Feral Jundi

Monday, April 16, 2012

Iraq: No Iraq Visas Issued to USG Security Personnel Since December 2011?

Filed under: Industry Talk,Iraq — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 1:23 PM

I recently came across a blog post by Diplopundit that was very interesting. They are reporting that no Iraqi Visas have been issued to USG security personnel since December of last year. This is not surprising and I posted about guys getting arrested and hassled last year and this year because of visa/paper work issues. Here is the quote and DoS has yet to refute this or comment over at Diplopundit.

“No visas have been issued to security personnel since December and there is no straight answer coming from the Department of State or the Ministry of Interior.”

What is funny is that the DoS stated this in their travel warning for Iraq.

“The U.S. government considers the potential threat to U.S. government personnel in Iraq to be serious enough to require them to live and work under strict security guidelines. All U.S. government employees under the authority of the U.S. Ambassador must follow strict safety procedures when traveling outside the Embassy. State Department guidance to U.S. businesses in Iraq advises the use of protective security details.

We also know what the Oil Ministry thinks about private security in Iraq. lol

So how is it that anyone can legally provide this security throughout Iraq if they don’t have visas? So I take it that folks are just sitting at the embassy and not traveling throughout Iraq because their security is without a visa? Or I wonder if any other countries have been denied visas and the US is the only one? (There are various oil interests in Iraq, to include China’s, and I wonder how they are being treated?) Let me know what you think or if you have any updates? –Matt

Monday, December 14, 2009

Legal News: Omnibus Bill FY 2010–Embassy and Worldwide Security Protection Stuff

     I found this over at Diplopundit, which is a great blog that tracks this stuff.  They basically broke down the bill as to the budget amounts and any new amendments.  I especially clued into the latest budgetary figures, increases in new security positions, and the latest ‘best value’ contracting mechanism that State has. They even mention the Kabul Fiasco specifically, as a reason for the amendment.  Check it out. –Matt

——————————————————————-

From Diplopundit:

Worldwide Security Protection

The conference agreement provides $1,586,214,000 for Worldwide Security Protection, which is $8,787,000 above the House and $8,786,000 below the Senate. The conferees note that $13,375,000 requested for fiscal year 2010 was included in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32), bringing the total available for Worldwide Security Protection in fiscal year 2010 to $1,599,589,000. Within the amount provided, $221,926,000, and a projected 200 security positions, are to strengthen the Department’s capacity to respond to the growing security challenges at posts around the world, including the requested positions for the second year of the Visa and Passport Security Plan.

Embassy Security Constructions and Maintenance

The conference agreement provides $1,724,150,000 for Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance, which is the same as the House and Senate, of which $847,300,000 is for priority worldwide security upgrades, acquisition, and construction and $876,850,000 is for other operations, maintenance and construction.

The following provisions are new, modified from the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8), or further clarified in this joint statement.

Sec. 7006. Local Guard Contracts.

The conference agreement includes a new provision which allows the Secretary of State flexibility to award local guard contracts on the basis of either lowest price that is technically acceptable or the best value cost-technical tradeoff (as defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation part 15.101) when awarding such contracts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

Current law requires that all local guard contracts must be awarded on the basis of the lowest price that is technically acceptable, and if other factors had been considered, the problems reported earlier this year involving the local guard contract in Kabul, Afghanistan may have been prevented. The conferees understand that providing the Secretary with authority to make awards through the best value approach can enhance the guard force’s effectiveness and justify the additional cost, particularly in countries with dangerous or hostile environments.

Check out Diplopundit here.

Powered by WordPress