PDA

View Full Version : Few Alternatives to Blackwater



Razoreye
10-17-07, 11:15
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119258332118861426.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Few Alternatives to Blackwater
U.S. Weighs Security-Firm Change
Amid Political Fallout in Iraq
By NEIL KING JR. and AUGUST COLE
October 17, 2007; Page A6

WASHINGTON -- U.S. officials face a blunt reality as they weigh whether to replace Blackwater USA as the prime protector of U.S. diplomats in Iraq: They have no easy alternative.

Mounting evidence suggesting Blackwater guards shot and killed 17 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad's Nisour Square without provocation last month has sparked calls within the Iraqi government to throw the private-security company out of Iraq. Some critics in Congress say the State Department should replace the North Carolina-based contractor with government security, even with U.S. soldiers.

With several investigations under way, U.S. officials are considering whether to turn Blackwater's work over to another contractor, while tightening the rules under which U.S. security contractors operate in Iraq. But finding a replacement could prove difficult.

Blackwater's security work for the State Department in Baghdad is up for renewal in May, and U.S. officials say it would take at least that long to arrange for another private contractor to take over. Even a new company would have to rely heavily on hires from Blackwater's employee base of about 1,000 in Iraq. Hiring and training new guards, all of whom must be Americans with classified-security clearance, would otherwise take months.

Blackwater, part of Prince Group LLC, couldn't be reached for comment.

Blackwater and two other U.S. security companies, DynCorp International and Triple Canopy Inc., are working under a global contract with the State Department that gives them a total of $571 million a year to protect officials in countries like Israel, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq. Iraq alone accounts for $520 million.

Kathleen Hicks, a former Defense Department official who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, said that while the State Department could break Blackwater's contract before it runs out, it would be easier to see it through to the end.

"Regardless of who they pick, they're going to have to have much better oversight," she said.

Besides providing security details for U.S. diplomats and other officials in Iraq, Blackwater also supplies a fleet of helicopters and pilots. U.S. officials said the "Little Bird" helicopters, which are like those used by elite military units and can maneuver in tight confines like cities, provide essential evacuation, surveillance and transportation functions that neither the military nor other contractors can easily offer.

Blackwater's helicopters have been known to fill in during crisis moments, such as picking up the Polish ambassador to Iraq after he was injured in an ambush earlier this month. Blackwater's Presidential Airways affiliate owns the helicopters, three of which have been destroyed this year.

Even finding a replacement for its basic security services could prove tough. The administration has dismissed suggestions to tap the State Department's own Diplomatic Security bureau, which has about 1,400 trained specialists scattered at U.S. embassies and other outposts around the world. Hiring and training new diplomatic-security agents takes at least a year; mustering the numbers required for Iraq, U.S. officials said, would be out of the question.

"There's just no way our system could handle trying to get hundreds of new people trained and sent to Iraq," said a State Department official. "That would be a multiyear process."

Both the Pentagon and the State Department long ago ruled out using U.S. soldiers to guard the hundreds of American diplomats and officials in Iraq. Even the Defense Department relies on private security for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and others doing Pentagon-funded work in Iraq.

An Iraqi investigation of the Sept. 16 killings found that a Blackwater convoy didn't come under attack before it opened fire on civilians in Nisour Square. Some Iraqi officials are demanding that the company be prosecuted under Iraqi law, and relatives of the dead filed a federal lawsuit against Blackwater last week in a U.S. court.


Blackwater has said its convoy was fired on.

The State Department has three teams in Iraq looking into the Sept. 16 incident. One group, led by the agency's top management official, Patrick Kennedy, is formulating recommendations on whether the U.S. should stick with Blackwater or find some other arrangement. Its findings are expected to be released in early November.

U.S. officials familiar with the internal debate over Blackwater said it is possible that the Kennedy team will determine that the company is too much of a liability and must be replaced. "If the determination is that Blackwater is the problem, then we would have to find a way to phase them out," said the State Department official.

Some U.S. officials said the State Department was likely to reach an agreement with the Iraqi government either to keep Blackwater or to replace it with DynCorp or Triple Canopy.

DynCorp has been a U.S. government contractor for decades and has experience working in dangerous areas for the State Department. It held the previous State Department security contract and has done international police training as well as counternarcotics missions in Afghanistan and Colombia. Though it doesn't have a fleet of aircraft like Blackwater does, DynCorp has extensive experience working on aviation contracts for the government. DynCorp declined to comment.

Triple Canopy is a much younger company, formed in 2003. The company, which also provides security for the Defense Department, declined to comment.

Any of the firms would likely face tighter oversight and more-restrictive rules on how to respond to threats like car bombs. The State Department is looking at a range of new technologies, including high-end lasers, that security guards could use to warn approaching drivers. Currently, the security guards use an escalating scale of force from signs and hand signals to thrown water bottles and gunfire.

Despite such steps, questions are likely to grow among both the companies and security guards over whether the political and legal risks they face in Iraq -- on top of the day-to-day dangers -- are worth it. While security guards can earn hundreds of dollars a day, many are likely to think twice because of the uncertainty of legal protections under Iraqi law, combined with growing scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers and watchdog groups.

According to the State Department breakdown of spending globally, Blackwater's security work under the contract costs $360 million annually, while its aviation operations account for an additional $113 million. Triple Canopy has a smaller role under the contract, with its work costing the government $59 million a year. DynCorp's share tallies up to $39 million.

Write to Neil King Jr. at neil.king@wsj.com and August Cole at august.cole@dowjones.com

whitetiger7654
10-17-07, 11:25
I doubt many other companies have the assets to take over. Not only must you find men to do the work. You also have to train and gear them up. Plus what about all the helicopters and such you would have to buy. Not a cheap thing to start up.

kletzenklueffer
10-17-07, 11:25
Here's the thing that gets me. Iraq has stated that they want Blackwater out, and want a replacement that will be subject to Iraq law.

Their own people aren't subject to their law. They blow each other up, and aid and abed terrorists in their own country. The police force is rotten with insurgency. Their army isn't far off from that, yet they want to subject our guys to their laws. Their government is ineffective, and until it gets squared away, and shows it by executing lawfulness against their own people, then they play by our rules.

KWACKERB279
10-17-07, 11:32
Here's the thing that gets me. Iraq has stated that they want Blackwater out, and want a replacement that will be subject to Iraq law.

Their own people aren't subject to their law. They blow each other up, and aid and abed terrorists in their own country. The police force is rotten with insurgency. Their army isn't far off from that, yet they want to subject our guys to their laws. Their government is ineffective, and until it gets squared away, and shows it by executing lawfulness against their own people, then they play by our rules.


I agree, well said.

Nathan_Bell
10-17-07, 14:17
This all seems to me to be that the Iraqi gov't wanted to shakedown Blackwater, but misjudged how the US anti-war politicians would jump on this and try to use it to help and lose the war. Now Iraq might just have destroyed the protections that the diplomatic process needs at the worst possible time.

kbrdann
10-17-07, 14:30
I have spent some time in that part of the world. What will happen is at worst there will be a new company started and it will be a subdivision of Blackwater. Same people some stuff just a new name. KBR does it all the time.

Joseywales
10-17-07, 20:15
There is no such thing as an alternative to Blackwater. Not that others can't step in. The problem is that Blackwater is being used as a political pawn to pay for the shortcomings of politicians and a nation full of corrupt people (Iraq). It doesn't matter who the firm is, they all will be f-ed in the end.

Blackwater has some of the best trained special forces people in the world. If they cannot do it, I doubt anyone can.

Iraq Ninja
10-18-07, 08:28
You would be surprised how few SF people their are in BW. Lots of Marines and regular Army guys. This stuff is not rocket science.

In these kinds of contracts, the client owns most of the equipment, not the security company. No new sub company will be formed by BW to continue this contract. KBR may do that, but it doesn't apply in this situation.

The only other companies that have a WPPS approved training program is Dyncorp and Triple Canopy.

Looey
10-18-07, 10:14
Here's the thing that gets me. Iraq has stated that they want Blackwater out, and want a replacement that will be subject to Iraq law.

Their own people aren't subject to their law. They blow each other up, and aid and abed terrorists in their own country. The police force is rotten with insurgency. Their army isn't far off from that, yet they want to subject our guys to their laws. Their government is ineffective, and until it gets squared away, and shows it by executing lawfulness against their own people, then they play by our rules.

+1 totally agree

rayray
10-18-07, 13:16
Here's the thing that gets me. Iraq has stated that they want Blackwater out, and want a replacement that will be subject to Iraq law.

Their own people aren't subject to their law. They blow each other up, and aid and abed terrorists in their own country. The police force is rotten with insurgency. Their army isn't far off from that, yet they want to subject our guys to their laws. Their government is ineffective, and until it gets squared away, and shows it by executing lawfulness against their own people, then they play by our rules.

You hit the nail right on the head. Great comment.

Dport
10-18-07, 14:31
This actually sounds like a great opportunity for a venture capitalist.

Renegade
10-18-07, 15:16
How come MSD no longer protects State personnel? I was surprised to see BW protecting SECSTATE on the 60 minutes piece.

Iraq Ninja
10-18-07, 20:02
I think because they don't want to increase their numbers, because they don't want career folks, who they won't need later.

It is easier and cheaper to contract it out to BW. At least that is what State was saying at the hearings on CSPAN.

LukeMacGillie
10-19-07, 06:30
How come MSD no longer protects State personnel? I was surprised to see BW protecting SECSTATE on the 60 minutes piece.


MSD does not do protection for Madam Secretary in its normal duties. There is another group that does that.

But I have to ask, since I didnt see the piece, how do you know it was BW? Very easy to use stock footage of folks with M4s and tan gear and claim its BW.

SilverEagle
10-19-07, 08:05
My limited professional understanding of the situation in the Middle East as it pertains to BW is that the "contractors" are not only a cheaper and more media sensitive approach to the missions that we hear about but that they are also able to perform some of the missions the standing-army forces can't. As already pointed out the rescue effort (http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Oct03/0,4670,Iraq,00.html)conducted out of the US embassy a few weeks ago was tasked to the BW forces because they had the deploy-ability and equipment to get in and out at the right pace. Beyond that, imagine for a second what the same shoot scenario would play out as if it had been a detail of "good ol' American boys and girls of the armed forces" instead of the faceless contractors? I can easily see a much larger political / media backlash. As it currently stands all of the attention is being directed to whether or not they should still have a free hand, not the classic "screw the consequences, pull everyone out" attitude which grew out of Mi Lai in '68 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai). In my opinion the BW crowed and contractors in general are performing a task which no one else is willing or capable of doing, and history will look back at them as being the true framers of independence in Iraq… of course all of this is based on the assumption that the Iraqi government is telling the whole honest truth; everything changes is we learn the “crowed” was in fact an “armed mob” which was quickly dispersed by rapid and accurate return fire…

Renegade
10-19-07, 09:43
MSD does not do protection for Madam Secretary in its normal duties. There is another group that does that.

But I have to ask, since I didnt see the piece, how do you know it was BW? Very easy to use stock footage of folks with M4s and tan gear and claim its BW.

They said it was BW. Obviously I was not on-site to check IDs. Having worked for DS in past life, they did not look, or act like DS employees though.

John_Wayne777
10-19-07, 20:53
That jackass Scahill is on PBS right now.