« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
Blackwater: Above the law.
Yesterday we reported that not only is Blackwater immunized from liability under any Iraqi law, but the State Department has allowed it to operate under less restrictive rules of engagement than any other private military company. As a result, the State Department bears responsibility for the culture of impunity that resulted. Today The Washington Post adds more detail:
Blackwater "has a client who will support them no matter what they do," said H.C. Lawrence Smith, deputy director of the Private Security Company Association of Iraq, an advocacy organization in Baghdad that is funded by security firms, including Blackwater.The State Department allowed Blackwater's heavily armed teams to operate without an Interior Ministry license, even after the requirement became standard language in Defense Department security contracts. The company was not subject to the military's restrictions on the use of offensive weapons, its procedures for reporting shooting incidents or a central tracking system that allows commanders to monitor the movements of security companies on the battlefield.
"The Iraqis despised them, because they were untouchable," said Matthew Degn, who recently returned from Baghdad after serving as senior American adviser to the Interior Ministry. "They were above the law." Degn said Blackwater's armed Little Bird helicopters often buzzed the Interior Ministry's roof, "almost like they were saying, 'Look, we can fly anywhere we want.' "
Last year, Congress passed a law placing contractors under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the law that establishes legal conduct for U.S. forces. Little follow-on work has established what exactly that means for private security companies, however. While the Pentagon has issued a number of so-called fragmentary orders seeking to regulate the private security firms, Blackwater is exempt, since its contracts are with the State Department and CIA. Blackwater isn't required to keep the U.S. military command informed of its operations or file incident reports to it.
The Iraqi Interior Ministry -- which, lest we forget, is deeply corrupt itself -- claims it has information on at least six incidents where Blackwater contractors fired on Iraqi civilians. On Sunday, Blackwater guards were involved in a murky incident in Baghdad's Mansour neighborhood that resulted in at least nine dead Iraqi civilians. The Iraqi government claims Blackwater resulted to deadly force with minimal provocation. The State Department called Blackwater's response a defensive measure resulting from an insurgent attack on a Blackwater-guarded diplomatic convoy. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has called the incident a "serious crime." A joint U.S.-Iraqi investigation has now been empaneled.
The Defense Department, stung by the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal and sensitive to allegations of further wrongdoing, has at least taken first steps to hold its security contractors in check. But its regulators see little reason to hold State contractors to the same standard.
"I'm not gonna go chasing after non-DoD organizations, going, 'Uh, you didn't submit an incident report for this,' " said Maj. Kent Lightner of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who monitors shooting incidents involving private security contractors under Defense Department contracts.Peter, of the private security firms' advocacy group, said the rules that govern companies often depend on who issued their contract. "There's a different regulatory environment depending on who you work for," he explained.
Earlier this week, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) accused Howard Krongard, the State Department's inspector general, of scuttling investigations into Blackwater's contract. If true, it would underscore what the official in charge of Iraq contracting for the Army Corps of Engineers told the Post about Blackwater's operational style: "It's obviously condoned by State and it's what State expects, because they have contract oversight and if they didn't like it they would change it."
Comments (43)
Jonah wrote on September 20, 2007 9:21 AM:Just like the Nazis, Blackwater uses red and black.
Punchy wrote on September 20, 2007 9:25 AM:So Maliki first demanded them out, then (of course) had to rescind this when his US superiors (odd, being that they're supposed to be sovreign) told him otherwise. What a feckless, powerless stooge he must appear to be. I'm amazed the Iraqis haven't taken matters into their own hands with respect to this Blackwater outfit...
jolly ranchero wrote on September 20, 2007 9:28 AM:Wow. Goodwin's in ONE post. A new record?
Henry wrote on September 20, 2007 9:37 AM:So do the United Farm Workers (and conservative opponents tried to make the same connection out of that 40 years ago). And so does AC Milan (no analogies drawn AFAIK). A little less superficiality, please.
Good article. Worth remembering the next time that someone claims that the occupation would have worked out better if we'd just had smarter administrators.
Alex wrote on September 20, 2007 9:49 AM:The emergence of military "contractors" is one of the most ominous outgrowths of our post-Reagan 'private industry can do it better' paradigm.
We now have operational private armies that have been chartered to act in the United States (New Orleans). They use their growing wealth to buy political influence and expand their power.
The present incident illustrates just some of the risks of these policies. The decade to come may bring new levels of violence to America - and we may see lethal goon squads added to the political hardball Rove brought to Florida in 2000?
Inconceivable? Government-authorized torture and spying were inconceivable just a few years ago. The campaign of lies and disinformation used to launch and sustain the Iraq war were inconceivable just a few years ago.
We have to shut these "contractors" down. Military force should be an arm of the government, period.
Larry wrote on September 20, 2007 9:54 AM:Imagine!!! When the Iraqi war is over the Blackwater people will rearm at NRA gun shows and start to bring "law and order" to the good old USA.
Larry wrote on September 20, 2007 9:54 AM:Imagine!!! When the Iraqi war is over the Blackwater people will rearm at NRA gun shows and start to bring "law and order" to the good old USA.
Larry wrote on September 20, 2007 9:56 AM:Imagine!!! When the Iraqi war is over the Blackwater people will rearm at NRA gun shows and start to bring "law and order" to the good old USA.
jvill wrote on September 20, 2007 9:56 AM:Jonah wrote on September 20, 2007 9:21 AM:
"Just like the Nazis, Blackwater uses red and black."
Yeah, just like those damned Atlanta Falcons. Hang 'em all.
TheraP wrote on September 20, 2007 9:57 AM:Black-Ops.
Black Sites. Black Vigilantes. Black rules.
DoD: Outsourcing Odious Ops
DanF wrote on September 20, 2007 10:02 AM:Not that anyone could have foreseen that the heavy reliance on mercenaries for legitimate security needs in a military theater would end up badly... [end snark]
Blackwater has about 1000 people in Iraq. The UN estimates that there are 160 companies with about 35-40,000 mercenaries working in Iraq (not all of them are working for the United States). There is no way the US armed forces could take over the security duties of these mercs if they were to leave. If you kick out the mercenary companies you have to either find 35,000 MPs/troops to replace them with (which ain't gonna happen), or you effectively end our participation in the war. Our current forces are already stretched thin. You can't just reassign even 20,000 of them to security detail.
gcs wrote on September 20, 2007 10:02 AM:So much for the absurd joke that Iraq is a "sovereign" nation.
po wrote on September 20, 2007 10:12 AM:Ah, Blackwater molded in the image of those that made it 'necessary': "Above the law and beyond accountability."
John Patterson wrote on September 20, 2007 10:27 AM:Like I said, these Blackwater gunners are the Doberman pups from animal farm...
And their bosses are the pigs...
Milton Wiltmellow wrote on September 20, 2007 10:38 AM:Naomi Wolf enumerates ten precursors of a totalitarian government. A "warrior caste" is one of those:
When leaders who seek what I call a "fascist shift" want to close down an open society, they send paramilitary groups of scary young men out to terrorise citizens. The Blackshirts roamed the Italian countryside beating up communists; the Brownshirts staged violent rallies throughout Germany. This paramilitary force is especially important in a democracy: you need citizens to fear thug violence and so you need thugs who are free from prosecution.
The years following 9/11 have proved a bonanza for America's security contractors, with the Bush administration outsourcing areas of work that traditionally fell to the US military. In the process, contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been issued for security work by mercenaries at home and abroad. In Iraq, some of these contract operatives have been accused of involvement in torturing prisoners, harassing journalists and firing on Iraqi civilians. Under Order 17, issued to regulate contractors in Iraq by the one-time US administrator in Baghdad, Paul Bremer, these contractors are immune from prosecution http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html
The whole article is worth the read.
ShorelineCT wrote on September 20, 2007 10:39 AM:It seems to me that Blackwater is akin to the Mehdi army since it also works independent of any "real" government oversite.
anonymouse wrote on September 20, 2007 10:44 AM:"...post-Reagan 'private industry can do it better' paradigm."
This has more to do with the rest of Bush's directives (most okayed by both the Reps and the Dems willingly) in which almost all legal violations are exempt from penalties. It also has to do with the fact that it is a whole lot easier to start wars with hired thugs than with folks who are bound to other ehical, moral conduct.
We will be having more and more unnecessary wars as our democracy declines.
The one blatantly visual aspect of a dictatorship is that those in power do not have to pay the consequences... they are exempt.. that the commoners do.
BTW: Folks who don't plan on breaking all the laws do not find a need for exempting themselves from those same laws, as Bush did at the very beginning of this fiasco. The small number of folks who saw through this in the beginning were ignored by their congressmen/women, senators, and the media.
Most people were more interested in getting even than paying attention to the facts... says volumes about what kind of society WE are...
lgm wrote on September 20, 2007 10:47 AM:My pet theory about Blackwater -- please deny if possible: We have Blackwater soldiers guarding diplomats rather than regular US Army exactly because the Blackwater Rules of Engagement are different. Diplomats are safer with guards who are allowed to fire at will rather than with guards who are not supposed to kill unarmed civilians.
SkepticRising wrote on September 20, 2007 11:03 AM:I couldn't help but notice that the Blackwater logo looked like something you'd see on a high school letter jacket. Then it occurred to me that the pawprint looks remarkably like a badger print. And it is! Sweet cheeses, these people are fantasizing "Red Dawn".
And I was also struck by the existence of an organization called "Private Security Company Association of Iraq". An industry trade group? For private armies? Do they allow the Sadr Army to join? This thing is seriously messed up.
nin wrote on September 20, 2007 11:09 AM:It's all a part of a dog and pony show. Bring the dips in with their security in place by the Blackwater black ops, then, show them around courtesy of State and Dod, you know, all the "good" stuff going on in Iraq, and let them talk to only the "supporters", you know, just like at Bush's speaking events all round the country. In order to be a part of the show, you must first make the pledge of allegiance to Bushco.
Then, dips come home and tell us all how WONDERFUL it is in Iraq. Meanwhile, you have a whole population boiling mad at ANY american because the yahoos are acting out a bad spaghetti western where they shoot anything that moves.
Support our troops!
bryan wrote on September 20, 2007 11:17 AM:To: lgm
I can't totally deny your pet theory, but here's an alternative.
I don't think the more lax Rules of engagement have anything to do with actually protecting diplomats. First, Blackwater protects diplomats because that is the job they lobbied for, bid on, and were awarded. While protecting diplomats is not a cakewalk, it is certainly a lot easier than being on the front lines or searching for landmines. If I owned a security firm with friends in the US gov. I think protecting diplomats is precisely the type of contract I would seek. It's stressful work to be sure, but not a full time combat position.
If US soldiers were protecting diplomats instead of Blackwater, its probably true that the Rules of Engagement would be more stringent. BUT, because the persons charged with protecting diplomats can respond to any perceived threat with force, I don't think the rule would result in any lesser protection. The rules become 'relaxed' under those circumstances.
Also consider that Blackwater charges a lot more than we would pay US soldiers to do the same job.
So, I think Blackwater's role in Iraq is probably a result cronyism, corruption, greed, and not a result of some well thought out plan to provide better protection for diplomats.
Cinderella Ferret wrote on September 20, 2007 11:19 AM:SkepticRising wrote on September 20, 2007 11:03 AM:
I couldn't help but notice that the Blackwater logo looked like something you'd see on a high school letter jacket.
And as the late, great Frank Zappa once said, "Politics is just high school with guns and knives."
yer mother wrote on September 20, 2007 11:20 AM:this whole thing smells like big time wrestling gone wild
I hope these testosterone ladeled nincompoops get their comeuppance
what theater for hostile children, now murderers, and the scum bag mafia we have running the show is just eating it up.
get your red hot state sponsored carnage and terrorism in Iraq, ... shortly to be available in the united states of am .... oh fucking puke!
Zem indians?
NC-11-CD wrote on September 20, 2007 11:30 AM:They must be cause we're in India aint we?
We was headed fer India and this is where we landed, soze 'em must be indians ...
Never mind that ... how should we kill 'em?
I know! let's play nice and pretend like we come to help 'em!
Good idea
Yep
Zem indians?
SkepticRising,
If memory serves, the mascot in Red Dawn was a wolverine. Closely related to badgers, but not quite the same animal.
And talking about rules of engagement brings up a supreme irony. Blackwater and other contractors are being used to put more troops into combat positions, whether or not they've trained for that purpose. And once they're in combat, the troops have (for good reason) more restrictive rules of engagement than the private contractors.
hmbnancy wrote on September 20, 2007 11:46 AM:Using mercenaries also allows the true number of forces in Iraq to be minimized.
The reality-there are probably over 300,000 "soldiers" in Iraq.
A force that size is clearly an occupation in anyone's book.
The Juan Cole/ Josh Marshall interview yesterday was the best I have heard- definitive, authoritative, and rant-free.
Cole said we are trying to control this from the fringes. We have too few troops for the number of people.
SkepticRising wrote on September 20, 2007 11:50 AM:NC-11-CD, you're right. I misremembered. And the wolverine, while related to the badger, has a distinctly different print (four toes instead of five). Still...
hoover wrote on September 20, 2007 12:14 PM::-)
Iraq has private militias beholden to no one, the US has private militias (such as Blackwater) beholden to no one. An equal opportunity civil war.
Candyce wrote on September 20, 2007 12:17 PM:"Blackwater "has a client who will support them no matter what they do," said H.C. Lawrence Smith...."
Dick Cheney's private army.
wonderland wrote on September 20, 2007 12:29 PM:This reminds me of the fictional Blackwater in the movie Shooter. In one scene evidence has been presented at a meeting of the AG, FBI, Colonol Isaac Johnson,ex-army colonol, commander of the fictional Blackwater, who had ordered the extermination of a village of 400 people in Africa over an oil pipeline. Col. Johnson says "...what am I doing here. Call the joint chiefs." "...is this the Horn of Arfica? This is the land of the free and the brave" "None of this sticks to me. I'm out of here." This movie is an excellent demonstration of what a governament sponsered private security company could do taken to the extreme. Seems to me that Blackwater is more than half way there.
Lynn Lightfoot wrote on September 20, 2007 12:35 PM:Larry: I doubt Blackwater will have any need to re-arm at stateside gun shows. I feel certain their arsenal is more than ample already. (Of course that won't mean that they cease to stockpile weapons at every opportunity, legitimate or otherwise.)
foggylady wrote on September 20, 2007 12:49 PM:The 180 private security firms in Iraq, including Blackwater, are NOT "contractors"..they are mercenaries.
palm pilot wrote on September 20, 2007 1:28 PM:Iraqi's fighting against US invasion of their homeland are NOT "insurgents"...they are ...well, what? Patriots?
Whatever we would like to be called when we defended this country against the British.
For way way too long we have allowed Bush and Co. to provide the definitions of our reality.
It is time to be aware of this and to stop it.
It is time to label reality.
BW ROE is way looser than US mil. and always has been. That's been known to us ground pounders from the get go. They actually un-do alot of the civil affairs work we accomplish because of it. Suprised it took so long for it to hit the blogs. Those guys are well known for "going cylic" at even one or two incoming rounds. For those not familiar with the term it means laying down a 360 degree ring of constant supressing fire usually why agressively exfiltrating the scene. The problem has been when it happens in a crowd or civies or with the IDF/ING in range (and by the way the I-forces have been known to take shots at contractors in the past). Anyway, that's why those four BW guys got lit up so bad in Falluja a while back and hung from the bridge. They were part of a crew who went cyclic a few days before and killed a bunch of innocents (that was the real story no one wanted to talk about). Is that a bad thing? hell yeah, but my point has always been why is it nobody here decries the insurgents for staging attacks in and around innocents in the first place??? They know they'll get this exact reaction from the US people, no matter the pains the US contractor and military forces go to NOT to harm innocents. I've had good troopers shot cause' they were unwilling to return fire, after insurgent initiated contact, on friendlies in the target area. Insurgents use little girls for shields for christ sake. They physically pick them up by the neck and hold them across thier chests. I've seen it. Foggylady, a "patriot" doesn't hide behind schoolgirls to wage war against an enemy. That is called a "terrorist." You need to get into reality before you can label it ma'am. I agree BW shooters are overpaid and undertrained - but understand the environment they work in a little better would ya? please.
curbnoise wrote on September 20, 2007 1:37 PM:How do we know that Blackwater has a client at all. Is it beyond the pale that Blackwater is a sham CIA agency? Especially in light of John Bolton's recent quip that (and I paraphrase) the US needs to go back to the "covert" regime change we used to be so good at?
Roberta wrote on September 20, 2007 1:58 PM:Imagine if the money being paid to these "security" contractors--or most of the contractors in Iraq--was put toward paying those serving in the military a wage that's competitive with the private sector.
I bet that would attract a heckuva lot more people who would like to serve their country as a career but know that they can't provide for a family as well by going into and staying in the military. It may not be right, but human nature makes us value the jobs we do (in part) based on how well we're paid to do them.
Then the military could have quality people in all its areas--Army Corps of Engineers?--that could protect AND serve their country, both here and as proud representatives of the US in other countries.
The soldiers would be career people who are trained in how to behave towards citizens of other countries. They'd understand when to fight and when to placate. (I'm not saying that doesn't ever happen, but it's less likely to happen with soldiers who undergo quickie training and then get thrown into situations in which they can't possibly understand cultural differences, since that wasn't the goal of their training.)
Then--since it was probably inevitable that the Busheney would have invaded Iraq no matter what, whether 9/11 happened or something else had to facilitate it--the post-invasion military presence in Iraq would have had a very different mien. We might actually have won a few hearts and minds.
bjobotts wrote on September 20, 2007 2:19 PM:They came for the Iraqis...and I said nothing...then they came for the Muslims...and I did nothing...then they came to Washington....
tom baker wrote on September 20, 2007 2:58 PM:gee - now we can export Hessian babykillers all over the world - what a glorious triumph of the free market.
jeffgee wrote on September 20, 2007 3:16 PM:Blackwater moves to Illinois to set up training facility
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZpNkyHdDBs
and check out some of the other videos on the page
jeffgee wrote on September 20, 2007 3:26 PM:Scared yet?
Imagine the fun when these guys come back and join a police force. They'll justify murder by claiming that they felt threatened and who will dare question them?
buckminster wrote on September 20, 2007 3:50 PM:Finally a reason to support the Iraq war: keep Blackwater busy over there so we don't have to fight them over here....
romath wrote on September 20, 2007 4:38 PM:Spencer Ackerman's post tacitly discounts the initial Iraqi report of the apparently murderous incident over the weekend, as reported in the NYT, by not mentioning it and sticking close to the official line.
bryan makes a good point about guarding diplomats, but fails to note that the underlying issue is the U.S.' use of a volunteer army, which is much too small for the military occupation taken on.
Anonymous wrote on September 20, 2007 4:53 PM:Move along, nothing to see people:
President Bush told reporters in Washington that he expects to discuss the incident with al-Maliki during a meeting in New York next week on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly session.
"Folks like Blackwater who provide security for the State Department are under rules of engagement," Bush said. "They have certain rules. And this commission will determine whether they violated those rules."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070920/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_blackwater
In the name of imperialism, Bush can do no wrong.
31tudor wrote on September 20, 2007 4:53 PM:Move along, nothing to see people:
President Bush told reporters in Washington that he expects to discuss the incident with al-Maliki during a meeting in New York next week on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly session.
"Folks like Blackwater who provide security for the State Department are under rules of engagement," Bush said. "They have certain rules. And this commission will determine whether they violated those rules."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070920/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_blackwater
In the name of imperialism, Bush can do no wrong.
JAJ wrote on September 20, 2007 4:53 PM:So we outsource major parts of what was traditionaly military duties to paid mercenary organizations. They then are given a free, no rules of engagement, to do whatever they want. Because of that freedom to shoot whoever they want, they are perceived to be tougher, even admired by some, than our own military.
The problem whith all this is the basic difference between these two kinds of fighting forces. One is led by honor and tradition of fighting for your country, and the other is fighting for money.
So what happens when the money guys start getting paid more by some other country to fight against our country.