Hired Guns
What to do about military contractors run amok.
By Phillip Carter
Posted Friday, April 9, 2004, at 2:57 PM PT
Contractors: Life during wartime
The ambush and gruesome killing of four U.S. contractors in Fallujah, Iraq, has sparked some of the most intense combat since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime last spring. It has also brought the actions of private military contractors—hired by the U.S. government to provide extra manpower and firepower in Iraq—into sharp focus, with reports that they are fighting their own battles with their own weapons, helicopters, and intelligence networks.
Military contracting in wartime is nothing new. The military depends on a vast support network of civilians to feed, clothe, equip, and train the forces. Indeed, today's U.S. military couldn't function without civilian contractors to troubleshoot its high-tech equipment. What is new is the extent to which these contractors are conducting combat operations in Iraq; rather than the purely support functions they have performed during recent missions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. This shift raises a number of problems for the U.S. government, with which the Pentagon is only now beginning to wrestle—principally, how to control these contractors and ensure that their actions under fire further the national interest.
The first set of problems arises from the legal status of contractors. Armed contractors—like the four men ambushed in Fallujah last week—fall into an international legal gray zone. They aren't "noncombatants" (as unarmed contractors are) under the 4th Geneva Convention, because they carry weapons and act on behalf of the U.S. government. However, they're also not "lawful combatants" under the 3rd Geneva Convention, because they don't wear uniforms or answer to a military command hierarchy. These armed contractors don't even fit the legal definition of mercenaries, because that definition requires that they work for a foreign government in a war zone, in which their own country isn't part of the fight. Legally speaking, they actually fall into the same gray area as the unlawful combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
more
http://slate.msn.com/id/2098571 /
The bulk of the media and political class in Britain has followed this lead in an apparent attempt to normalize the occupation of Iraq in the eyes of the public. The fact that British squaddies shot dead 15 Iraqis in Amara on Tuesday has had little more coverage than the shameful beating to death of Iraqi prisoners in British custody. Both the BBC and ITN routinely refer to British troops as "peacekeepers"; private mercenaries are called "civilian contractors"; the rebranding of the occupation planned for June is described as the "handover of power to the Iraqis"; the Sadr group always represents a "small minority" of Shia opinion; and a patently unscientific and contradictory poll carried out in Iraq last month - in which most people said they were opposed to the presence of coalition forces in Iraq - is absurdly used to claim majority support for the occupation.
more
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0408-05.htm Outsourcing War
An inside look at Brown & Root, the kingpin of America's new military-industrial complex
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_37/b3849012.htmThe New Condottieri and US
Policy: The Privatization of
Conflict and Its Implications
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/02winter/smith.htmRight of peoples to self-determination
Report of the Secretary-General**
http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/a987f0110ca2567ac1256c39004c32d5?Opendocument