"Private Security"

Victor

I'm just wondering what people think of the "private security" people being employed in Iraq. While some will be genuine VIP close protection and static guard types, I have this nagging feeling that quite a few of them fall into the "unfulfilled" (euphemism for "not having killed enough people"?), gung-ho, "lets shoot everybody" types. This potentially ties with stories of "coalition soldiers" being buried in the desert and of secretive nighttime flights repatriating bodies.

A friend visited Arlington National Cemetery (Washington DC) and during a conducted tour, was informed by the guide that the burial rate from Iraq is a lot higher than official figure for service personnel (this on top of service personnel who fought in previous conflicts and who died in later civilian life). The guide said in one day they buried 35 people (from Iraq). While no doubt this will happen in burst and funerals may be organised together to simplify arrangements, something doesn't seem quite right.

Anyway, while I think there is possibly a **very small** niche for companies like Executive Outcomes (South Africa based) in helping countries defend themselves, I think these companies are mercenaries in all but name.

http://www.thepost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-16609691-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FNews.asp

Private guns for hire hit lucrative Iraqi market
18/04/04 00:00
By Susan Mitchell

Iraq has become a bonanza for the burgeoning $100 billion a year private military sector.

Experts claim it is the fastest-growing area of the global economy over the past decade.

Up to 15,000 private security personnel are reported to be stationed in Iraq, where they comprise the third-largest international division of the war effort after US and British troops.

The escalating violence has hampered reconstruction efforts and scared away some investors, but a shadowy army of private security and military companies is turning the insecurity into a huge money-spinner.

Contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been handed out to private security companies by the US- run provisional government in Baghdad and by the private sector.

Security costs have absorbed up to 15 per cent of the coalition's $57 billion investment in Iraq, according to the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). A report to the US Congress showed that private security firms had been allocated contracts worth $3.4 billion - more than the combined amounts being spent on health, education and transport.

The US-led troops are too stretched to deal with the poor security that has plagued aid agencies and private companies hired to rebuild the country's shattered infrastructure.

Private security firms have relieved the pressure and military analysts claim the arrangement allows regular troops to concentrate on fighting.

The security companies provide attractive employment for former soldiers as they offer up to $1,000 a day, about ten times the salary paid by the army.

The private companies in Iraq range from large, relatively well-known firms - such as Kroll, Blackwater, ArmorGroup, British Control Risks Group, Haart, Dyn- Corp and Vinnell of the US - to smaller operators such as British firm Olive Security.

Vinnell has been contracted to train the Iraqi army. Blackwater - which lost four employees in a high-profile attack two weeks ago - provides security for the US civil administrator, Paul Bremer. DynCorp has been hired to train Iraq's police force and Global Risk has the contract to provide armed protection for the CPA.

Anne Triedemann, managing director of Kroll, described the early opportunities in Iraq as something of a "gold rush".

"There is quite a bit of business out there. From our point of view, it just gets better all the time," another contractor told the Financial Times.

Iraq is just the tip of the iceberg as private security companies are increasingly employed by oil companies in the African desert, heads of state in Haiti and Afghanistan, and international firms operating in global hotspots.

"The rate of growth in the security industry is phenomenal," said Deborah Avant, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University in Washington DC, in a recent interview.

"It has moved very quickly over the past decade, but Iraq has escalated it dramatically."

The trend is controversial as critics point out that security firms are largely unaccountable to governments, the courts or the public. Peter Singer, author of Corporate Warriors: the Rise of the Privatised Military Industry, said that loopholes in international law enabled employees of private security firms to escape prosecution for crimes they committed overseas.

Many US and UN contracts oblige local governments to give legal immunity to such contractors. Critics claim this sets a dangerous precedent for covert foreign policy. Governments can intervene abroad and - by calling on firms with fleets of cargo planes and hundreds of soldiers - can avoid unwelcome publicity when things go wrong.

"Why try to persuade Congress to sanction the use of US troops in Colombia's war on narco-guerrillas when you can send in contractors to spray cocoa fields and train paramilitary groups - as both the Clinton and Bush administrations have done?" asked a recent article in Business Week.

Outsourcing war is also a useful public relations tool. It has been reported that nobody knows how many contractors have been killed in Iraq as the military does not officially track civilian contractor deaths, of which there have been over 30 reported to date.

"It's a bit ugly if our elected politicians have decided that the country's tolerance can be sustained longer by serving up contractors to take bullets," said Steven Schooner, a US government procurement specialist.

Kenneth Kurtz, chief executive of the Steele Foundation, the world's fifth-largest firm, told the San Francisco Chronicle that "most of the security firms in Iraq have had some people killed".

Concern about the role of private security firms increased after four employees of Blackwater Security Consultants were killed in Falluja. The deaths prompted numerous articles about the role of private military companies.

Contractors are hired for just about every imaginable task in conflict zones - they supported US troops in Vietnam and during the Gulf War.

At the end of the Gulf War, the ratio was said to be about one contractor to every 100 soldiers. In Iraq it is one contractor to every ten soldiers, estimated Singer, who de-scribed it as a "coalition of the billing".

Recent reports claimed that many contractors were fleeing Iraq and the ultimate fear is that contractors under extreme duress will flee en masse, exposing US and British soldiers to greater risk.

But the escalation of violence has not yet dampened the enthusiasm of security contractors. "The only people leaving Iraq are the Russians. None of the reconstruction firms is leaving.

"There is simply too much money at stake and too much has already been invested," said one security consultant with a British company in Iraq.

With major security firms reportedly lobbying the US government and the United Nations to privatise peace-keeping operations, their record in Iraq is likely to prove significant.

chewy

.... yeah they seem dodgy.... private security so there not held responsible like thye army.... well in different ways... better lawyers perhaps , that italien guy that got killed seemed very dogy and unqualified.... it seems the entire green zone is protected by them, whats wrong with the army, there supposed to be 20,000 of them i wonder how many they killed or injured we probably never know

the companeis seem to intent on saying there the only ones qualified and all the others are jokers, but if they all say that...

halkar

In the eyes of Americans it is better to see 5 Private Security dead then 1 American soldier dead. It is a way of US saving their soldiers so press won't go mad. :rolleyes: There would have been more American soldier lives be lost if they were to do the works of Private Security me thinks and this wouldn't look good for Bushy.

Sand

Mercenaries arent inherently worse than state armies - state armies have carried out the greatest atrocities in history afterall. Giving their soldiers immunity from legal accountability for their actions is the big problem.

From the point of small countries they also make a lot of sense - no need to waste money on buying a military you dont need for 99.9999999% of the time. When youre threatened you get an equipped, experienced force able to carry out just about any role an army could. Win win.

chewy

the scariest thing i read i not sure if its in the articel above but some security company saying, south africans are the best, a sa african is worth two green berets...

and the writer added think back to what the south africans might have learned their trade doing.....?

and the writer added think back to what the south africans might have learned their trade doing.....?

despite, their acts, they are counted as superb troops for two main reasons. They've been trained under fire, and their experience in "nasty" situations could prove useful. I'm not saying that the coalition is using them for such, but the South African (was going to say SA, but realised how bad that was) mercs capable of it. Its part of the reason why the SAS is counted so great. Most sections have combat expierence in fighting against guerilla warfare.

Mercs are probably better than State troops for this. They're interested in getting their job done, getting paid and going home. State troops tend to have very emotional patriotic (duty, honor etc) feelings that may cause more trouble. Mercs have more of a handle on their emotions, and less likely to panic and start spraying everywhere with their weapons.

Victor

Originally posted by halkar
In the eyes of Americans it is better to see 5 Private Security dead then 1 American soldier dead.

For PR purposes, yes. However, there seems to have been an extreme reaction to the 4 guys being killed.

halkar

Originally posted by Victor
For PR purposes, yes. However, there seems to have been an extreme reaction to the 4 guys being killed.

Extreme reaction is always expected in any conflict. Just as what happened in Rwanda and other conflicts. You can also remember those burned Iraqi soldiers in the 1st Gulf war. And I am sure Iraqis remember that too and they remember far more than that. I am against any violance but one must put themselves in Iraqis shoes too and the anger they have. They are liberated but they are not free and in many cases country is in worst state now then it was in Saddams rule. Saddam should have been removed by other means without going through all this. these private soldiers made the choice themselves to be there so they knew what they were going in to.

Victor

Sorry halkar, what I mean is soliers and civilians arre killed day in, day out, but as soon as these 4 killings reached the media there was a massive crackdown that appears to have killed 800-900 people.

To make the point "Don't kill our mercenaries"?

halkar

Maybe that is why US have Felluca under siege and won't let the media in and told Al-Jazeera to get out. I dare to see anyone coming out of the rubbles left from the US bombs. Bombing of civilian houses while they are in them is far more disturbing to me then seeing mercanaries getting killed. Anyone with a right mind wouldn't be there at this stage no matter what the pay is. I feel sorry for the US soldiers that they have to be there because of their contracts and going home in body bags.

Capt'n Midnight

anyone see that docu where they interviewed some UK mercenaries in yougoslavia.

These guys were shooting at ambulances on thier "own side" FFS

The question is who are they answerable to ?
Mercaneries are not bodyguards - there shoud be a disticntion - mercenaries are paid to be offensive on behalf of a govt, where as bodyguards are defensive for individuals. (or so the theory goes)

Were these SA guys the ones that were arrested in the plane a while back ? - did they have anyting to do with the sychelles a coulpe of years ago ?

BTW: as well as killings there will be accidents that will result in US bodies but little or no media cover.

When did Iraq last have a cencus - and when is the next one ?

chewy

despite their acts....

is that all you got to say about that...

these guys have experience of shooting and torturing ppl based on their skin colour thats great spread about a bit .....
throw a different religion in their too ???

Victor

In light of the current citizenship debate, should these people being keeping their citizenship and passports?

THE PHOENIX (23 April 2004, page 6)

FROM THE FALLS TO FALLUJA

THE death in a fire-fight with mujahedeen of Co Down-based Colour Sergeant, Chris McDonald, has drawn attention to one of the lesser-known aspects of the Iraqi war - the large number of Irishmen serving there as mercenary soldiers. At last count, more than 1,000 former security personnel from the North were reported in Iraq. Despite their staunch loyalty to Her Majesty's government, many carry neutral Irish passports because of the assumed added protection afforded in the event of kidnap.

First into the field last year were 600 former prison officers made redundant with the closure of Long Kesh and the run-down of other jails. Recruited by London private security company, Rubicon International, the ex-screws are paid up to stg£100,000 tax-free, all-found. on one-year contracts to guard some 10,000 Iraqi internees in a make-shift prison camp, not unlike Long Kesh, inside the American security zone at Baghdad airport. They have much safer jobs than former RUC colleagues recruited afterwards who ride shotgun on convoys and provide VIP and static guards at installations.

The BBC has quoted "upwards of 200 former RUC men" serving in Iraq. With their experience of urban guerrilla warfare and counter-measure training against improvised munitions (Iraqi roadside, radio-detonated landmines are identical to IRA ambush bombs), the ex-RUC men are in great demand. Hundreds of other ex-Northern mercenaries have been recruited by Rubicon (run by Major General Bob Hodges, former commander British Land Forces NI) or Control Risks (run by former SAS commander, General Sir Michael Rose. another old Irish hand). Many come from British special forces units (SAS or SBS) or elite formations like the Parachute Regiment or Royal Marine Commando units, but there is still plenty of work for lesser squaddies (at up to $15,000 a month) like redundant ex-UDR/RIR soldiers who have flocked to the pot of gold at the end of the Iraqi rainbow.

Alas, their dreams of wealth beyond avarice have been shattered in recent weeks by a spate of fatal ambushes and kidnaps. This has brought the discovery- as happened with the unfortunate Chris McDonald, that their families are on their own financially in the event of death or injury. Private military companies (PMCs) are mostly small administrative firms who employ mercenary soldiers as sub-contractors, after (lie manner of building site workers on the lump. Thanks to their hands-on experience in Ireland, British PMC firms run by retired officers who have spent most of their careers on counter-terror tactics (from the safety of plush offices in the City of London) seem to have cornered the market in "civilian contractors".