This morning the Washington Post, not normally one of my favorite newspapers, ran an interesting article on Blackwater and its founder, Erik Prince. The article notes that:
Blackwater's extraordinary rise would not have been possible without a swirl of historic forces, including sharp cuts in military and security staffing in the 1990s.... Over the past seven years, federal agencies have used changes in contracting rules launched during the Clinton administration to outsource an unprecedented amount of government business, including life-and-death duties once the domain of the military.
So while Bush the Younger usually gets most of the credit for the privitization of US military operations, in fact the opportunity to do so only came about as a result of the massive military cuts made by two Clinton administrations. Or did it?...
A host of public-private partnerships existed during World War II, from intelligence analysis to weapons development to language training for counterintelligence personnel. But America's use of what today would be termed 'contractors' in fact goes back much farther. Captain Myles Standish, of Pilgrim fame, was a hired security contractor, as were many figures in the early days of American settlement. This is not really surprising, since public-private partnerships were common in the Anglo-American tradition at least as far back as Elizabethan England. Sir Francis Walsingham, Sir Francis Drake, Sir John Hawkins, Christopher Marlowe, William Shakespeare and the other men the Elizabeth employed probably worried little about the precise nature of their work with the government. They were serving Queen and country, and that was what mattered.
While there’s no shortage of books on international terrorism, drug cartels and genocide, the international weapons trade has received less attention. Journalists [Douglas] Farah and [Stephen] Braun center their absorbing exposé of this source of global misery on its most successful practitioner, the Russian dealer Victor Bout (pictured, in the Congo). Throughout the Cold War, they show, the Kremlin supplied arms to oppressive regimes and insurgent groups, keeping close tabs on customers; after the USSR collapsed, the floodgates opened in the 1990s. With weapons factories starved for customers, Soviet-era air transports lying idle and rusting, and dictators, warlords and insurgents throughout the world clamoring for arms, entrepreneurs and organized criminals saw fortunes to be made. The authors paint a depressing picture of an avalanche of war-making material pouring into poor, violence-wracked nations despite well-publicized UN embargoes. America denounces this trade, but turns a blind eye if recipients proclaim they are fighting terrorism, they say. Ruthless people who shun publicity make poor biographical subjects, and Bout is no exception. The authors’ energetic research reveals that rivals dislike him, colleagues admire him, enemies condemn him, and Bout describes himself as a much-maligned but honest businessman. Although an unsatisfactory portrait, the book surrounds it with an engrossing, detailed description of this wildly destructive traffic.
-Publishers Weekley
A fascinating interview with Merchant of Death author Douglas Farah on Al Jazeera's English service. Includes a phone conversation with Richard Chichakli, a close associate of the elusive Mr. Bout.
The front page of today's Express, the free daily put out by the Washington Post, carries an AP story which misleads the reader about the Blackwater private security contractor. The tagline proclaims: "Investigation finds security guards fired first in shootings."
Whose investigation? The Iraqi government's. The same Iraqi government that the Washington Post and its ilk was lambasting not so long ago because it failed to meet the US standards for transparency, accountability and other such Western nicities. But apparently we now trust it to conduct investigations about our own citizens. Never mind those allegations that Blackwater refused to pay the bribe the Iraqi Interior Ministry demanded of it, resulting in having its license pulled. Never mind that the Iraqi government has tried to wiggle its way out of a joint US-Iraqi probe, to avoid a full investigation. Never mind that Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul Qader Mohammed Jassim admitted to the International Herald Tribune that his investigation was one-sided...
The State Department, seeking to retain its relationship with Blackwater USA while trying to bring the company’s armed guards under tighter control, said Friday that it would now send its own personnel as monitors on all Blackwater security convoys in and around Baghdad.
In addition, the department says it will install video cameras in Blackwater vehicles and will save recordings of all radio transmissions between Blackwater convoys and military and civilian agencies.
What does all this mean? The knee-jerk answer is that Blackwater has been reigned in and punished in some way. This is true so far as it goes, but it misses a key underlying point: the State Department wants Blackwater to stay in Iraq. And why? Because without Blackwater protection, US diplomats would have to pull up stakes and come home. The situation is simply too dangerous to operate without protection. The Department of Defense is too busy fighting insurgents and State Department guards are inadequate for the task.
The most alarming part of this story is that the anti-war camp knows just how important Blackwater is ensuring that US diplomats are able to provide a political dimension to US efforts in Iraq. Without the diplomats, the military component alone cannot win the war. And the anti-war camp knows this. That's why they want Blackwater out. The anti-war camp's not interested in the safety of Iraqi civilians or US government personnel; they just want to see us out now. And they're willing to resort to dirty politics and frivolous lawsuits to do it.
For all the failures that my have occurred in Iraq, US officials have realized the importance of the political dimension of the war. USA Todayreported that a half dozen al-Qaeda media centers have recently been captured, with twenty propagandists arrested. The insurgents understand the crucial role of the media in this fight and have used it to strong effect. In 2005, Ayman al-Zawahiri (pictured), Osama bin Laden's deputy, said that most "of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media."
USA Today reports that these "new offensives [are] aimed at al-Qaeda sanctuaries and [have] an emphasis on blunting the terrorist group's extensive propaganda operations." Air Force Col. Donald Bacon explains that "one of our goals is to target these propaganda networks, and we've had more success over the past three months." These seizures have sharply reduced the quantity of videos and other items posted to the internet.
A new magazine titled Serviam (Latin for "I will serve") has just been launched, and it takes an interesting new look at the role of private institutions in international stability. The magazine describes its mission thus:
To provide accurate and actionable information about private sector solutions to promote global stability. We address users and consumers of private goods and services in the humanitarian relief, national development, security and military sectors; government and private providers of such goods and services; and government entities involved in decisions that determine or influence trends in this growing industry.
While Blackwater and the International Red Cross might strike some as strange bedfellows, they actually have a surprising amount in common. Not only are both private institutions engaged in the international scene, but security is a prerequisite for humanitarian aid and reconstruction. Without security, aid is all but impossible; without a humanitarian motive, security is pointless.
So keep an eye out for interesting, innovative and enlightening articles from Serviam and its editor, J. Michael Waller.
A daring ambush of bombs and gunfire left Poland's ambassador [to Iraq] pinned down in a burning vehicle Wednesday before being pulled to safety and airlifted in a rescue mission by the embattled security firm Blackwater USA.
Though Blackwater was not involved in the protection of the Polish convoy, the State Department dispatched the private security contractor for a rescue mission when news of the attack came in.
The AP reports that "American authorities confiscated an AP Television News videotape that contained scenes of the wounded being evacuated. US military spokesman Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl told AP that Iraqi law make it illegal to photograph or videotape the aftermath of bombings or other attacks." However, videos have shown up on YouTube, only to be pulled for various reasons. Statecraft & Security will keep looking until we can find you one.
This morning the Washington Post, not normally one of my favorite newspapers, ran an interesting article on Blackwater and its founder, Erik Prince. The article notes that: 
A host of public-private partnerships existed during World War II, from intelligence analysis to weapons development to language training for counterintelligence personnel. But America's use of what today would be termed 'contractors' in fact goes back much farther. Captain Myles Standish, of Pilgrim fame, was a hired security contractor, as were many figures in the early days of American settlement. This is not really surprising, since public-private partnerships were common in the Anglo-American tradition at least as far back as Elizabethan England. Sir Francis Walsingham, Sir Francis Drake, Sir John Hawkins, Christopher Marlowe, William Shakespeare and the other men the Elizabeth employed probably worried little about the precise nature of their work with the government. They were serving Queen and country, and that was what mattered.
