“If they had a rule book and they followed it, you’d think they’d be very happy to tell you about it,” Harris said.

The Defence Department directed questions to the Foreign Affairs Department, which answered with an email late Tuesday afternoon.

The accord “is fully consistent with current Canadian policy and practice related to the use of private military and security companies,” said the note from Alain Cacchione. 

   Finally, some talk about the Montreaux Document. The big one here goes back to regulation and quality control.  You can sign all the documents in the world, but unless there is enforcement of those rules, companies are going to do whatever they want.  If Canada was to take a hint at the US lackluster performance, they would hire enough government or military contracting officers (CORs) to actually manage these contracts.  Give the CORs a strong leader and some teeth to deal with the delinquent companies, and get to work.

    As for managing these local companies, you tell them if they cannot abide by the contract, then it is a default on contract and the thing is null and void.  Then put the word out that because company X could not perform to the standards of the contract, they were dropped or massively fined.  Companies will catch on real quick about what contract compliance means. Where companies get away with murder, is when no one is watching or even cares.  That is why it is so important to have enough people to watch these companies and actually keep these groups honest.

   The other one that kills me is when governments make excuses on why they cannot manage these companies.  There is no viable excuse.  You write a comprehensive contract that both the company and yourself understands and agrees too, and then you provide the necessary resources to manage that contract. Make it a priority, and hire the necessary folks to manage this stuff.

    And management does not mean quality control from the comforts of your office in Kabul or Washington DC.  Management means actually getting out in the field, and checking up on these guys.  If the companies know your watching and care, they will comply.  And in the tradition of Sun Tzu, if you make an example of the first company that decides to mock the contract…. drop those fools.

     Better yet, if you can write into the contract some kind of fines system, that would be better. I am not talking about a few thousand dollars, I am talking about tens of thousands of dollars or even millions–make it painful.  Money is what drives these companies, and money should be the first tool of choice used to punish or even reward the company.  If the company refuses to pay the fine, drop them and take them to court if you want.  There are plenty of options of controlling and disciplining these companies, and it all starts with a well written contract along with enforcement of these contracts. All of this should be commonsense, yet every story I read about this stuff tells me that no one has any sense at all in the upper ranks of this machine.  Wake up.

   The other point I want to stress for the Canadians is that if you are serious about COIN, then it behooves you to get your hired guns under control.  That your regional strategy could be hindered or even destroyed, because you failed to properly manage your contractors in that region.  You have to remember, these companies are your asset, and essentially a representative of you.  If they kill some civilians in a village, and the the village knows the company was working for you, who do you think the villagers are going to blame?  Who do you think the Taliban are going to blame in that scenario? Wake up.

     Man this pisses me off.  Both the US and Canada, along with the rest of the Coalition in this war, have done Jack Squat about managing the close to a quarter million contractors in their AO’s.  If you want your COIN strategy to succeed, you are going to have to actually first acknowledge our existence, and second, tell us what your plan is so we don’t mess things up.  It’s ok to tell us what to do…. you’re the one paying for our service….really, it’s ok.  To me, this is like playing a football game, and half the team is not included in the huddle. -Matt

——————————————————————

Canada agrees to stricter controls on Afghan hired guns

Jun 16, 2009

By Murray Brewster, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA – Canada quietly signed an international agreement on regulating private security companies in war-zones just weeks after a Canadian soldier was allegedly shot by a contractor during a confused firefight in Afghanistan last summer.

But it’s unclear what the government is doing to keep the hired guns on its payroll in check.

Canada was one of 17 countries to agree last fall to the Montreaux Document, which lays out responsibilities for the use of hired guns under international law.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Afghanistan, Canada, Compass Security ISS, Montreaux Document, security contractors