Why is it that the security contracting community is always treated like the elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge? We are the second largest force in Iraq, yet we are treated as insignificant or irrelevant when it comes to any conversation about our service there.
So with that said, this show was a little hard to listen too. There is absolutely no voice representing the security contracting community in this forum. I am actually kind of disappointed in PBS NewsHour for putting together such a one sided deal.
I think the biggest thing that kind of ticked me off, was that all of the contributors in this conversation, completely ignored the realities of the war in Iraq, during the times that they were referring to. I really don’t know how else to convey how dangerous and tenuous these kinds of operations were then and now, and there was a total disregard for this fact during the show. How else do you go down the road as a security specialist, guarding a convoy that every insurgent in Iraq would love to destroy? Or worse yet, to be dealing with an environment where all vehicle are potential bomb laden threats. The roads are dangerous, and keeping alive the client in a war zone is not easy or pretty.
Or that the reason why we were called upon in the first place to do our thing in Iraq, was because the DOD and DOS did not have the man power to get these jobs done. We are and were very important to the war effort, and this guys did not cover that aspect very well at all. Did PBS think to post how many men Blackwater lost in Iraq? Like I said, the conversation was a little one sided.
Also, security contractors are a service provider. If the client (DOD and DOS) wants to use us, then it is on them to determine the rules and what we can or can’t do. With that said, I have had to sign numerous legal documents to operate in Iraq. I have always understood that I was accountable for my actions and that I was covered by UCMJ, which really is the only legal system we should fall under while over there.(in my opinion) Likewise, if UCMJ was properly applied to contractors, then maybe Iraq would have seen more justice served. But yet again, politics and the desires of the Iraqi people are what dictate the conditions of the SOFA, and not what is practical or fair.
The other thing that bothers me, is this mention of a fully operational and legitimate Iraqi legal system. Maybe the courts are set up all nice, complete with well briefed judges, but the law enforcement side of the issue is in severe question. How do you collect evidence, secure a scene, and question witnesses, in the middle of a war zone? During the Blackwater incident, that is exactly what they came up against. That evidence and witness questioning, was tainted by a war environment. That the enemy could very well set up a situation to frame companies, as a tactic of war, and take advantage of this kind of chaotic environment.
Now don’t get me wrong, I want Iraq to succeed and gain total independence from the US and Coalition. I want it to be a success story, just like everyone that has been a part of that war. But it is my opinion that we need to slowly transition toward Iraqi independence, and do it very carefully and base all of our moves on results, and not politics. What I am afraid of, is that politics will force these issues, and guys could get hurt during this transition period. And when the war is finally finished, then maybe we can trust that justice and the law can be fairly administered.
I think we can fall under Iraqi law legitimately one day, and I think we should.(that’s if we are all still in their country when the war is over) But do I think Iraq is at the level where justice will be fully served, and especially in the middle of a war? I have my doubts, and I would like to hear some more experts out there weigh in on the issue to alleviate some of these doubts.
As for the DOS not falling under the SOFA, that is an interesting angle. It could be that the guards of DOS are privy to more sensitive information, and that if they are brought up before an Iraqi court of law, that this could cause OPSEC/PERSEC problems. But the DOD has the same situation as well. Or the State is just trying to protect Blackwater right now, because they know that Iraq is out for blood. The current agreement got this far like that, so there must be intent for that part to be in there.
I don’t know, and I am just speculating right now. But this is the kind of thing I am talking about. Who is going to explain this stuff to the guy on the ground? That’s why I recommend to all employees of companies working in Iraq, to demand that the company explain the details of the SOFA to them as soon as an agreement is passed. –Head Jundi
——————————————————————-
Transcript
Security Contractors Left Out of Iraq Status of Forces Pact
Blackwater security contractors in IraqA draft Status of Forces Agreement negotiated between the U.S. and Iraqi governments gives Iraq “primary legal jurisdiction over contractors with the U.S. and their employees.” But disagreement has arisen over whether the provision applies to State Department contractors, such as Blackwater USA, or just Defense Department contractors. The NewsHour’s Dan Sagalyn prepared this report.
