Mercenary companies clearly have little to fear from Republican-dominated governance in Washington. But what about the Democrats? Despite their stated antiwar claims, the Democrats’ dominant Iraq plan would keep in place tens of thousands of U.S. troops for an unspecified time, while escalating U.S. action in Afghanistan. For military contractors like Blackwater, this is welcome news. “Nobody is going to be able to throw the contractors out,” said David Isenberg of the British-American Security Information Council. “They’re the American Express card of the American military. The military doesn’t leave home without them, because it can’t.”63
The 2007 Iraq supplemental spending bill opened a window onto what could happen in the first term of a Democratic administration. Along with the findings of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group analysis, it formed the basis for the Iraq plans of the leading Democratic contenders for the presidency. The bill was portrayed as the Democrats’ withdrawal plan, and Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton passionately supported it, with Obama saying it meant the country was “one signature away from ending the Iraq War.”64 But upon a careful reading of the legislation (which was vetoed by President Bush), that claim rings hollow. The plan would have redeployed some U.S. forces from Iraq within 180 days. But it also would have provided for 40,000-60,000 troops to remain in Iraq as “trainers,” “counterterrorist forces,” and for “protection for embassy/diplomats,” according to an analysis by the Institute for Policy Studies.65 “There was nothing in the legislation about contractors or mercenary forces,” said IPS analyst Erik Leaver.66 The truth is that as long as there are troops in Iraq, there will be private contractors.
In part, these contractors do mundane jobs that traditionally have been performed by soldiers, from driving trucks to doing laundry. These services are provided through companies such as Halliburton, KBR, and Fluor, and through their vast labyrinth of subcontractors. But private personnel, as Blackwater’s history in Iraq has shown, are also consistently engaged in armed combat and “security” operations. Contractors interrogate prisoners, gather intelligence, operate rendition flights, protect senior occupation officials—including some commanding U.S. generals—and in some cases have taken command of U.S. and international troops in battle. In an admission that speaks volumes about the extent of the privatization, Gen. David Petraeus, who was charged with implementing the “surge,” admitted that he has, at times, not been guarded in Iraq by the U.S. military but by “contract security.”67 At least three U.S. commanding generals have been guarded in Iraq by hired guns, including the general who oversees U.S. military contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.68
In 2008 the number of private contractors in Iraq was at a one-to-one ratio with active-duty U.S. soldiers, a stunning escalation compared with the 1991 Gulf War. “To have half of your army be contractors, I don’t know that there’s a precedent for that,” said Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.69
Some estimates actually put the number of contractors at higher than active-duty soldiers in Iraq, but exact numbers are nearly impossible to obtain.70 According to a March 2008 report by the Government Accountability Office, the Pentagon “does not maintain departmentwide data on the numbers of contractor employees working side-by-side with federal employees.”71 But in a review of twenty-one Defense Department offices, the GAO found that at “15 offices, contractor employees outnumbered DOD employees and comprised up to 88% of the workforce. Contractor employees perform key tasks, including developing contract requirements and advising on award fees for other contractors.”
Beyond the issues raised by private contractors hired by the Pentagon lies the more troubling problem of the State Department’s private armed forces. A major part of the Democrats’ plan calls for maintaining the massive U.S. Embassy, the largest embassy in world history, as well as the Green Zone. At present, much of the security work required by the embassy and the travel of U.S. officials into and out of the Green Zone is done by three private security firms: Blackwater, Triple Canopy, and DynCorp. This arrangement reflects the simultaneous militarization and privatization of the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Created in the mid-1990s, the department’s Worldwide Personal Protective Services was originally envisioned as a small-scale bodyguard operation, comprised of private security contractors, to protect small groups of U.S. diplomats and other U.S. and foreign officials. In Iraq, it has been turned into a sizable paramilitary force. Spending on the program jumped from $50 million in 2003 to $613 million in 2006.72
The looming question is: who would protect the Democrats’ army of diplomats in Iraq? Some insist that it is possible to continue to rely on private forces to do this work as long as they are held accountable. As of March 2008, these private forces enjoyed a de facto “above the law” status, which both Obama and Clinton have decried. But it is hard to see how “accountability” is going to be achieved, at least in the short term.
In late 2007, in the aftermath of Nisour Square, the House overwhelmingly approved legislation that would ensure that all contractors would be subject to prosecution in U.S. civilian courts for crimes committed on a foreign battlefield.73 The idea is: FBI investigators would deploy to the crime scene, gather evidence, and interview witnesses, leading to indictments and prosecutions. But this approach raises a slew of questions. Who would protect the investigators? How would Iraqi victims be interviewed? How would evidence be gathered amid the chaos and dangers of a hostile war zone like Iraq? Given that the federal government and the military seem unable—or unwilling—even to count how many contractors are actually in the country, how could their activities possibly be monitored? Apart from the fact that it would be impossible to effectively police such an enormous deployment of private contractors (such as in Iraq, where it is equal in size to the military presence), this legislation could give the private military industry a tremendous PR victory. The companies could finally claim that a legally accountable structure governed their operations. Yet they would be well aware that such legislation would be nearly impossible to enforce. Perhaps that is why the industry has passionately backed this approach. Prince called its passage in the House, “Excellent.”
Others have proposed to address the problem simply by expanding the official U.S. government forces responsible for securing the embassy and Green Zone, thus reducing the market for mercenary companies. In an October 2007 letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Senator Joe Biden, chair of the influential Foreign Relations Committee, suggested the United States should examine “whether we should expand the ranks of Diplomatic Security rather than continue to rely so heavily on contractors.”74 He called for hiring more agents, saying, “The requirement for extensive personal security to protect the employees of the U.S. mission will continue for several years to come—regardless of the number of U.S. forces in Iraq.”
While an increase in funding to the Diplomatic Security division would ostensibly pave the way for a force made up entirely of U.S. government personnel, there are serious questions about how quickly that could happen. As of October 2007, the State Department had only 1,450 Diplomatic Security agents worldwide who were actual U.S. government employees and only thirty-six deployed in Iraq.75 In contrast, as of March 2008, Blackwater had nearly 1,000 operatives in Iraq alone, not to mention the hundreds more working for Triple Canopy and DynCorp. The State Department has said it could take years to identify prospective new agents, vet them, train them, and deploy them.76 In short, this would be no small undertaking and, even if the political will and funding was there, would take years to enact.
If the Democrats attempted to make diplomatic security a military operation, that would pose serious challenges as well. As the New York Times reported in late 2007, “the military does not have the trained personnel to take over the job.”77 Even if the military trained a specialized force for executive protection and bodyguarding in Iraq, this arrangement would mean more U.S. military convoys tr
aveling inside Iraq, potentially placing them in deadly conflict with Iraqi civilians on a regular basis.
Realizing the practical challenges any transition away from private security forces in Iraq would entail, during the 2008 election campaign, a senior foreign policy adviser to Obama said, “I can’t rule out, I won’t rule out, private security contractors.”78 This must have been a difficult admission. While Obama has been at the forefront of attempts to legislate accountability for contractors on the battlefield—he introduced a contractor reform bill eight months before Nisour Square—his foreign policy team clearly understood that their support for maintaining a sizable U.S. presence in Iraq had painted them into a corner. On February 28, 2008, a day after I reported Obama’s position in an article in The Nation, Hillary Clinton announced she would sign on to legislation to “ban the use of Blackwater and other private mercenary firms in Iraq.”79 The timing, in the middle of their hotly contested campaign for the Democratic nomination, was curious—Clinton, during her five years on the Senate Armed Services Committee, had been largely mute on the issue before the September 16 Blackwater shooting and did not issue her statement for a full six months after the massacre. How exactly she envisioned carrying out her Iraq plan without such private forces was also unclear.
Both Clinton and Obama indicated they supported increasing funding of Diplomatic Security, as advocated by Senator Biden in 2007. In the bigger picture, however, firms like Blackwater operate in a demand-based industry, and it is this demand, which derives from offensive, unpopular wars of conquest, that must be cut off. Even if a U.S. president determined to completely transfer diplomatic security jobs from companies like Blackwater to official U.S. government agents, which would be a major undertaking, the State Department has said it could take years to implement. The reality is that short of dramatically shrinking the size of the U.S. civilian and diplomatic presence in Iraq, which necessitates such a large “diplomatic” security force, the next president may have no choice but to continue the current contracting arrangements. And that is good news for Blackwater and other private security companies.
But Iraq and diplomatic security are only part of the picture. There is almost no discussion in Congress about the stunning growth of the operations of companies like Blackwater globally and at home. Their expansion into private intelligence, homeland security, military weapons, surveillance technology, the “war on drugs,” and peacekeeping operations continues, largely free from the scrutiny of lawmakers and the media. Long ago, these companies began to stake out their role in future conflicts and a greater presence in highly sensitive and increasingly privatized government programs. It is in large part because of the lack of intense scrutiny by the media and Congress that their future appears both secure and bright.
Erik Prince certainly isn’t losing sleep these days, not over the killings of Iraqi civilians by his forces or over his company’s future status in the U.S. war machine and national security apparatus. Shortly after Nisour Square and facing a slew of Congressional, military, and Justice Department investigations over his company’s actions, Prince said, “How can I sleep? Because I’m comfortable, and I know what we’re doing. We’re doing the right thing, so beyond that, I can’t worry. I sleep the sleep of the just. I’m not feeling guilty.”80
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I AM grateful to my parents, Michael and Lisa Scahill. They provided me with an education no university could ever rival. Their quiet humility, their dedication to justice, and their love for others amazes me. I have never met more decent people. They are my heroes and my friends. Thanks to my brother Tim and sister Stephanie for their lifetime love, companionship, and support, as well as my sister-in-law Jenny and my niece Maya. Ksenija, you are my heart and my world. Barb and Harry Hoferle, thank you for always believing and always being there. Also I wish to remember my late grandparents, two of whom were Irish immigrants who lived through the terror of the Black and Tans paramilitaries. Gratitude also to my aunts, uncles, and cousins for their love through the years.
This book is very much the product of the hard work and influence of scores of people who gave their time, commitment, friendship, love, and solidarity to this project and to me and my family. I would like to thank my editor Betsy Reed, who spent countless hours editing and revising this manuscript and who has supported my reporting through thick and thin. It has been a great gift to work with her over the past few years. Without her this project would never have happened. Thanks again to Garrett Ordower for everything. Gratitude to my friend and agent Anthony Arnove, who has believed in my work since we met. Naomi Klein for her undying friendship, solidarity, and support. Thank you to Daniela Crespo for her support. My compañeros Sharif Abdel Kouddous, Ana Nogueira, Carmen Trotta, and Dave Mickenberg for being. Carl Bromley and Ruth Baldwin at Nation Books for their support, enthusiasm, and dedication from the jump—you guys were the glue. I would like to extend my deepest appreciation to the amazing team from Perseus: David Steinberger, John Sherer, Michele Jacob, Nicole Caputo, and Elena Guzman. At Avalon, Michele Martin for her faith, tenacity, and encouragement. The Avalon production team for pulling it all together: Peter Jacoby, Linda Kosarin, Jonathan Sainsbury, and Mike Walters. Also thanks to Anne Sullivan and Karen Auerbach. Mark Sorkin did an amazing job meticulously copyediting this book. Many thanks to the talented Joe Duax, who spent months combing through every sentence and footnote diligently fact-checking the manuscript.
I would like to extend un abrazo fuerte to Liliana Segura for her tireless work. She labored extensively on the original manuscript and has been central to completing the new edition. She has been a dedicated collaborator, ally, and strategist. Her love, companionship, and friendship en la lucha leave me in awe always. Mercedes Camps González from Real World Radio and Russell Cobb ably translated many articles. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Hamilton Fish, Taya Kitman, and The Nation Institute for their crucial support and encouragement. Deep gratitude to Perry Rosenstein and the Puffin Foundation for backing this project and my work. Special thanks to Katrina vanden Heuvel, Victor Navasky, and The Nation magazine for supporting and publishing my reporting. I also wish to acknowledge Alan Kaufman, Sophie Ragsdale, Kim Nauer, Mike Webb, Roane Carey, Ben Wyskida, Suzanne Ceresko, and Andres Conteris for their assistance. Thanks to Jared Rodriguez for the pic and also to journalist Tim Shorrock for the tape. I would also like to thank all of the journalists whose work is cited in this book as well as those people who gave generously of their time in interviews and research, especially Katy Helvenston-Wettengel and Danica Zovko.
A special thanks to my friend, colleague, and mentor, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! She took me under her wing and taught me to fly, and I will forever be in her debt. She is this country’s finest journalist. Also to one of my media heroes and friends, Juan Gonzalez, for the example he has set and the battles he has waged. I also wish to acknowledge my rebel media comrades from my Democracy Now! family: Dan Coughlin, Maria Carrion, Sharif Abdel Kouddous, Ana Nogueira, Mike Burke, Elizabeth Press, Nell Geiser, Yoruba Richen, John Hamilton, Mike DiFilippo, and Aaron Mate. Also special thanks to: Rep. Jan Schakowsky and her staff, Dave Rapallo from Rep. Henry Waxman’s office, Brenda Coughlin, Michael Moore, Elisabeth Benjamin, Kwame Dixon, Dave Isay, Verna Avery Brown, Dave Riker, Diana Cohn, Denis Moynihan, Mattie Harper, Isis Philips, Chuck Scurich, Karen Pomer, Vince Vitrano, Kareem Kouddous, the Antic family, Ian van Hulle, Laura Flanders, the Crespo family, Art Heitzer, William Worthy, the late Dave Dellinger, Tom Hayden, Errol Maitland, Dred Scott Keyes, Elombe Brath, Sharan Harper, Bernard White, Mario Murrillo, Deepa Fernandes, Karen Ranucci, Michael Ratner, Coach Goran Raspudic, St. Rose of Lima and Neighborhood House. For their support and encouragement: Carmen Trotta, Tom Cornell, Frank Donovan, Matt Daloisio, Bill and Sue Frankel-Streit, and the whole CW family. My deep gratitude to Philip, Daniel, and Frida Berrigan and Liz McAlister for their example, their community, and their love.
So much of what can truly be called in
dependent journalism is produced by people and communities in struggle, and the labor is donated because of lack of financial resources and out of a deep commitment to a free media and a just world. I would like to thank the independent media outlets that have supported and published my work over the years: Pacifica Radio, its journalists and workers, and its five stations (WBAI, KPFA, KPFK, KPFT, and WPFW); Democracy Now!; Pacifica affiliates and community radio stations across the U.S. and the globe; Free Speech Radio News; Dennis Bernstein and Flashpoints; Norm Stockwell and WORT; Commondreams.org and Craig Brown; Antiwar.com; Alternet.org; Z Magazine and Michael Albert; Guerrilla News Network and Anthony Lappé; Jeffrey St. Clair and Alex Cockburn at Counterpunch.org; CorpWatch.org; the Indypendent newspaper and Independent Media Centers worldwide; Sam Husseini and the Institute for Public Accuracy; Brian Drolet and Free Speech TV; Dee Dee Halleck, the godmother of community TV; Danny Schechter and MediaChannel.org; John Alpert and DCTV; The Progressive magazine; Dollars & Sense magazine; the Grassroots Radio Conference; Ali Abunimah and Nigel Parry at ElectronicIraq. net; and HuffingtonPost.com and Arianna Huffington. Thank you also to independent journalists Dahr Jamail, Arun Gupta, Christian Parenti, Laila al-Arian, Alan Maass, Rosa Clemente, Norman Solomon, Josh Breitbart, Robert Greenwald, Pratap Chatterjee, John Tarleton, Andrew Stern, Kat Aaron, and Rahul Mahajan. To my friends and colleagues whom I worked with and struggled alongside in a place once called Yugoslavia: Ivana Antic’, Ljiljana Smajlovic’, Terry Sheridan, Katya Subasic’, Nenad Stefanovic’, Thorne Anderson, Kael Alford, Alex Todorovic’, Josh Kucera, Vesna Peric Zimonjic’, Ana Nikitovic’, Ivan Benussi, Novak Gaijic’, and Dusan Cavic’. Thanks also to Oronto Douglas and Sowore Omoyele of Nigeria for taking big risks for justice.
Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army Page 53