The Military and Ethics (catch all)

[SWJED]

I just received an official (military) request for points of contact info on those working on issues regarding the training and education of professional militaries to manage the ethical challenges of contemporary operations and future conflict.

Please PM or e-mail me (Dave D.) with any information along these lines and I will forward on.

Thanks much,

Dave

[Brian Hanley]

Based on my observations, while it isn't direct, the problem of what I have termed "development bandits" is a significant negative impact on rebuilding efforts, etcetera. These are Westerners who enter into a "gatekeeper economy" position. Note that the Middle East with its legacy of Ottoman Empire governance has operated by gatekeepers for at least 500 years.

This has two significant impacts on in-country operations.

1. I am not personally aware of any military personnel that have put themselves in such positions. However, I am aware of some from the aid/NGO community. I think military commanders should provide for scrutinizing them and keeping ears to the ground to find them. Such scrutiny has a limited set of parameters and can winnow targets to a quite small number that is reasonable to track.

A. To make money they need to put themselves in a position to allocate funds. At a low level of graft they will become contract administrators, allocating contracts in-country. At a high level they will get themselves into a high position at a bank funded by the World Bank. (I have seen both.) They may even manage to start a bank using WB money with in-country personnel. At the highest level they will make connections to the president and governors.

B. High level corrupt relationships have quid pro quos on both sides. The government can use the banks to conduct covert foriegn policy and raise funds through illegal arms sales. (Note that banks are a required and integral part of any major insurgency.) For instance, a government may (as Iran is now in Iraq) make efforts to keep a threat busy across a border. (Until recently, Shevardnadze did this quite successfully with Russian in Chechnya. The president and close coterie can use such deals (and drug deal money) to raise money for themselves and hold the money outside their country. (Thus strengthening their power base.) Governments can also use such relationships to reward favored personnel (such as soldiers who save their lives) with multi-million dollar loans for business startups or pure theft.
For the Westerners, while they enter into a potientially quite deadly game because they make themselves a security hazard for the network they get in bed with, the lure is money. They collect their money in three primary ways: a.) Kickbacks for loans written. Typical rates are 10%-20% of loan amount. b.) Rakeoff payments for handling black money transfers for weapons and drugs. Usually, the bulk of this is supposed to go to people in the government, typically department of the interior or something similar.
c.) Theft of funds from black money transfers prior to telling the government about it. (In one case I received a report an individual had made their last deal prior to leaving the country without notifying the department of the interior minister in order to net out the whole amount.)

This is an ethical situation that officers can make a difference with. While most NGO personnel are fine, a critical few are not. Insurgencies can also make efforts to recruit such people, although I have not seen that directly myself.
If in-country personnel make extra efforts to watch for such people and exert jurisdiction where they can, this will help their redevelopment and occupation efforts. If they cannot get jurisdiction, handing over such information to CIA, MI5 or Interpol would be appropriate. Venue can be a serious problem in such situations.

2. Related to this is a problem endemic in the middleast and central asia - anywhere that has lived under oppression and gatekeeper economics for long periods. In country hires that specialize in understanding what the invader wants to hear in order to get a position to extract tribute are a problem. For instance, in Afghanistan, it would be expected that in-country persons who had worked with the Soviets would also work pretty well with the USA. But thinking that because they are easy for our people to work with means they are doing the right thing or acting in what we could consider an ethical manner would be very wrong. They won't be doing that. It is often the more difficult to work with (for a boss) that are the more honest.

[SWJED]

... have two solid leads on POC's so far. Keep them coming...