Archive for category Publications

Publications: UN Use Of Private Military And Security Companies– Practices And Policies, By Åse Gilje Østensen

A big hat tip to David Isenberg for finding this one. Great little paper and the real value here is all the history between the UN and private military and security companies listed in this thing. Here is a snippet about PAE in Africa which I thought was interesting.

PMSCs in UN humanitarian operations 
…..The role played by PAE in MONUC serves as a more recent illustration of  how  a  PMSC  has  been  deployed  in  a  UN  peace  operation.  In  June  2004  Congolese students released a wave of violence in central and eastern parts of the DRC in protest at the UN mission’s failure to prevent atrocities in Ituri  province.  The  frustration  of  the  Congolese  civil  war  was  directed  towards  UN associated  personnel  and  facilities.  PAE  was  an  integral  part  of  the  UN  operation.  It  ran  six  airfields  for  the  mission  and  its  employees  drove  UN  vehicles  and  were  considered  UN  workers  by  locals  –  and  hence  were  also  subject  to  attacks.  The  violence  in  Kisangani  included  burning  the  UN  headquarters  in  the  city  to  the  ground,  UN  staff  housing  was  attacked  and  burned,  and  over  70  UN  vehicles  were  stoned  and  set  ablaze.  As  the  UN  military  contingent  withdrew,  300  UN  staff  fled  to  the  local  airport  where  they  demanded  emergency  evacuation  from  the  city,  fearing  they  would  be  killed  by  the  rioting  mobs.  PAE  workers  prepared  for  and  carried  out  the  evacuation  of  the  UN  staff,  while  the  PAE  teams  stayed  behind  to complete their  contract.  This  example  in  particular illustrates a fundamental  dependency  on  commercial  companies  for  essential  tasks  in  certain  peacekeeping  operations, and  suggests  that  at  times private contractors may face more risks than UN personnel. 

The other thing that I liked about the paper is that it showed the hypocrisy of the UN and their view of this industry. Here they have the UN Working Group on Mercenaries which criticizes everyone for using PMSC’s, and yet in the same breath, the UN had companies like Executive Outcomes on their vender list. Or they use PMSC’s all over the world to help secure operations and protect personnel.

Anyway, here is the paper and definitely check it out. Let me know what you think in the comments section. -Matt

 

UN Use of Private Military and Security Companies: Practices and Policies, By Åse Gilje Østensen

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Publications: Journal Of International Peace Operations, November-December 2011

Tags: , , ,

Publications: From Dogs Of War To Soldiers Of Peace, By Stephen Wittels

A big hat tip to David Isenberg for finding this paper. He does a fantastic job of finding the really interesting publications out there that need to be read and discussed. It should also be noted that this particular piece won the 1st Prize in the Awards For Excellence contest at the Journal of Military and Strategic Studies back in 2010. Pretty cool.

As to the paper itself, the point of it is to address the problem that the UN has in getting member states to contribute quality forces. Or the problem the UN has in getting enough troops that are capable enough to do the job. So a quantity and quality problem, and a possible solution to address that. The paper argues that PMC’s could be the solution to the quantity and quality problem that the UN is up against.

Contractors are also politically acceptable, just because no one cries when we are killed. With member states, when they send their military units to the UN for peacekeeping duties, and that mission goes horribly wrong and many troops are killed, then that becomes politically sticky for those leaders of those states to deal with. Tragedies in peacekeeping could actually force states to pull out troops, or a mission might be too dangerous, and no states want to contribute forces–all because those missions are threats to the careers of politicians in those contributing nations. That is reality, and PMC’s are one way to mitigate that reality.

Or worse, you get states that have poor and corrupt leaders who view their military as a way to make money by pimping them out to the UN. They could care less about taking care of their military, or accomplishing the mission/providing a good service. What matters to them is getting paid by the UN, and then letting the UN and the other member states figure out how to take care of their prostituted military. Meanwhile, those poor leaders also rip off their soldiers and siphon off their pay.  Pfffft.

Now of course I have cursed the UN in the past, just because they seem to cause more problems than fix problems in these countries. But it is also important to note that a properly equipped and armed professional force with a well defined mission can make all the difference in the world.  So if the UN wants to go down this path and have it succeed, then it will first have to square away the way it does business. It will have to first accept that PMC’s can do this kind of work, and then they will have focus on lessons learned within their organization and within the current wartime contracting lessons learned by the west. (or at least trying to learn…lol)

In other words, they can build a model contracting system, but it will take reaching out to other country’s experiences, other industries and companies, and ‘building a snowmobile’ out of all of these lessons and ideas. Because the really hard and costly lessons that the US has experienced, could totally help the UN form a sound contracting system that delivers the services they want and need.

Another point I wanted to bring up is that in my opinion, the optimum contracting mechanism that best mitigates the principal agent problem is the ‘best value’ contracting method. The lowest priced, technically acceptable contracting mechanism is a horrible way to do business, and it is a ‘race to the bottom’.  So instead of getting poor troops from member states, you will replace them with poor PMC’s if you go this route.

Furthermore, you must have a professional contractor management force that actually produces the correct ratio of management per contract. Please do not assign one guy to manage billions of dollars and thousands of people and multiple contracts. A division of labor is vital to this effort, and those people tasked with watching these contracts need to know what they are doing and what they are looking for. Like I said, the lessons are there if anyone is willing to study this stuff.

251061 2124730125950 1476807303 2474550 5975402 nPublications: From Dogs Of War To Soldiers Of Peace, By Stephen Wittels

Oh, and why was there no mention of the excellent work that Executive Outcomes did in Sierra Leone, or the cost effectiveness of that PMC, versus the total waste of UN manpower and money to do the same job there? (see the graphic above) Or where was there any mention of the UN calling Executive Outcomes and asking for help and a quote on services for dealing with the Rwanda Genocide crisis back in the nineties? My point here is that the UN should be talking with men like Eeben Barlow, and asking exactly the best way to partner and work with such companies like EO. Who knows, the UN could have actually stopped the Rwandan Genocide if they would have hired a company like EO?

I guess the final deal I want to talk about is the global economy. Right now, there are austerity measures being implemented throughout the world, and the availability of force for the UN and it’s member states is decreasing because of it. The UN will have less money and less force to work with under the current constraints of that economy, and missions will suffer because of it. That’s unless they get creative and actually look to private industry as a way to save money and provide a force with capability. I believe private industry can be a great service to the UN, but that all goes out the window if the UN does not set this up correctly or fails to manage these contracts properly. -Matt

 

From Dogs of War to Soldiers of Peace: Evaluating Private Military and Security Companies as a Civilian Pro…

Tags: , , ,

Publications: State Department’s QDDR And Private Security Contractors

The Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) is a sweeping assessment of how the Department of State and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) can become more efficient, accountable, and effective in a world in which rising powers, growing instability, and technological transformation create new threats, but also new opportunities. At its core the QDDR provides a blueprint for elevating American “civilian power” to better advance our national interests and to be a better partner to the U.S. military. Leading through civilian power means directing and coordinating the resources of all America’s civilian agencies to prevent and resolve conflicts; help countries lift themselves out of poverty into prosperous, stable, and democratic states; and build global coalitions to address global problems.

I just went through the QDDR and tried to find all the parts that talked about security contractors. They talk about contractors in general, and from what I gather there really isn’t anything new or radical about DoS’s position. They still want to use more federal civilians to do this work or to supervise contractors, and they want to increase and improve upon contractor oversight. And I think they are doing that. Hell, they have plenty of reports and lessons learned to go off of.

What is important to point out though is that State is wanting to do more forward looking and strategic planning, just so budgeting could reflect that. That is good, because companies can then plan accordingly for that kind of strategic planning. It adds more stability to the process, and it allows companies to better prepare for what State or USAID really need.

Along those lines, I posted a brief introduction to State’s new bureau below. It is called the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations or CSO. This is the group that will:

-Get ahead of change. While the scale and types of future crises cannot be predicted, the complex nature and cascading effects of 21st century challenges require a more forward-looking State Department. CSO will support the State Department’s ability to anticipate major security challenges by providing timely, operational solutions.

-Drive an integrated response. CSO will build integrated approaches to conflict prevention and stabilization by linking analysis, planning, resources, operational solutions, and active learning and training. The bureau will call on its civilian responders to deploy in a timely manner to areas of instability in order to bring the right mix of expertise to each unique situation.

-Leverage partnerships. CSO will work with a range of non-governmental and international partners to prevent conflict, address sources of violence, build on existing resiliencies, and promote burden-sharing. In particular, CSO will encourage greater involvement of local civil society – including women, youth, and the media – to prevent and respond to conflict.

State has also recognized that we are experiencing a very fast moving and complex world environment right now. The Arab Spring, the global economy, wars, and revolutions in the various countries of the middle east and world are opening new opportunities for the US government. It takes a flexible ‘smart power’ approach to take advantage of that. Contractors are a big part of that flexible smart power approach.

We are also crucial to filling vacuums of capability and security. Iraq is a prime example. Because of politics in Iraq and in the US, US troops are no longer welcome. But in order to insure our investment of blood and treasure in Iraq doesn’t go to waste, and for our strategic interest in the region to continue to be met, it is vital to maintain a presence and apply that smart power there. DoS used to rely on a combination of the military and their security contractors to provide the security necessary to perform their diplomatic missions outpost security. Now security contractors, with Diplomatic Security personnel managing that effort, will have to accomplish the task. And the insurgency in Iraq is still active, and Iran is still supplying weapons to opposition groups. In other words, the troops might be gone, but the danger of attacks are still there.

As to interesting points about private security contractors, I thought this one was interesting:

-Video recording systems and tracking systems installed in vehicles.

I just think it is very interesting that Erik Prince was pushing for video cameras in the vehicles, way before the Nisour Square incident, and State fought that. Now of course, video cameras in vehicles is policy. Which is great, because now there will be an official video record that can be presented in regards to the performance, good or bad, of a security contractor and their team. The video does not lie, and it will eliminate the ‘he said, she said’ game. Plus it will help in a court of law, much like how they are used in law enforcement.

And in a world where security contractors can easily be thrown under the bus based on politics or whatever, a tape of an incident could make all the difference in proving a security contractors actions were sound and based on a solid threat. Or to prove that ‘yes, the motorcade was fired upon first, and here is the video to prove it’. A tape can also help to get rid of poor contractors, or can add a better picture of the incident for an after action review. Although we will see how it is used, good or bad, and only time will tell.

Which brings me to my next point. I know how important these guys are, everyone in this industry knows how important security contractors are, and State/USAID knows just how important we are. Too bad the public doesn’t know this, because no one in State or USAID promotes how important we are to the press or public? A great example was the silence from DoS about the whole Kabul Embassy attack?  Contractors definitely saved the day there, but the public hasn’t a clue about that performance or effort.

I guess Secretary Clinton’s new policy on armed guards on boats is a start, but I definitely would like to see these agencies give more of an effort to recognize the good efforts and sacrifice of the men and women who put their lives on the line to defend them? Or at least acknowledge just how important we really are to their mission and strategic goals? - Matt

 

From the QDDR on Private Security Contractors
Enhance and improve private security contractor oversight and accountability.
State uses private security contractors to help meet the extraordinary security requirements in critical threat and non-permissive environments.  Through operational changes already implemented and an examination conducted as part of the QDDR, State is ensuring proper management, oversight, and operational control of the private security contractors we deploy overseas.  We institutionalized many of these changes through the new Worldwide Protective Services contract awarded in September 2010, which incorporates lessons learned to ensure that private security contractors perform their requirements in a professional, responsible, culturally sensitive, and cost effective manner.  Specific steps we have taken include:
Ensuring professionalism and responsibility through improved direct oversight of security contractor personnel:
-Direct hire Diplomatic Security personnel directly supervise protective motorcades;
-Diplomatic Security personnel reside at off-site residential camps in Afghanistan;
-Revised mission firearms policies strengthen rules on the use of force and new less-than-lethal equipment fielded to minimize the need for deadly force; and
-Video recording systems and tracking systems installed in vehicles.
Improving the image of the security footprint through enhanced cultural sensitivity:
-Mandatory cultural awareness training for all security contractors prior to deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan;
-Revised standards of conduct, including a ban on alcohol; and
-Interpreters included in protective security details.
Achieving greater efficiencies through new contract terms:
-One set of terms and conditions, enhancing the ability to provide appropriate and consistent oversight;
-Reduced acquisition timelines;
-Larger number of qualified base contract holders, thereby increasing competition and controlling costs;
-Timely options in the event a company fails to perform;
-More efficient program management compared to multiple, stand-alone contracts; and
-Computerized tracking of contractor personnel to aid in reviewing personnel rosters used to support labor invoices.
Page 183 and 184
—————————————————————-
Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations
The Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) advances U.S. national security by driving integrated, civilian-led efforts to prevent, respond to, and stabilize crises in priority states, setting conditions for long-term peace.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Publications: Contractor Support Of USCENTCOM AOR, 4th Quarter FY 2011

The big news here is that there are 52,700 DoD contractors in Iraq, which represents a 19% decrease from the 3rd quarter of this year. They predict that there will be around 14,000 to 15,000 DoD and DoS contractors through FY 2012.

For Afghanistan, there are currently 101,800 DoD contractors and this represents a 9.3% increase from the 3rd quarter of this year. Local nationals make up 49.8% of the DoD contractor workforce. -Matt

 

Contractor Support Of USCENTCOM AOR, 4th Quarter FY 2011

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Publications: Texas Border Security–A Strategic Military Assessment, 2011

This is a great little publication and a big hat tip to retired Generals McCaffery and Scales for putting together such an enlightening report.

The bottom line here folks, is as the Mexican authorities become better at countering the cartels, the cartels will increasingly depend upon safe havens to continue business and operations. So strategically speaking, the cartels are looking to set up sanctuary in the US border regions and play the border like a rib bone.

I should say that they ‘are’ using the US as sanctuary, just because if you combine this report with the other report I posted, then it isn’t too hard to put two and two together. And in a war sense, this is akin to the Taliban using Pakistan as a sanctuary so they can continue operations in Afghanistan.

The other element of sanctuary is the idea that cartels are operating along the seams of the law and law enforcement agencies, both federal or state, or between two countries. These guys are playing the borders in the literal sense, and in the legal sense, and definitely taking advantage of the grey areas.

Here are some quotes from this thing that jumped out at me:

A successful sanctuary permits insurgents to move freely and operate on whichever side offers greater security. In a curious twist of irony, the more successful the Mexican military becomes in confronting the cartels, the greater likelihood that cartels will take the active fight into Texas as they compete against each other in the battle to control distribution territories and corridors….

…..This paper will be the first to conclude that the cartels are following a twofold strategic plan:
1. First, to create a “sanitary zone” inside the Texas border — one county deep — that will provide sanctuary from Mexican law enforcement and, at the same time, enable the cartels to transform Texas’ border counties into narcotics transshipment points for continued transport and distribution into the continental United States.
2. Second, to increasingly rely on organized gangs to provide expendable and unaccountable manpower to do their dirty work inside Texas and elsewhere in the country. These gangs are recruited on the streets of Texas cities and inside Texas prisons by top-tier gangs who work in conjunction with the cartels.

Check it out and let me know what you think?  Definitely pass this around and get the word out. -Matt

 

Texas Border Security: A Strategic Military Assessment, 2011

Tags: , , , ,

Publications: The DoJ National Drug Threat Assessment, 2011

The National Drug Threat Assessment 2011

Tags: , , , , ,

Publications: Journal Of International Peace Operations, September-October 2011

Tags: , , , ,

Publications: CWC Final Report To Congress–Transforming Wartime Contracting, August 2011

Here it is. If you want some light reading, this is the report for you. lol Actually, the more folks that can read this thing, the more input I can get about it. If you find anything wrong with the report, or disagree with one of the findings, then definitely let the viewing public know about it in the comments below.

I would also like to commend the members of this commission for taking on such a daunting task and coming up with a product. Now the key is to learn from it, and make the necessary adjustments. We have enough reports and information to build an excellent contingency contracting program. Now it just takes leadership and resolve to act on those lessons learned.

I also wanted to comment on something that I think is pretty telling. At no time did the commission ever make an effort to contact me or this blog. Although I know that a good portion of my readership comes from the beltway and I have to assume that the various researchers tasked with helping the CWC have come across this blog. But no one has come forward to talk, and that is really too bad. What are you scared of?

For that matter, I haven’t seen any CWC folks reach out on the various forums that this industry congregates on, and that is odd to me as well. Although I am sure the CWC has reached out to the various companies and associations, it just seems that they have completely avoided talking to the very group that their report would impact.

Contractors have been killed and wounded in this war in great numbers, and they will continue to make that sacrifice. Contractors also have a huge presence in today’s war zones, and thousands have served over the years. Arguably, this highly flexible civilian army is a strategic asset to this nation. If it isn’t, then implement the draft or spend the money on recruitment to bring everything under military control.

I highly doubt that politicians will ever have the political will to implement a draft, or to convince tax payers to raise a standing army of such size and nature. The point is, is that contractors are here to stay and this nation cannot go to war without us. So to not reach out to this industry and acknowledge this sacrifice and contribution, is just wrong.-Matt

 

CWC Final Report To Congress–Transforming Wartime Contracting, Controlling Costs, Reducing Risk, August 2011

Tags: , , , ,

Maritime Security: Ministry Of Shipping–Indian Ship Owners Are Now Allowed To Contract With Private Security Companies

This is surprising, because from what I can tell, Indian ship owners are able to contract with whatever PSC they want. Which means Indian ship owners could tap into the already vibrant maritime security market. This is great news if true. I posted the guidelines in my Scribd if anyone is curious, and I could not find anything in them that said these PSC’s had to be Indian owned.

A couple of months back I posted a deal about the Indian government warming up to the idea of allowing their ship owners to use armed guards. But I got the impression in that article that they would only allow retired Indian naval officers to work on these vessels? Now I am sure Indian shipping companies would probably prefer contracting with Indian PSC’s, but hopefully with these new guidelines, this will help them to realize they have a choice–that’s if they would like to go outside of the market of Indian PSC’s.-Matt

 

Ships with Indian crew can have armed guards
Aug 30 2011
The ministry of shipping on Monday issued guidelines allowing ships with Indian crew to deploy armed guards in a bid to combat piracy in the Gulf of Aden. The move comes on the back of recommendations from the inter-ministerial group (IMG) of officers constituted to handle the hostage situation on hijacked ships and also suggest preventive measures.
It has been found that about 35 per cent of the ship transiting in these waters deploy armed security guards and that the pirates generally don’t attack ships with armed guards on board, an official release said on Monday. So far, 120 Somalian pirates have been apprehended by India as on date.
As per the new guidelines, ship owners are allowed to engage private maritime security companies (PMSC) through a proper selection procedure. In line with these, all Indian ships visiting Indian ports are to furnish details of security personnel on board, the firearms carried by them and the details of licence issued, etc, to the port authority, customs, Coast Guard and the Navy. Foreign merchant vessels visiting Indian ports with security guards are also required to follow similar procedure, as per the guidelines.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,