IG probe. Its parent company, the Prince Group, recently hired the Pentagon's ex-IG, Joseph Schmitz.
Indeed, all throughout Blackwater are ways to get around government oversight: Cofer Black, the company's vice chairman, used to work at the CIA with A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard, formerly CIA's executive director. And, yes, you read that last name correctly: Krongard of CIA is the brother of the current State Department IG. Think Schmitz or Black knew which numbers to call in the event of a State inquiry into the company?
That's not all.
Roll Call reports (sub. req.) that Blackwater and its private-security colleagues are investing heavily in lobbyists to prevent Congress from passing legislation regulating their war-zone activities.
“It’s a little bit frustrating because there are 15 different committees that have jurisdiction over what our industry does,” said Doug Brooks, president of the International Peace Operations Association, whose members include Blackwater and DynCorp. “We are pulled in all these different directions.”
The private-security industry is lining up behind a bill by Rep. David Price (D-NC) to put their firms under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, thereby creating a more coherent legal framework for their operations. Apparently it wouldn't be such an onerous one. Here's how Blackwater lobbyist Alan Chvotkin described competing legislation backed by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), which would "would require more transparency in the contracts":
“Our disagreements with Mrs. Schakowsky are over the amount of detail that she would like to see reported, versus our view of what’s useful information to policy makers,” Chvotkin said. “She wants compensation levels and hours worked, those kinds of things will change with every shift, every day, and in our view it doesn’t help a policy maker to know that.”
Lobbyists for private-security companies describe regulating Blackwater and its ilk as having "life or death consequences" in places like Iraq. Somehow, though, they may not have to worry.
Comments (19)
mbbsdphil wrote on September 19, 2007 12:20 PM:Bush privatized the military and GOP-ized the government. Now the GOP has its own private army and air force, with its own army of lobbyists and bought-and-paid for Congress Critters. I Bush's experience flying TANG jets over Texas and Alabama may have practical value after all. You never know where protesters who've read their Constitutions may show up.
bob wrote on September 19, 2007 12:57 PM:Expanding MEJA, which basically applies to civilians on certain American military installations abroad (i.e. spouses and contractors), is a good way to bring some accountability to military contractors and bring more of them into the U.S. legal system, but it requires more prosecutors and resources in order to be effectively enforced, and both are sorely lacking right now.
You have to have the funds to effectively investigate these cases abroad in order to prosecute them. If any bill doesn't include dedicated funds, and preferably dedicated staff and prosecutors, it isn't going to do any good.
jrcjr wrote on September 19, 2007 1:01 PM:"...all throughout Blackwater are ways to get around government oversight"
Blackwater's very existence is a way to get around govt oversight. Its use by the Pentagon keeps Congress out of the mix, and keeps military activities out of public view. No one knows where the Pentagon spends its money, but Congress keeps tabs on how the Army is used.
It costs, what, 5 times as much to hire Blackwater instead of using troops? Why else (aside from the obvious profit potential) would they ever be used?
asphyximorphis wrote on September 19, 2007 1:54 PM:" “She wants compensation levels and hours worked, those kinds of things will change with every shift, every day, and in our view it doesn’t help a policy maker to know that.”
Lobbyists for private-security companies describe regulating Blackwater and its ilk as having "life or death consequences" in places like Iraq."
Oh, kinda like our death by spreadsheet health care coverage in this country? The NERVE of those who just want to have their cake and eat it too!!!..Oh wait, I forgot, it's okay if you're a republican or a wholesale mercenary pentagon contractor.
And what employer does NOT want to know what billable hours their contractors work? Mocking basic fiscal oversight is no way to earn yourself further contracts..that is, unless you're a republican or a wholesale mercenary pentagon contractor.
asphyximorphis wrote on September 19, 2007 1:57 PM:" “She wants compensation levels and hours worked, those kinds of things will change with every shift, every day, and in our view it doesn’t help a policy maker to know that.”
Lobbyists for private-security companies describe regulating Blackwater and its ilk as having "life or death consequences" in places like Iraq."
Oh, kinda like our death by spreadsheet health care coverage in this country? The NERVE of those who just want to have their cake and eat it too!!!..Oh wait, I forgot, it's okay if you're a republican or a wholesale mercenary pentagon contractor.
And what employer does NOT want to know what billable hours their contractors work? Mocking basic fiscal oversight is no way to earn yourself further contracts..that is, unless you're a republican or a wholesale mercenary pentagon contractor.
SPENCER wrote on September 19, 2007 2:24 PM:Before he leaves office, Bush/Cheney will use Blackwater and other mercenaries in Iran, Somalia, and other countries, if they haven't already.
It's a great way to circumvent Congress with no oversight, too.
If Congress doesn't investigate this, we are going to be at war all around the world.
NoOneYouKnow wrote on September 19, 2007 2:54 PM:The "International Peace Operations Association." That's priceless. For some particularly hair-raising and bizarre reading, check out the family history of new Blackwater employee Joe Schmitz. I know that their use of mercs will come back someday to bite the Repugs on the ass, but I'm worried they'll take a few bites out of us before they're through.
Paul wrote on September 19, 2007 3:01 PM:To Bob:
You raise an important point about how a law is useless without enforcement. I'd point out that Rep. Price and Sen. Obama's bills (H.R. 2740, H.R. 369, and S. 674) would establish FBI investigative units in the field to ensure allegations of misconduct are properly investigated.
And as for resources, Price's bill says, "The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall ensure that each Theater Investigative Unit has adequate resources and personnel to carry out its responsibilities."
Paul wrote on September 19, 2007 3:02 PM:To Bob:
You raise an important point about how a law is useless without enforcement. I'd point out that Rep. Price and Sen. Obama's bills (H.R. 2740, H.R. 369, and S. 674) would establish FBI investigative units in the field to ensure allegations of misconduct are properly investigated.
And as for resources, Price's bill says, "The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall ensure that each Theater Investigative Unit has adequate resources and personnel to carry out its responsibilities."
juschny wrote on September 19, 2007 3:28 PM:Why is Blackwater contracted to provide security for the State Dept.? As far as I know, the Marines have always provided security for diplomatic missions, consulates, and embassy. It would seem that the State dept would want a trained, vetted security force that would have top secret clearance to protect their people- obviously a job for our military. I can't believe this is legal or that the foreign service would stand for it.
1oldlady wrote on September 19, 2007 3:43 PM:When will the "Barry Goldwater's" in the senate start putting Constitution first before party!
When will the profit of war wake up this body of old freaking farts that are in Congress!
When will someone go off to jail for all crap that has sucked the life out of all of those who need law as our rule, but not to change it with out the body that makes it?
Cowards...thats it.
foggylady wrote on September 19, 2007 4:31 PM:*****The "International Peace Operations Association." That's priceless.******** sez NoOneYouKnow .
Adding to the inanity above, Wiki describes The "International Peace Operations Association" as representing the "Peace and Stability Industry !!!!!!!!
INDUSTRY ?????????
Meaning more than just Blackwater,.
aka Brownshirts in another time and place.
Good news is "Member firms must adhere to a Code of Conduct."
whew...for a minute there I was worried....
jeffgee wrote on September 19, 2007 4:35 PM:Are there ANY contractors in Iraq that aren't hard-wired to the White House?
whidbeygrl wrote on September 19, 2007 4:42 PM:International Peace Operations Association's code of conduct, here....
http://ipoaonline.org/en/standards/code.htm
Spoiler: Blackwater did not keep to it, according to the Iraq story.
Added snark...the IPOA claims to adhere to laws that the USA is claiming non-binding on the military and CIA.
Mary wrote on September 19, 2007 6:35 PM:Don't forget, too, that ex-DOD Inspector General, who had some allegations of his own, is also tied in with Blackwater.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002470847_schmitz04.html
Ugh wrote on September 19, 2007 6:35 PM:There's nothing to the brother connection.
Samsara wrote on September 19, 2007 8:54 PM:Be careful what you blog about Blackwater and similar mercenary groups. Remember, when the "house of cards" global economy comes crashing down, it will be these very same people who will be helping us regain our freedom.
Bill W. wrote on September 20, 2007 1:50 AM:I've always been amused by the name of this company of mercenaries.
Guess no one at Blackwater has ever trundled around in an RV before.
'Cuz in an RV there are three water holding tanks. The first, and largest, is for potable water. It might be called the "whitewater" tank, but no one does, as I recall.
The second is the "greywater" tank, which takes the runoff from the "kitchen" sink and the shower.
The third is for human waste--this tank is for the "blackwater". So, it seems the company has taken as it's namesake the appelation of the sewage tank on RVs the world over.
Reminds me of an old Barney's ad in New York City, if anyone remembers it. There were kids playing on a brownstone stoop, asking one another what they'd like to be when they grow up--I don't remember them all, but, say it was Jackie Robinson, Arthur Ashe, John Lindsay. When they got to little Barney, he said, "Well, you're always going to need clothes."
The booth announcer then intones: "Even then he knew."
So, of Mr. Black, one of the least trustworthy of war profiteers and mercenaries, we can say of his choice of company names when starting his company: "Even then he knew."
Thomas Dobrzeniecki wrote on September 20, 2007 7:29 PM:Does anyone know how jurisdiction works with Blackwater? Supposedly, Blackwater is exempt from Iraqi law, but wasn't that exemption granted during Bremmer's stay? In other words, when Bremmer left, the U.S. occupation of Iraq officially ended and the country was turned over to the Iraqis -- therefore, Bremmer's exemption should be null and void and Blackwater SHOULD be subject to Iraqi law, correct? (After all, Bush tells us that Iraq is a sovereign country!).
Also, can't the Iraqis prosecute Blackwater under the "hostis humani generis" concept in law?