Feral Jundi

Monday, August 2, 2010

Afghanistan: DynCorp Contractors Cleared By Kabul Police In Auto Crash

     The question I have now is who was in the crowd that helped to create this riot?  Because it wouldn’t take much to bring a crowd to that point, and especially if they had experience doing such a thing in past riots. –Matt

——————————————————————

U.S. Cleared in Afghan Crash That Led to Rioting

August 1, 2010

By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and MUJIB MASHAL

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Kabul police have cleared a United States Embassy vehicle of fault for a deadly collision on Friday that set off anti-American rioting near the embassy, a senior police official said Sunday.

After the crash, hundreds of enraged onlookers threw rocks, chanted “Death to America” and set ablaze two American vehicles.

The intensity of the response revealed the deep-seated hostility toward Americans and raised fears of a repeat of the pandemonium that swept the city and left 14 people dead after a fatal crash in May 2006. In that case, a truck in an American convoy plowed into a dozen Afghan cars and killed at least five people.

On Sunday morning, several hundred Afghans marched peacefully through central Kabul to protest both Friday’s collision and the deaths of other civilians caused by American and other Western military forces. Escorted by Afghan police officers, they chanted slogans against the United States, as well as against Iran and Pakistan.

(more…)

Friday, July 30, 2010

Afghanistan: DynCorp Contractors Attacked By Crowd After Fatal Auto Accident

   If anyone has any information on this one, I am all ears. It sounds like to me that they were unfortunately in a part of town that is not too friendly towards contractors or foreigners.  Or worse yet, the crowd was fed by some instigators who took it upon themselves to twist the story around and try to create a riot.

   All I know is that some Afghanis are dead from a horrible crash, and some DynCorp contractors are wounded because of a hostile crowd. If they were attacked by the crowd, then they showed some serious discipline to ‘not’ fire their weapons in self defense. I mean this could have ended up like another Blackwater Bridge scenario, the way it sounds. Who knows, and as more information comes out, I will make the edit. –Matt

Edit: July 31, 2010 – A big thanks to Ashley Burke from DynCorp, who sent me this update and statement from the company. The thing I keep looking at here, is how quickly the crowd formed and attacked this crew. There must have been instigators in the crowd.  And it sounds like the Afghans who pulled out in front of the DynCorp convoy are at fault here. But yet the crowd could care less. Here is the statement:

I saw your recent posting and wanted to make sure you had the full DI statement on this incident.

On July 30, 2010, DynCorp International (DI) personnel were involved in a car accident in Kabul when an Afghan vehicle unexpectedly pulled in front of them on a road to the airport. Several Afghan civilians were killed in the tragic accident.

When the DI personnel exited their vehicle to assess the situation and assist, a crowd quickly formed, the DI team was attacked, and their vehicle was set on fire. A second DI team arrived on the scene to assist, that DI team was also attacked by the crowd, and their vehicle was set on fire.  Local police arrived quickly. DI personnel took no action against the crowd and did not fire any shots, deferring to the local police who took action to disperse the crowd and remove the DI team to safety.

Any accident involving a loss of life is tragic. Our condolences go out to the families of those who were killed or injured in the accident. An investigation into the accident is underway and, until that investigation is complete, it would be inappropriate to comment further.

The employees involved in the accident are working under a program sponsored by the U.S. Department of State.

From Ashley Burke

—————————————————————–

Fatal Crash Stokes Afghan-U.S. Tension in Kabul

July 30, 2010

Auto Accident Involving American Contractors Leaves 4 Locals Dead; Mob Hurls Stones, Sets Fire to Vehicles

A fatal traffic accident involving private U.S. security contractors sparked an angry demonstration in Kabul Friday, with enraged Afghans hurling stones, setting fire to two vehicles and shouting “death to America” before police fired guns into the air to disperse the crowd.

Four Afghans were killed in the accident on the main airport road, according to Kabul’s criminal investigations chief, Abdul Ghaafar Sayedzada.

U.S. embassy spokesperson Caitlin Hayden confirmed to CBS News that the SUV involved was carrying four contractors from DynCorp, a private security firm affiliated with the embassy. Afghan police officials said the Americans were traveling in a two-vehicle convoy.

There were conflicting accounts of the accident and its aftermath. Local witnesses told CBS News that the Americans were driving the wrong way down the road, though DynCorp said that version of events was “not correct.”

Witnesses also said only three locals were killed in the crash, with the fourth dying after the U.S. contractors opened fire into the crowd.

(more…)

Industry Talk: FBO Solicitations– PSC Services For COB Blackhawk, FOB Tarin Kowt, FOB Hadrian, And ANCOP HQ, Afghanistan

     All of these just popped up the last couple of days and I wanted to get this out there.  Just reading through all of them, they all repeat the same things.  The contracting mechanism will be that concept I loathe called LPTA or Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable. Or what I call the ‘lowest bidder’.  So lowest bidder security is what is acceptable for the protection of our most cherished assets in this war–our soldiers and civilians serving there?

     What really kills me though is that the only ones that can bid are those companies who are registered with the Afghanistan Minister of Interior.  So anyone not on the list is out.

     I certainly hope for the sake of those who will be living at these COBs and FOBs, that when your lowest bidder PSC’s show up to provide protection, that you are able to sleep comfortably at nights. I have no idea if they will be putting these folks up on the walls, or just posting them at interior facilities. Nor do I have an idea of who they will use as security contractors, but you can guess that they will be ‘bottom of the barrel’ forces. And of course it will be pissed off expats running the whole thing and having to manage that mess.

     Either way, the US military has no one else to blame but themselves for using such a god awful contracting tool.  LPTA might be good for trash disposal or pest control, but it is a terrible idea when it comes to protecting peoples lives in war zones. You get what you pay for.

     To put it another way, I would not use LPTA for picking a doctor to save my mother’s life, nor would I advocate using LPTA for protection services in a war zone.  Pfffft. –Matt

———————————————————————

PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTOR (PSC) SERVICES @ COB BLACKHAWK, AFGHANISTAN

W91B4L-10-R-0230

COB BLACKHAWK, AFGHANISTAN KANDAHAR PROVINCE,

09355 AF

Department of the Army

Joint Contracting Command, Iraq/Afgahnistan

KANDAHAR RCC

COMBINE

07/25/10

*****

PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTOR (PSC) SERVICES AT FOB TARIN KOWT, AFGHANISTAN

W91B4L-10-T-0058

FOB TARIN KOWT AFGHANISTAN FOB TARIN KOWT, 1

09355 AF

Department of the Army

Joint Contracting Command, Iraq/Afgahnistan

KANDAHAR RCC

COMBINE

07/26/10

*****

PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTOR (PSC) SERVICES AT FOB HADRIAN, AFGHANISTAN

W91B4L-10-T-0059

FOB Hadrian, Afghanistan FOB Hadrian, 1

09355 AF

Department of the Army

Joint Contracting Command, Iraq/Afgahnistan

KANDAHAR RCC

COMBINE

07/27/10

*****

PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTOR (PSC) SERVICES AT ANCOP HQ, AFGHANISTAN

W91B4L-10-T-0077

ANCOC HQ Kandahar Kandahar, 1

09355 AF

Department of the Army

Joint Contracting Command, Iraq/Afgahnistan

KANDAHAR RCC

COMBINE

07/27/10

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Industry Talk: BLISS Could Be State’s New LOGCAP, And More Clarification About WPPS

     Thanks to David Isenberg for posting this on his blog and bringing it to everyone’s attention.  I think this is some interesting information that came out of this letter between Richard Verma and Sen. Claire McCaskill. If in fact BLISS becomes the new LOGCAP for DoS, this could be a pretty sizable contract.  That’s ‘if’ they cannot bring State under the current LOGCAP.  We will see how it goes.

     But what I thought was most interesting in this letter was the clarification as to the fact that contractors will be operating this war equipment that DoD will be loaning to State. That is great, and it will be cool to see Blackhawks and MRAPs rolling out into the skies and roads of Iraq under the control of contractors.  I wonder if they will paint this equipment a different color? Like DoS blue/white/yellow? lol

    Also, will these MRAPS or Blackhawks be stripped of all the life saving electronics and communications stuff that our troops were able to use for the survival of their units?  Probably not, but who knows.  Today’s military hardware has a lot of useful stuff in it that could really come in handy for the contractors that have to operate it.

     One thing that is missing in this letter, is a question and response about the 14 security related functions that State identified, that might have to be done by contractors.  Stuff like EOD or counter mortar/rocket team operations. Or QRF/rescue stuff or other military type activities.  I say this because I have yet to see any answers as to how the DoS will treat contractors if they actually had to fire their weapons and kill enemy combatants while doing any of these 14 security related functions.  Or worse yet, what about firefights that unintentionally ended up in the deaths of civilians? Because the enemy loves to attack from population centers with the hopes of creating such an incident.

     Like I have said before, we might want the war to be over in Iraq, but the enemy could care less about our wishes. If anything, with a limited military presence and an Iraqi government and security forces still trying to establish itself, a lot can happen during the transition and drawdown. DoS must understand that the enemy has learned much from the propaganda value of such incidents like the Nisour Square incident. If they can recreate such an incident again they will gain much, and DoS and the US mission in Iraq will suffer yet again from the consequences.

     There are still many questions that come to mind, and that is will DoS support their contractors if involved in a firefight that accidently resulted in civilian deaths, or will they treat the contractor as if they were criminals?  Worse yet, will they hand these individuals over to the Iraqis, or will they insure these men are afforded the same protections and rights that the military or even diplomats would have received in similar situations? Will DoS implement rules for the use of force that are realistic and give contractors the best chance of success for the defense of personnel and property? Or will DoS even allow the proper weapons and tactics required for an effective defense (that could include borderline offensive operations), or even rescues? Stuff to think about and it will be interesting to see how this turns out. –Matt

Edit: 08/02/2011- Hat tip to Ms. Sparky on this news. Supposedly KBR was chosen for this. Check the comment below for the entire post.

——————————————————————

On July 9, 2010 this letter was sent to Sen. Claire McCaskill, from Richard D. Verma, Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs at DoS. (I posed the first question and answer, and the 5th question and answer. Follow the link to read the rest)

*****

1. Will private security contractors, including contractors under the State Department’s Worldwide Personal Protective Services contract, be operating the requested equipment, vehicles, and aircraft?

     The Department of State (DOS) does not presently maintain a cadre of qualified drivers/operators for some requested equipment, such as MRAPS, and, as such, would need to supplement current skill sets within its WPPS contract to ensure operational capability. If/when DoD provides the requested equipment, the Department will modify the relevant contracts to require that the equipment be operated and maintained by contractor personnel in accordance with manufacturer, DoD, or other applicable standards. Contract modifications will also require that contractor personnel possess the necessary qualifications and complete the requisite training to properly operate and maintain the equipment. An aircraft provided to the Department will be incorporated into an existing Department aviation support contract.

5. If the State Department’s request to use LOGCAP is denied, how does the Department plan to ensure that the next contract for life support services is as transparent, competitive, and accountable as possible?

     Should the LOGCAP [Logistics Civil Augmentation Program] be unavailable, the Department will follow Federal Acquisition Regulation competitive procedures in any separate procurement action. Due to long-acquisition lead-time involved, the Department has already initiated action to develop a competitive solicitation for the base life support requirements should it be unable to remain under the LOGCAP program. This solicitation is referred to as the Baghdad Life Support Services acquisition, or BLISS contract. If necessary, the Department could issue a Request for Proposals for the BLISS contract in a very short time.

—————————————————————–

Baghdad Life Support Services

Solicitation Number: SAQMMA10I0009

Agency: U.S. Department of State

Office: Office of Logistics Management

Location: Acquisition Management

(more…)

Monday, July 26, 2010

Iraq: U.S. Orders Pullout Of All Pinoy Workers In Iraq

Filed under: Industry Talk,Iraq — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 12:07 PM

    Boy, this is a surprise.  My thoughts with this is that if Nepalese workers have to leave, that would include security contractors.  That is too bad because these are some excellent guys to have for security work.  I certainly hope these countries can work on lifting their bans, because all of these workers are bringing back money earned in war zones and spending it in their local economies back home. They are also providing a much needed service in Iraq.

     But yeah, if these countries do not want them in Iraq, then we should honor that.  But we should also try to be working the diplomatic angle with these countries. All of these folks want an opportunity to work in Iraq, and if Iraq is alright with that and things are safer than several years back, then I do not see the what the issue is. –Matt

Edit: 08/05/2010- It looks like Nepal has lifted the ban for their citizens.  It sounds like the Philippines is getting close to lifting their ban.  In the comments, I posted two stories that talked about both.

——————————————————————

US orders pullout of all Pinoy workers in Iraq

By Dindo Amparo

07/26/2010

Thousands of Filipino workers in Iraq are on the brink of losing their jobs after the US government ordered all its military contractors to send home expatriate workers whose country imposes a travel ban in Iraq.

The deadline for expatriation is August 9.

In a memorandum issued by the United States Central Command last July 20, Colonel Richard Nolan, senior contracting officer of the Iraw CentCom Contracting Command said: “All contractors in Iraq have 20 days from the date of this letter to ensure their employees comply with US and international law and understood their redeployment responsibilities under the term of their contract.”

The memo added: “It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that it is not employing people from countries prohibited from entry to Iraq.”

The decision of the US Central Command was also triggered by reports that some expatriate workers including Filipinos were abandoned by their contractors in various camps throughout Iraq, raising concerns about violations committed by various contractors including hiring workers from countries that have imposed travel and work restrictions.

The Philippines and Nepal are among those mentioned among countries whose nationals were able to enter and work in Iraq despite the travel ban imposed by their host governments.

(more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress