Asked if he would be forced to end contracts if the situation was not resolved, one development company official said, “Absolutely.” “We apply what we call the son and daughter standard,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to avoid alienating American and Afghan government officials. “Would we send our sons and daughters out there to do this work, and the answer is no.”
Boy, who couldn’t see this one coming? lol Of course Afghanistan is not able to put together this Afghan Public Protection Force. As you all remember, this was the force that was supposed to replace private security forces in Afghanistan.
As that quote up top hints at, this APPF concept is not exactly giving all of the aid and development groups the confidence they require in order to send ‘their sons and daughters’ to Afghanistan. I wouldn’t trust my life in the hands of such a force, even if half of this report is true. This quote below is what perked me up:
The assessment makes it clear that much work needs to be done. Of 166 “essential” criteria to determine if the government was able to recruit, train and sustain the guard force, less than a third could be fully met, the assessment found. Sixty-three of the measurements could not be met at all.
Really? So here is my suggestion. Private industry is really the only solution here, and the Afghans need to face reality, or everyone is going to pack up and leave. And that is a lot of money and projects just going out the door.
My suggestion is to implement a license and bonded PSC system. Streamline the licensing process, and tell the companies to put their money where their mouth is if they want to operate. If they violate the contract, then they are fined via the surety bond. If they violate the terms of the license, then suspend the license. If they break a law, then prosecute those individuals. But the point is, find a way to work with private industry and do not try to re-invent the wheel. Let the various aid and development groups in country choose what licensed security they want, and focus on managing and regulating that. –Matt
Report Details Problems for Afghan Security Force Plan
By RAY RIVERA
November 1, 2011
KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai’s plan to disband private security companies that protect billions of dollars worth of aid projects and replace them with government forces is fraught with problems and unlikely to meet the president’s March deadline to complete the transition, according to a six-month assessment of the program.
The assessment, conducted by NATO and the Afghan Interior Ministry, outlines dozens of issues that have slowed the development of the new security force and raises questions about the government’s capacity to carry out and sustain the program and others as international aid money and military support dwindle in coming years.
The report, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, comes as international development companies are becoming increasingly worried about the security of their workers, many of whom are Afghans.
What is interesting about this is that DoS has been getting some pressure from folks in Congress as to how many security contractors will be on the ground in Iraq in the near future. So this number is coming directly from DoS as a projection for 2012. That number is 5,000 security contractors, which is the equivalent to a brigade in the military. Although that number does not include the logistics folks and other contractor types in country, but at least this gives some perspective as to the size of just the security element.
Now of course this is not new if anyone has been following along. June of last year, State said they would need between 6,000 and 7,000 security contractors for Iraq. And I guess if you were to add the requirements of the OSC, 5,000 would be modified to be closer to the 6,000 figure. But who knows, and those numbers are not out there yet.
This is also significant, because our industry is giving State the ability to safely operate and perform their duties in Iraq. The troops are going to be gone, and instead of the Marines being ‘last out’, it will be contractors. lol (the Marine in me is not laughing though…lol)
Now the other question that needs to be asked that really hasn’t been addressed from what I can see is the ‘lost functionality’ problem as the military leaves. I imagine that the Iraqis and maybe some small military contingents will be be filling in these gaps, but I am still curious how they are to be filled. Here is a quote from my post on the subject:
Recovering killed and wounded personnel Recovering damaged vehicles Recovering downed aircraft Clearing travel routes Operations-center monitoring of private security contractors (PSCs) PSC inspection and accountability services Convoy security Explosive-ordnance disposal Counter-rocket, artillery, and mortar notification Counter-battery neutralization response Communications support Tactical-operations center dispatch of armed response teams Policing Baghdad’s International Zone Maintaining electronic counter-measures, threat intelligence, and technology capabilities
As the attack in Kabul demonstrates, there will be times where State’s security forces will actually have to participate in combat. With the troops gone in Iraq, and all of the services and combat power they used to provide going with them, has there been any arrangements to fill those gaps?
Now I am going to assume that all of these issues have been addressed, just because this list of issues was originally brought up by State to congress as to why they needed all of the MRAP’s and military hardware they requested. State has also had plenty of time to plan, and DoD and congress has had plenty of time to figure out what they plan on giving them for that mission. But who knows, and I really hope it goes well for them. Especially as budget issues come up, and programs and missions are cut. –Matt
Iraq: U.S. Diplomatic Mission and Security Personnel for 2012
Taken Question
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
October 5, 2011
Question: Approximately how many security contractors will be required in Iraq to protect the U.S. diplomatic mission next year?
Answer: In light of the high threat environment in Iraq over the past several years, we expect that in 2012 there will be approximately 5,000 such security personnel to help protect our diplomatic presence in various locations around the country and ensure our capability to interact successfully with the Iraqi Government and people to build an enduring partnership of benefit to both countries and the region. We expect this number of security personnel to noticeably decrease in the following years as security conditions continue to improve, as they have done steadily since 2007.
Boy, this latest attack in Kabul was an interesting incident. Purely because I have yet to hear anything at all about the security contractor performance during this whole deal.
Now I will tell you what I have heard that is not making the news, and that is at least one Afghan security guard was wounded on the compound itself. I have also heard that the tower that the Taliban were using in this attack was a major concern of security contractors that have been posted at that site over the years. It is the high ground, and positions like this are always a concern. But what was done about it? Because I am sure the RSO’s over the years had received an earful about it.
I have also heard that there weren’t any M-2’s or MK-19’s used to decimate those enemy positions in the tower. At those distances, something like a M-2 .50 cal. could reach the tower and pour some hate on it. It might have saved some lives, and yet I am hearing that the military component of the defense did not respond with such tools? I could be wrong here, and I would like to be corrected on this. Because I am sure the contractors didn’t have those tools or authority to use those kinds of weapons. (The video below shows the fight at ISAF, and I don’t see any heavy weapons being used?)
Either way, I would love to hear from any contractors or soldiers that were on scene on any of those compounds that were involved in this fight. Because it is just odd to me that we spend this much money on the WPS guys and the KESF guys, and everyone else in between, and there is nothing at all about their good work and sacrifice? It is actually in poor taste that the DoS, ISAF or NATO refuses to say anything at all about our industry’s contribution in incidents like this.
The other reason why I wanted to post this is to give any of the companies and DoS/ISAF/NATO a chance to communicate about the contractor performance during this deal. Because as we speak, the media and new media folks out there are filling in the vacuum of information with their narrative.
You have folks like POGO that have been excellent at pointing out the deficiencies of companies like AGNA, but currently is spinning this latest deal as if AGNA performed poorly in this incident? And yet POGO has not one shred of information to support anything of the sort. So instead, they go off on the past performance of AGNA to leave the reader with the idea that they ‘must have performed poorly during this incident’. That is what I mean by narrative, and DoS and company silence is doing more harm than good.
Hell, if you want, I could spin this as a deal where the contractors performed well? I could just assume that because not one diplomat or federal employee was killed or injured, that the defense was excellent. Or I could use quotes from guys like General Carsten Jacobsen:
He said the attack proved the security of the Nato and US embassy compounds, which were not breached, and said the Afghan forces responded “very well” and quickly.
But instead, I would like to draw some conclusions based on facts. So help me out folks, and don’t let others who could care less about the facts control the narrative.
Now of course the DoS/ISAF/NATO is probably instructing AGNA or other companies not to make any press releases, or there is some contract stipulation against such things, but still? It is just horribly odd to me that there is not a mention about the very people that put their lives on the line to defend the property and people of these compounds during such a publicized attack? –Matt
Edit: 9/15/2011- Supposedly there were two contractor injuries. Thanks to a reader for the information.
Edit: 9/16/2011- Ok, I have had several reports from readers that contractors were engaged in combat during this deal. Meaning, they were using their weapons to defend against attackers. Which I am glad they did, and I certainly hope they killed some of these Taliban attackers? Nothing confirmed as far as how many Taliban were killed by contractors. There were also multiple RPG hits within the compound.
Statement from Ambassador Crocker on Attacks of September 13, 2011
Yesterday was a long and difficult day for the U.S. Embassy, for ISAF and for the residents of Kabul. We witnessed both cowardly attacks by an increasingly desperate insurgency, as well as instances of enormous courage and dedication on the part of ISAF troops and especially the Afghan National Security Forces. It was Afghan police and soldiers who bravely ended the attack on the embassy and stopped further strikes on Kabul Airport, two police stations, and a local high school. We mourn the Afghan civilians and the brave troops and security forces killed in these actions, and wish a full recovery to the wounded, which include Afghan civilians and American and partner-nation troops. We offer condolences to the families of these innocent victims.??The attacks serve to highlight the weakness at the core of the insurgency. Unable to confront ISAF and newly-trained Afghan troops on the conventional battlefield, they have turned to launching attacks on high-profile facilities like the U.S. Embassy in an attempt to garner headlines. Yet their actions backfired. Afghan security forces showed they were up to the task of thwarting such operations and are willing to sacrifice their lives to reclaim their communities and country. Unlike the insurgents, the ANSF took great care to avoid civilian casualties. The transition to Afghan-led security is on track, as we turn our focus to long-term efforts for supporting a more secure, stable and prosperous Afghanistan.??As Secretary of State Clinton said yesterday, “We will be vigilant, but we will be continuing with even greater commitment to doing all we can to give the Afghan people, who have suffered so much, a chance at a better future for themselves and their children.”
Press release here.
——————————————————–
UPDATED: U.S. Embassy Statement
September 13, 2011
The U.S. Embassy confirms an attack occurred today in the area of the U.S. Embassy, including RPG and small arms fire. Four Afghans were injured in the attack on the embassy compound, none with life threatening injuries. They included three Afghan visa applicants and one local contract guard.
Now this is a very interesting development. All of these security contractors from Uganda that have participated in such programs like TWISS in Iraq, are now looking at Somalia as the next market for security contracts. Which makes total sense, and especially since there is a massive pool of Ugandan security contractors created by their efforts in Iraq.
Uganda is also a huge contributor of forces for AMISOM, so it would only be fair that their country’s PSC’s would have a crack at any contracts in Somalia. I would imagine Burundi would also be interested in entering the reconstruction market in Somalia as well. Uganda has also lost 57 plus troops in the war, and Burundi has lost 78. But the real market of force would come out of Uganda.
This pool of security contractors are also trained to western standards, with experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they could be an excellent tool to use for Somalia’s reconstruction plans. But like the article mentioned below, if the gains made by AMISOM are lost, then there really is no chance of PSC’s coming in. We will see how it goes? –Matt
Ugandans eye businesses in Somalia
By John Semakula
12th September, 2011
THE business community in Uganda received the news of AMISOM’s recent victory against the al-Shabaab militants in Mogadishu with a smile of hope. ?The community had long wanted to venture into Somalia but the insecurity in the country had hindered it. ?When news emerged that the AU peacekeepers had secured 90% of Mogadishu from the militants, managers of various companies in Uganda started drawing business plans for Somalia.
Rest in peace to these fallen guards. Afghan security contractors have definitely paid a high price in Afghanistan.
Although this attack is interesting in that it came out right after this bit of news about the Host Nation Trucking contracts. Was this an attack designed to take out the competition? Who knows, but maybe someone out there has a better idea?
The other thing I wanted to point out is that they stopped the attackers at the front gate. The two bombers may have blown up that front gate and killed four guards, but the other security forces were able to neutralize the third bomber in a firefight and stop them at the breach. A tragic loss of life, but they definitely stopped the attack from reaching the client. That is awesome and Til Valhall. –Matt
Four die in Taliban attack near Afghan NATO base
By Mamoon Durrani
8/15/2011
Four security guards died Monday as suicide bombers targeted a fuel depot for NATO-led forces close to one of Afghanistan’s biggest bases, where thousands of foreign troops are stationed.
The attack happened at a facility belonging to logistics company Supreme, near the sprawling Kandahar airfield, which acts as a hub for troop operations across south Afghanistan, the Taliban’s heartland and focus of the war.
The police commander for southern Afghanistan, General Salem Ihsas, said four Afghan guards working for a private security firm were killed in the assault, which happened at around 9:00 pm (1630 GMT).
He said eight other guards — three from Nepal and five from Afghanistan — were also wounded.
Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi said the militant group was behind the attack in a telephone call from an undisclosed location.
The insurgents frequently target organisations, both foreign and Afghan, which work with the 140,000-strong foreign military in Afghanistan as well as fuel convoys and tankers supplying the international force.
The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) relies on contractors to provide a wide range of services in Afghanistan, particularly at large hub bases such as Kandahar airfield.
Ihsas said three suicide bombers were behind the attack, with two blowing themselves up at the compound gates and a third shot dead by security forces in a gun battle.
The fighting is now over and “we are in control,” Ihsas said, adding the suicide bombers had not managed to get inside the compound.