Today's Article
The use of private
security contractors
threatens core values
embodied in our legal
system, including
respect for human
dignity and
accountability.
security contractors
threatens core values
embodied in our legal
system, including
respect for human
dignity and
accountability.
The American Spark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Why Contractors Shouldn't Fight Our Wars
By Cliff Montgomery - May 29th, 2010
The federal government's reliance on private companies for its overseas operations--including war--was the
subject of a very interesting hearing conducted in February 2008 before the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs.
Though the hearing occurred a few years ago, a report on the matter wasn't released to the public until March
2010.
Among those who testified before the Senate panel in 2008 was Laura Dickinson, a University of Connecticut
School of Law professor. It would appear that her testimony remains a valid warning.
Below The American Spark quotes a major portion of Professor Dickinson's prepared statement:
"Thank you for the opportunity to address you here today on this important topic. As members of this
Committee are no doubt aware, both our military and our foreign policy agencies are now employing private
contractors to an unprecedented degree. For example, current estimates suggest that there are almost as
many contractors as troops in Iraq.
"These contractors are serving meals, building facilities, transporting goods, and providing a broad range of
logistical support to troops. They are training Iraqi police [...] and, in some cases, they are interrogating
detainees and providing security to governmental officials, sites, and convoys.
"We don’t know precisely how many security contractors are operating in Iraq, though estimates suggest there
may be as many as 30,000.
"Indeed, we are forced to rely on rough estimates because neither the State Department nor the Department
of Defense, nor any other arm of government, keeps sufficient track. And some reports suggest that even on-
the-ground military commanders in Iraq may not know whether private security contractors are operating in
their territory.
"While most contractors have performed admirably and filled vital roles—and more than 1,100 contractors have
died in Iraq while doing so—some have committed serious abuses without being held accountable.
"Perhaps the most notable recent case is the incident from September 16th of [2007], when Blackwater
security guards employed by the Department of State fired into a crowd in Baghdad’s Nisour Square, killing
seventeen people. Subsequent reports by the Department of Justice and the military have concluded that at
least 14, and possibly all, of the killings were unprovoked. Yet no one has yet been indicted for the killings.
"In a similarly high-profile incident, contract interrogators and translators joined troops in sexually humiliating
and brutally abusing detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq in 2003. Indeed, General Fay reported that the
contractors, many of whom lacked training, were actually supervising uniformed military personnel at the prison.
"Yet while twelve uniformed soldiers have faced punishment for their role in the abuse, no contractors have
been charged.
"A recent report from Human Rights First suggest that these incidents are just the tip of the iceberg and that
there are many more cases in which security contractors or contract interrogators may have used excessive
force. In fact, CIA director Michael Hayden has testified that he believes that CIA contract interrogators have
engaged in waterboarding.
"But again there has been [as of February 2008] only one instance—the case of the CIA contract interrogator
David Passaro—in which U.S. authorities have criminally prosecuted a contractor for such crimes.
"Thus, we are left with the unmistakable conclusion that the use of private security contractors and
interrogators potentially threatens core values embodied in our legal system, including (1) respect for human
dignity and limits on the use of force and (2) a commitment to transparency and accountability.
"How should Congress respond to the problems posed by private security contractors and interrogators?
"One possibility is to take steps to discourage or ban the outsourcing of at least some military, security, and
intelligence functions. Certainly, the risks are greatest when contractors are authorized to use force, as in the
case of security contractors or interrogators. Accordingly, we should be particularly cautious about outsourcing
such functions and consider whether they may be inherently governmental.
"Alternatively, Congress might consider designating such functions as 'core' rather than inherently
governmental, which would permit outsourcing but at the same time impose limits on the percentage of
positions that may be turned over to contractors, while mandating higher standards of oversight regarding
these positions."
"Nevertheless, although efforts to declare certain activities to be inherent or core governmental functions are
important, I also think that the incentives to use contractors will persist, and may even expand, particularly once
the inevitable draw-down of uniformed military personnel begins. Therefore, it may be difficult (and perhaps
even unwise) to limit significantly the use of private security contractors.
"Accordingly, Congress will undoubtedly need to institute more effective measures to punish contractors if they
commit abuses."
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
By Cliff Montgomery - May 29th, 2010
The federal government's reliance on private companies for its overseas operations--including war--was the
subject of a very interesting hearing conducted in February 2008 before the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs.
Though the hearing occurred a few years ago, a report on the matter wasn't released to the public until March
2010.
Among those who testified before the Senate panel in 2008 was Laura Dickinson, a University of Connecticut
School of Law professor. It would appear that her testimony remains a valid warning.
Below The American Spark quotes a major portion of Professor Dickinson's prepared statement:
"Thank you for the opportunity to address you here today on this important topic. As members of this
Committee are no doubt aware, both our military and our foreign policy agencies are now employing private
contractors to an unprecedented degree. For example, current estimates suggest that there are almost as
many contractors as troops in Iraq.
"These contractors are serving meals, building facilities, transporting goods, and providing a broad range of
logistical support to troops. They are training Iraqi police [...] and, in some cases, they are interrogating
detainees and providing security to governmental officials, sites, and convoys.
"We don’t know precisely how many security contractors are operating in Iraq, though estimates suggest there
may be as many as 30,000.
"Indeed, we are forced to rely on rough estimates because neither the State Department nor the Department
of Defense, nor any other arm of government, keeps sufficient track. And some reports suggest that even on-
the-ground military commanders in Iraq may not know whether private security contractors are operating in
their territory.
"While most contractors have performed admirably and filled vital roles—and more than 1,100 contractors have
died in Iraq while doing so—some have committed serious abuses without being held accountable.
"Perhaps the most notable recent case is the incident from September 16th of [2007], when Blackwater
security guards employed by the Department of State fired into a crowd in Baghdad’s Nisour Square, killing
seventeen people. Subsequent reports by the Department of Justice and the military have concluded that at
least 14, and possibly all, of the killings were unprovoked. Yet no one has yet been indicted for the killings.
"In a similarly high-profile incident, contract interrogators and translators joined troops in sexually humiliating
and brutally abusing detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq in 2003. Indeed, General Fay reported that the
contractors, many of whom lacked training, were actually supervising uniformed military personnel at the prison.
"Yet while twelve uniformed soldiers have faced punishment for their role in the abuse, no contractors have
been charged.
"A recent report from Human Rights First suggest that these incidents are just the tip of the iceberg and that
there are many more cases in which security contractors or contract interrogators may have used excessive
force. In fact, CIA director Michael Hayden has testified that he believes that CIA contract interrogators have
engaged in waterboarding.
"But again there has been [as of February 2008] only one instance—the case of the CIA contract interrogator
David Passaro—in which U.S. authorities have criminally prosecuted a contractor for such crimes.
"Thus, we are left with the unmistakable conclusion that the use of private security contractors and
interrogators potentially threatens core values embodied in our legal system, including (1) respect for human
dignity and limits on the use of force and (2) a commitment to transparency and accountability.
"How should Congress respond to the problems posed by private security contractors and interrogators?
"One possibility is to take steps to discourage or ban the outsourcing of at least some military, security, and
intelligence functions. Certainly, the risks are greatest when contractors are authorized to use force, as in the
case of security contractors or interrogators. Accordingly, we should be particularly cautious about outsourcing
such functions and consider whether they may be inherently governmental.
"Alternatively, Congress might consider designating such functions as 'core' rather than inherently
governmental, which would permit outsourcing but at the same time impose limits on the percentage of
positions that may be turned over to contractors, while mandating higher standards of oversight regarding
these positions."
"Nevertheless, although efforts to declare certain activities to be inherent or core governmental functions are
important, I also think that the incentives to use contractors will persist, and may even expand, particularly once
the inevitable draw-down of uniformed military personnel begins. Therefore, it may be difficult (and perhaps
even unwise) to limit significantly the use of private security contractors.
"Accordingly, Congress will undoubtedly need to institute more effective measures to punish contractors if they
commit abuses."
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
Wait, why does an
independent news source
run advertisements? The
Spark answers in its
advertising policy.
independent news source
run advertisements? The
Spark answers in its
advertising policy.
* Please check out our ads--they
help keep this news site running.
Thanks!
help keep this news site running.
Thanks!