Feral Jundi

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

India: India’s Maoist Menace

Filed under: Al Qaeda,India,Industry Talk,Nepal — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 2:14 AM

“We do not have the forces to move into areas occupied by the rebels,” Home Secretary Gopal K. Pillai told India’s Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses in March, according to media reports. “We have a long, bloody war ahead. It is going to be a long haul, and I see violence going to go up.” Pillai declined to comment for this story.

Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram told chief ministers of Maoist-hit states on July 14 that the federal government will strengthen security forces and provide better roads, schools and health care in areas where Maoists operate. Maoists have some degree of influence in 220 of the nation’s 626 districts, the government estimates.

India’s failure to defuse the conflict is another setback as it struggles to become a Western-style power. The nation must spend $1 trillion to improve living standards and infrastructure from 2012 to 2017 for its $1.2 trillion economy to grow at close to 10 percent, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said on March 23. Growth has averaged 8.5 percent a year in the past five years. 

*****

     I want to thank one of my readers for sending me some scoop on the situation in India. He had sent me an article from the Economist originally, and I went into research mode due to how interesting this conflict was.  This article from Bloomberg was a little better, and very extensive, so I will put this one up.  Both articles cover the same subject.

     The areas that I like to look at with conflicts, is the position of the insurgency and what economic forces are at play.  Specifically, resources that are at stake which could significantly help out a country.  Especially if that country’s success will positively help out the free world, and help to provide some balance in the global economy (China needs more competition to keep it in check). India is a democracy, and I sure would like to see it succeed as a democracy. I am no fan of Maoists and the communist game plan, and what they are doing in India and places like Nepal are troubling.

    The other thing my reader mentioned, which kind of falls in line with the market of force principles I was talking about earlier, is why do we continue to send money to countries and not offer the services of PMC’s?  If India does not have the manpower or COIN capability, then why are we sending money to them so they can somehow ‘re-invent the wheel’ of counter-insurgency?  Why not tell them ‘hey, we will help you out, but because we do not have troops to spare, we will send PMC’s’? At least with that arrangement, the money we give to India would instead be going into the pockets of our own companies who would be assisting India in their fight against Maoists.

    The best analogy I have for this, is that if you see a homeless man on the street, is it smarter to give them money, or give them an assistant who can clean them up and teach them to fend for themselves? Feed a man a fish, and you feed them for a day, teach them how to fish, and you feed them for life. So the saying goes.

    We could be sending companies who can teach the latest counter-insurgency methods and strategies, or even tap into our market of force that is certainly experienced in dealing with insurgents in today’s wars. Companies could be contracted to clear, hold, and build districts that India has lost or is losing too the Maoists. The return on investment in contracting the services of a company to do this for India, would be far better than just throwing money at the ‘homeless man’. Isn’t India’s success within the free world’s best interest?

     Because as it stands now, the way the west throws around aid to places like Pakistan or even India seems to never offer a good return on investment. It’s as if we are giving money to that ‘homeless man’ so he can go buy booze with it. lol Besides, wouldn’t it be nice to actually put that money back into the pockets of those who would go back the US or UK, and spend it at home?  Is it better to feed them a fish, or teach these countries how to fish?

    I also look at how a vibrant steel/mining industry could actually help a government to help it’s citizens. From the jobs it would produce, to the infrastructure the government can improve on, to invigorating the pride of a nation because it is actually doing well. All of this is important for a country to evolve and do well, and especially during a global recession.  It does not evolve or do well, when a country is limited by an ideology that a few seem to think is the path. Might I also add that the drug cartels, al qaeda, the taliban, al shabab are all using guerrilla warfare/modern insurgency/4th gen. warfare methods (which relies on much of what Mao thought up), and certainly these groups do not have any kind of moral superiority or world wide support for their cause. I mean who supports the Maoists in India or Nepal? lol

     Although I will put this out there for thought.  A government, no matter it’s design, must always seem like a good idea to it’s citizenry. If it is thought of as corrupt or ineffective, or they are not able to show progress and true security for the people, then they will be fighting an insurgency (whatever that might be) that will only increase in size and influence, and possibly become victorious. –Matt

—————————————————————–

India’s Maoist Menace

By Mehul Srivastava

Jul 29, 2010

Armed rebels hold the Red Corridor, a region the size of Portugal, in their grip. The nation’s mineral wealth and 8.5 percent annual growth are at stake.

At the heart of the Bailadila Hills in central India lie 1.1 billion tons of raw ore so pure and plentiful that half a century after miners first hacked at it with pickaxes, it remains the richest, and one of the largest, iron deposits on the planet.

Essar Steel Ltd. built a plant near the hills in 2005 to turn the ore into a liquid. The Mumbai-based company, controlled by billionaire brothers Ravi and Shashi Ruia, added a 267- kilometer pipeline to pump the slurry to the east coast, where Essar makes steel.

Yet on this quiet June day, cobwebs hang on rusted pipes in the all-but-abandoned facility, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its September 2010 issue. Caretakers prepare to switch truck-size rock crushers out of their coma, rousing the machines for five minutes a month to ensure they still work.

Maoist rebels from the surrounding Dandakaranya forest armed with guns and explosives — and some wielding axes and bows and arrows — attacked the facility four times in little more than a year, officials at the now-mothballed plant say. They burned 54 trucks waiting at factory gates in April 2008 and damaged part of the slurry pipeline, the world’s second longest, in June 2009. Essar idled the plant that month.

(more…)

Friday, August 20, 2010

Industry Talk: Stability Operations Industry–Opportunity And Risk, By Bullet Proof Blog

Filed under: Industry Talk,Leadership,Media News — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 12:43 AM

     I liked this article, and it is a concept that all of the companies need to really wrap their heads around in today’s times.  It is all about crisis communication, and it sounds like Mr. Levick is the guy to talk to about doing this kind of thing.  What is cool is that he has plenty of contractor history to learn from and he is also reaching out to individuals in the industry like Doug to get a feel for what’s what.

     This article also goes well with the interview Mr. Levick did with Doug Brooks, so I recommend watching that if you can.

     Now something I would like to hear from the author is how he would have dealt with the Nisour Square incident differently than how BW and State dealt with it back then?  Most of all, how would his firm handle the crisis management for such an incident if it happened again in the near future? He briefly touched on this contractor army that DoS plans on using in Iraq, but I would have liked to hear some details on how a true crisis management expert would handle the complexities of this industry’s incidents that tend to get so much attention.  We need all the help we can get, because no easy solutions have materialized and companies are still getting sucked into crisis that not only embarrasses them, but embarrasses their clients as well. These incidents also negatively impact the war effort, and it is certainly important for companies to not cause that kind of harm.

     As to an example of current crisis communication, DynCorp actually sent me a company release about the auto accident in Kabul.  But because of the speed of information spread in Kabul and online, and how the negative aspects of the news spread, I just don’t know how you can stop the impact of such a thing?  Or maybe DynCorp did all they could and this was the way to do it? They certainly responded quickly online to those of us trying to cover this stuff, and at least attempted to fill any information gaps that biased media or even the enemy was trying to fill with their own versions of the story.  I wonder how he would rate DynCorp’s crisis management and communications, both in Kabul and online? How would you guys rate it? Interesting stuff. –Matt

—————————————————————–

Stability Operations Industry: Opportunity and Risk

Richard Levick

August 18, 2010

For one not uncontroversial sector of the defense industry, President Obama’s recent reaffirmation of a timetable for Iraqi troop withdrawal means new business opportunity, accompanied by heightened scrutiny — and predictably severe penalties for failure to comply with professionally, as well as politically, dictated operational standards.

The industry in question is called “stability operations,” a broad term that denotes activities by private contractors to support military, peacekeeping missions and disaster relief. To ensure safe and secure environments outside the United States, their multifarious deliverables include protecting vital infrastructure, training indigenous military and non-military forces, responding to emergencies, body-guarding key personnel, overseeing project logistics, assuring medical provisions, demining hazard zones — and so forth.

During the Iraq War, unwanted attention fell on a few such companies amid allegations of fraud and abuse. Now that the West’s role in the war is largely ending, and the role of the industry in Iraq will grow apace, those past mishaps are going to have a strong continuing influence on public perception. Fairly or not, the bigger the future role of the contractors, the more mistrust they can expect to engender.

(more…)

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Iraq: Civilians To Take US Lead After Military Leaves Iraq

Filed under: Industry Talk,Iraq — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 1:56 AM

One American official said that more than 1,200 specific tasks carried out by the American military in Iraq had been identified to be handed over to the civilians, transferred to the Iraqis or phased out.

To move around Iraq without United States troops, the State Department plans to acquire 60 mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles, called MRAPs, from the Pentagon; expand its inventory of armored cars to 1,320; and create a mini-air fleet by buying three planes to add to its lone aircraft. Its helicopter fleet, which will be piloted by contractors, will grow to 29 choppers from 17.

The department’s plans to rely on 6,000 to 7,000 security contractors, who are also expected to form “quick reaction forces” to rescue civilians in trouble, is a sensitive issue, given Iraqi fury about shootings of civilians by American private guards in recent years. Administration officials said that security contractors would have no special immunity and would be required to register with the Iraqi government. In addition, one of the State Department’s regional security officers, agents who oversee security at diplomatic outposts, will be required to approve and accompany every civilian convoy, providing additional oversight.

*****

     I wanted to cut this portion out for the reader to focus in on. Does anyone see the possibility here for some real problems if the insurgents in Iraq wanted to target this ‘civilian leadership’ specifically? There is the potential here for multiple ‘Nisour Square‘ scenarios, because it will be this heavy duty contractor army that will be engaging with insurgents if they atttack. And no doubt, the bad guys will love to start a fight in highly populated areas, much like they did with the Nisour Square ambush.

     What I would like to hear is if State will stand by this ‘contractor army’ they have created, if in fact they had to actually use their weapons? I mean, you guys are arming them and giving them all of this military hardware to use? Because as much as the media, DoS, Iraq and the entire world would like to believe, civilian casualties happen in war zones, or non-permissive environments. (whatever we want to call Iraq now) It is unfortunate, but they happen. No one plans on a tragedy like this happening, except for the enemy.

     Of course no one wakes up one day and says ‘I want to kill civilians’, except for the enemy. When these types of incidents happen, it is extremely damaging to the psyche and to the morale of all involved. It is avoided at all costs, but sometimes this stuff happens. So that is why I continue to ask this question of ‘if you are going to ask these men to protect you in Iraq, and they have to use deadly force, are you going to back them up if they actually kill someone?’. Worse yet, are you guys going to back them up if a stray bullet in that fire fight accidently kills a civilian? Or will you be throwing your heroes into an Iraqi or American prison, for an accident they had no intention of committing?

     Finally, as the combat troops leave, and the ‘civilians’ take over, the realities of this war zone are still there. Only when the enemy has lost the will to fight, can you truly say the war is over. So in my mind, I totally think that Al Qaeda and company or any of the Iranian backed groups will continue to cause problems. Not only for Iraq, but for this civilian leadership and cadre left in Iraq. Contractors will be using military hardware like MRAPs and Blackhawk Helicopters, and taking over the various 1,200 military tasks in the country, but will they get the same treatment and legal protections that the military had when they were in Iraq? Because I certainly would hate to see contractors being thrown under the bus, like what happened with Xe, just for trying to do their job in a war zone. –Matt

—————————————————————-

Civilians to Take U.S. Lead After Military Leaves Iraq

By MICHAEL R. GORDON

August 18, 2010

WASHINGTON — As the United States military prepares to leave Iraq by the end of 2011, the Obama administration is planning a remarkable civilian effort, buttressed by a small army of contractors, to fill the void.

By October 2011, the State Department will assume responsibility for training the Iraqi police, a task that will largely be carried out by contractors. With no American soldiers to defuse sectarian tensions in northern Iraq, it will be up to American diplomats in two new $100 million outposts to head off potential confrontations between the Iraqi Army and Kurdish pesh merga forces.

To protect the civilians in a country that is still home to insurgents with Al Qaeda and Iranian-backed militias, the State Department is planning to more than double its private security guards, up to as many as 7,000, according to administration officials who disclosed new details of the plan. Defending five fortified compounds across the country, the security contractors would operate radars to warn of enemy rocket attacks, search for roadside bombs, fly reconnaissance drones and even staff quick reaction forces to aid civilians in distress, the officials said.

“I don’t think State has ever operated on its own, independent of the U.S. military, in an environment that is quite as threatening on such a large scale,” said James Dobbins, a former ambassador who has seen his share of trouble spots as a special envoy for Afghanistan, Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo and Somalia. “It is unprecedented in scale.”

White House officials expressed confidence that the transfer to civilians — about 2,400 people who would work at the Baghdad embassy and other diplomatic sites — would be carried out on schedule, and that they could fulfill their mission of helping bring stability to Iraq.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Afghanistan: Anti-Corruption Unit Pressure, Plus Coming Elections Equals ‘Crazy Karzai’!!

Filed under: Afghanistan — Tags: , , , , , , , — Matt @ 1:48 AM

     Any chance I can use ‘Crazy Karzai’ in the title of anything, is a good thing. lol Now back to the post.

     Here is the assessment. I really think Karzai thinks this is his ‘Ace in the hole’. Meaning he was planning on pulling this stupid decree out of his funny hat as a means to push back against this pressure we are putting on him about his crap government. Because at face value, not only is this decree silly, but it will probably backfire on him in a dangerous way.

     If let’s say he thought he would get some votes out of this populist move, at the end of the day he still has to deal with the Taliban. He will also have to deal with an entire group of unemployed Afghan security contractors who will probably hop on over to the Taliban out of anger–or just do nothing. He might get some of them to join the army or police. It’s hard to say who goes where, but I do know that this is a big gamble for him politically. And what happens when people get more angry because violence increases due to this massive removal of multiple private security operations across the country?

     I also think that this anti-corruption unit is going to go on the offensive during the elections. Karzai’s competition will have plenty of material for firing up the populace and ripping apart the incumbent. This upcoming election is heavy on his mind, and he knows (thanks to Senator Kerry’s shot across the bow’) that we mean business this time. I for one would love to see him voted out of office. Someone needs to hold that office, that both the Afghans and the Coalition forces fighting in that war can believe in…. and possibly die for, in battle.

     Below I found all the most pertinent stories to help you out in making your own assessments. From some Afghan security company’s responses to the whole thing, to the details of this last diplomatic mission which freaked Karzai out and forced his hand on this. So at this point, it is all about politics. –Matt

Afghan plan to shut private security firms may endanger convoys

If Afghanistan dissolves security firms, guards will join Taliban, some predict

Karzai Plays to the Crowd with Threatened Ouster of Afghan Contractors

U.S. sends warning to Afghanistan, and John Kerry delivers the message

——————————————————————

Afghan plan to shut private security firms may endanger convoys

By DION NISSENBAUM AND HASHIM SHUKOOR

August 16, 2010

KABUL, Afghanistan — Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s office abruptly announced plans on Monday to close all the country’s polarizing private security companies by year’s end, a decision that could create more risk for the U.S.-led military along crucial supply routes into Afghanistan.

In an announcement that appeared to catch NATO officials by surprise, Karzai vowed to shutter the lucrative network of private security firms.

“The government of Afghanistan has decided that the security companies have to go,” Karzai spokesman Waheed Omar said.

If the president follows through with the short timeline, the decision could strip NATO supply routes of the private forces, which have provided protection for convoys that come under constant attack.

It would force diplomatic missions, including the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, to find some other way to protect their compounds.

It also could create a volatile new pool of disaffected militants, some of whom already are suspected of having links with the Taliban and of staging attacks on convoys that are passing through their areas.

“Security will get worse,” warned Matiullah Khan, one of the country’s more influential figures in the murky security convoy business. “The police can’t provide security in the provinces, so how can they escort convoys?”

The private security industry, a complex network of registered international companies and unregulated Afghan militias, employs 26,000 people working on U.S. contracts, according to NATO officials. The vast majority of them – about 19,000 – work on military contracts.

The companies have come under fire from almost every front.

Karzai long has argued that the firms act as a parallel security force that undermines the nation’s police and army.

Many Afghans fear convoy security guards, who have been accused of wildly opening fire and killing civilians while protecting their routes.

Last month, contractors with DynCorp International were involved in a fatal car crash in Kabul that sparked violent anti-American protests and raised fears that the isolated demonstration could devolve into widespread rioting.

Some of the firms have been accused of using their familial ties to the Karzai government to secure millions of dollars in NATO contracts. Two of Karzai’s cousins run one major security company. The defense minister’s son runs another.

U.S. officials also have expressed concerns over long-standing allegations that the security firms use NATO funds for the contracts to pay insurgents not to attack the convoys.

Industry Talk: Karzai’s Decree Regarding PSC’s And The Buzz On The Forums

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 12:55 AM

     This is a translation that I wanted to put up just so folks have something to reference. But what is really cool is all the buzz on the forums about this one.  Lots of opinions all over the place.

     The photo below is a mystery.  I have no clue if these guys were PSC’s or not.  But what the photo symbolizes is all the years that good men like them spent putting their lives on the line for Karzai. Do you think he even thanked them for their protective services? –Matt

Edit: 08/23/2010 – Tim wrote up a great post on the subject, and has a better translation of the decree.  Check it out here.

—————————————————————–

Karzai

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, center, is surrounded by heavily armed bodyguards as he arrives for a groundbreaking ceremony in Parwan, some 34 miles, 55kms north of Kabul, Monday, March 14, 2005. Karzai was surrounded by dozens of US security personnel as he attended a ceremony of groundbreaking for a road linking the Panjshir Valley to Parwan in the district of Bayan. (AP Photo/Shah Marai, Pool)

—————————————————————–

President Karzai’s decree regarding PSCs in Afghanistan:

For tackling corruption and ensuring security of our citizens and prevention of security irregularities as well as exploitation of arms and military equipment and uniforms by the security companies which has caused some tragic incidents, after some thorough and legal review I am approving the annulment of foreign and national security companies within four months as per the following conditions.

The members of security companies who can meet the military recruitment conditions of provided that they meet the conditions they can join the police forces with or without their registered arms or weapons. And the Interior Ministry is obliged to annul it within four months from today.

For foreign companies who are registered with IM, if they agree, then the IM, Def Min and NDS will buy their weapons and the resident visas of the foreign members will be cancelled. If the companies do not agree to sell their arms their resident visas will be cancelled and they can leave the country with their arms.

Those companies who are not registered with IM their arms will be confiscated.

Embassies or diplomatic offices, NGOs who are operating in Kabul and provinces can still use their own security personnel within their premises. They should not be visible outside their premises. The number and conditions for this will be spelled out by the IM. The MOI’s must take charge of the external security of embassies,NGOs in Kabul and other provinces.

It is the MOI’s task to implement this decree.

——————————————————————

(You must sign up to read a few of these forum discussions)

SOCNET Forum discussion here.

Tactical Forum discussion here.

Lightfighter Forum discussion here.

Secure Aspects Forum discussion here.

Close Protection World Forum discussion here.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress