Matters Blackwater (Merged thread)

[marct]

We created our reliance on PMCs - this is a self-inflicted GSW. There should be no surprises that contracting out the nation's interests can result in consequences other then we had intended.

Agreed, Rob. But I want to point to one horrific example of what has happened with a too strong reliance on mercenaries, especially when there is no form of accountability: the Thirty Years War and, in particular, the Massacre at Magdeburgh.

I know, at the moment it is a false analogy, but it keeps cropping up n my mind as a worst case scenario and, quite frankly, with not a darn thing happening to reign these people in and make them accountable it is, in my cynical opinion, becoming much more likely. We have already seen the reactions of many Iraqi's to the actions of PMCs being uncontrolled and, in many cases, unpunished. This is an IO winfall for AQI and any other insurgent group. And, more importantly, let me just note that incidents like this one and others actually make a Jihad quite legal in even the most mainstream forms of Sunni Islam.

Even so - PMCs will probably still be seen on the battlefield. They have made their value on the world market known - and there are others who will contract their services.

Quite true but, with respect Rob, it is in some ways irrelevant, at least in the sense that we can take it as a given for the future. What is of primary importance now and in the future is getting mechanisms that hld them accountable for their actions.

I am not defended what happened, but when we talk about UCMJ and all the other DOD rules, you also have to find out or know what type of contract the individuals are operating under. DOS never has, and never will allow DOD to control what they do. It’s like a bad marriage.

Everyone is focused on this particular BW incident and forgetting or at least maybe not knowing that these particular BW folks are operating under a DOS WPPS Diplomatic Security which is NOT a DOD contract. They work for State Department, so labeling them as military contractors is not an accurate designation but of course the media seems to jump on that terminology. They are performing duties what normally would be filled by Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) Special Agents.

Does this mean that they have some form of diplomatic immunity? Even if that is the case, there is precedent for expulsion and requesting the originating nation to lay charges. This happened in Canada a while back with a Russian diplomat who killed someone in a car "accident" (BA content of .02+). I suspect there are other precedents for it as well.

To my mind, this means that the people involved in this incident should be expelled and indicted in the US under US law. As sgmgrumpy noted, there are private "security" details in the US - I can just imagine how US citizens would react to some of them randomly firing into traffic!

To me, the question is where do we go from here? I'd also add that even if we decide to fill our own holes - a process that a few years at the very minimum to fix (in a perfect world), goes beyond recruiting - toward competition with the PMCs to retain some of our best trained mid level folks, and to some degree relies on the political leadership to authorize, fund and equip the increase in manpower, and relies on the American public to volunteer on a much larger scale for service.

I definitely think you're right about that, Rob. Hmm, I really don't know US military policy as well as I should, but aren't officers available for recall after they leave? Would it be feasible (or even possible ) to add a rider to the legislation/admin rules (whatever) to he effect that if hey are engaged in "civilian" employment in a battlezone they, as individuals, are subject to the UCMJ?

Marc