I've read some great diaries here regarding the privatization of the military which freaks the widgets out of me. Jeremy Scahill’s recent article in the August 15th issue of the Indypendent delves deeper into the surreal world of mercenaries and the Bush administration’s growing reliance on this revolutionary and unaccountable ( surprise surprise) outsourcing of the war all paid for by you. It’s scarier than Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Read the article in it’s entirety... and sleep with your lights on.
The fact that taxpayers foot the bill for private war companies which can recruit from the world at large for U.S. military operations that fly under the radar with no accountability, no repercussions, and virtual immunity from being charged with any wrongdoing shouldn't shock anyone living in the U.S since 2001. This is par for the course. You have to hand it to the boys in the White House for consistency in circumventing democracy. They've had so much practice ignoring the American public's wishes it's almost Michael Jordan like the way they dunk it in our nether regions and we nary say "Whaa?"
Scahill has written extensively on the subject of private war companies in Iraq and around the world including the book, "Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army." He's also testified before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense on the impact of private military contractors on the conduct of the Iraq War.
Thanks to Scahill, at least we can't claim ignorance. Apathy? Yes please.
In essence, the Bush administration has created a shadow army that can be used to wage wars unpopular with the American public but extremely profitable for a few unaccountable private companies.
Since the launch of the “global war on terror,” the administration has systematically funneled billions of dollars in public money to corporations like Blackwater USA , DynCorp, Triple Canopy, Erinys and ArmorGroup. They have in turn used their lucrative government pay-outs to build up the infrastructure and reach of private armies so powerful that they rival or outgun some nation’s militaries.
Hmm, It's funny how the government can't account for the disappearance in Iraq of billions of dollars in aid and tons of weapons. Maybe one of those huge sand storms carried them off into obliviion.
Privatized forces are also politically expedient for many governments. Their casualties go uncounted, their actions largely unmonitored and their crimes unpunished. Indeed, four years into the occupation, there is no effective system of oversight or accountability governing contractors and their operations, nor is there any effective law — military or civilian being applied to their activities. They have not been subjected to military courts martial (despite a recent congressional attempt to place them under the Uniform Code of Military Justice), nor have they been prosecuted in U.S. civilian courts. And no matter what their acts in Iraq, they cannot be prosecuted in Iraqi courts because in 2004 the U.S. occupying authority granted them complete immunity
I propose all members of the House Select Committee on Intelligence pass a mandatory photographic memory screening test in order to properly monitor private military companies.
That raises the crucial question: what exactly are they doing in Iraq in the name of the U.S. and U.K. governments? Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), a leading member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, which is responsible for reviewing sensitive national security issues, explained the difficulty of monitoring private military companies on the U.S. payroll: “If I want to see a contract, I have to go up to a secret room and look at it, can’t take any notes, can’t take any notes out with me, you know — essentially, I don’t have access to those contracts and even if I did, I couldn’t tell anybody about it.”
So the administration can legally buy citizen soldiers from other countries with taxpayer money to fight in an unpopular war with no oversight, and then potentially continue the occupation with private armies after bringing our soldiers home. I feel much better knowing private mercenary companies with no allegiance to anyone but themselves may soon be in control of maintaining "freedom." It's refreshing to see the free market being embraced in this manner.
“Donald Rumsfeld’s masterstroke, and his most enduring legacy, was to bring the corporate branding revolution of the 1990s into the heart of the most powerful military in the world,” says Naomi Klein, whose upcoming book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, explores these themes.
“We have now seen the emergence of the hollow army. Much as with so-called hollow corporations like Nike, billions are spent on military technology and design in rich countries while the manual labor and sweat work of invasion and occupation is increasingly outsourced to contractors who compete with each other to fill the work order for the lowest price. Just as this model breeds rampant abuse in the manufacturing sector — with the big-name brands always able to plead ignorance about the actions of their suppliers—so it does in the military, though with stakes that are immeasurably higher.” In the case of Iraq, the U.S. and U.K. governments could give the public perception of a withdrawal of forces and just privatize the occupation. Indeed, shortly after former British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced that he wanted to withdraw 1,600 soldiers from Basra, reports emerged that the British government was considering sending in private security companies to “fill the gap left behind.”
More importantly, do they take Visa or Mastercard?
This unprecedented funding of such enterprises, primarily by the U.S. and U.K. governments, means that powers once the exclusive realm of nations are now in the hands of private companies with loyalty only to profits, CEOs and, in the case of public companies, shareholders. And, of course, their client, whoever that may be. CIA-type services, special operations, covert actions and small-scale military and paramilitary forces are now on the world market in a way not seen in modern history. This could allow corporations or nations with cash to spend but no real military power to hire squadrons of heavily armed and well-trained commandos.
“It raises very important issues about state and about the very power of state. The one thing the people think of as being in the purview of the government — wholly run and owned by — is the use of military power,” says Rep. Jan Schakowsky. “Suddenly you’ve got a for-profit corporation going around the world that is more powerful than states, can effect regime possibly where they may want to go, that seems to have all the support that it needs from this administration that is also pretty adventurous around the world and operating under the cover of darkness.
“It raises questions about democracies, about states, about who influences policy around the globe, about relationships among some countries. Maybe it’s their goal to render state coalitions like NATO irrelevant in the future, that they’ll be the ones and open to the highest bidder. Who really does determine war and peace around the world?”
I'm guessing you and I are dead last on the list of influence...at least for now.
Here's a sweet story on Blackwater. Please pass the popcorn-
Blackwater: The Shadow War