Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

A 'Perfect Storm for Disaster' Brewing With Washington's 'Unprecedented' Shadow Army

Posted by Jeremy Scahill, Rebel Reports at 7:00 AM on June 15, 2009.


As troops and private contractors surge in Afghanistan, a new report reveals a system rife with abuse.
contractorlogosetc

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get World in your
mailbox!

 

I’ve been reading through the hot-off-the-presses, exciting 100+ page report from the Commission on Wartime Contracting: “At What Cost? Contingency Contracting In Iraq and Afghanistan.” There have been several good pieces that covered the Congressional hearings related to this report, so I thought I would just post some of the more important excerpts from the report. One general note: The Commission, which was created due to the diligent efforts of Senators Jim Webb and Claire McCaskill, has been doing some incredibly important work digging deep into the corruption, waste, abuse, fraud, etc of the U.S. war contracting system. The statute that created the commission “requires the Commission to assess a number of factors related to wartime contracting, including the extent of waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement of wartime contracts. The Commission has the authority to hold hearings and to refer to the Attorney General any violation or potential violation of law it identifies in carrying out its duties.”
While the new report reveals some critical details about issues of waste and abuse, the general tone is very pro-contractor, which is not surprising. However, I find it disturbing that one of the members of the Commission, Dov Zakheim, is, according to his Commission bio, a current vice-president of Booz Allen Hamilton, a major defense, homeland security and intelligence contractor with a direct stake in US policy on contractors.

Booze is now majority owned by The Carlyle Group, which has deep political connections. In an Op-ed in The Washington Post last year, Zakheim campaigned against “more regulations and bureaucratic restrictions on contractors” and advocated for “a larger, more diversified base of prime contractors and suppliers.” Zakheim, who was a foreign policy advisor to Bush and part of the circle of the Vulcans, is now a key member of the primary body that is responsible for investigating the industry and making formal recommendations on U.S. policy. While the Commission is made up of appointees from both political parties, (Zakheim was appointed by President Bush) Zakheim’s corporate stake on these matters should be cause for a review of his position on the Commission.

***

One fact that jumped out at me in the report is that, at present, according to the Commission, “contracting oversight” in Afghanistan is being done remotely from Iraq. And remember, there are 70,000 contractors (and growing) in Afghanistan.

Here are some excerpts from the report, which I have categorized and in some cases highlighted or analyzed:

EXTENT OF U.S. RELIANCE ON CONTRACTORS

  • Contractors are playing a key role in the drawdown of U.S. military forces in Iraq. As military units withdraw from bases, the number of contractor employees needed to handle closing or transfer tasks and to dispose of government property will increase ... preparations for this major shift out of Iraq and into Afghanistan or other areas are sketchy
  • As the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have progressed, the military services, defense agencies, and other stakeholder agencies… continue to increase their reliance on contractors. Contractors are now literally in the center of the battlefield in unprecedented numbers.
  • From fiscal years (FY) 2001 through 2008, the Defense Department’s reported obligations on all contracts for services, measured in real‐dollar terms, more than doubled -- from roughly $92 billion to slightly over $200 billion. In fiscal year 2008, this figure included more than $25 billion for services to support contingency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. These figures do not include State and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contracts.
  • [T]he missions in Iraq and Afghanistan are the first major contingency operations to reflect the full impact of the shift to heavy reliance on contractor personnel for critical support functions in forward operating areas. Despite the key role of contractors in overseas operations, DoD lacks enough staff to provide adequate contract oversight. The State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development also use significant levels of contractor support in Southwest Asia.
  • The Commission believes that a serious shortage of U.S. government civilians in Afghanistan is all too likely to trigger heavy reliance on contractors in both the short term and the long run.

THE NUMBERS

  • During its April 2009 trips to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Commission sought to identify the total picture of contractor support in those countries. Officials in both Iraq and Afghanistan told us that there was no central list of all contracts providing support. The Commission was unable to put together a complete footprint of the contracts being performed at the bases we visited. GAO has also been unable to identify complete and reliable data on contractor personnel in Southwest Asia. Only DoD provided data on the number of contractor personnel, but officials have told GAO that its census data were not routinely evaluated for accuracy or completeness. There is still no clear picture of who the contractors in theater are, what services they provide, which contracts they perform, and what their support costs are.
  • U.S. Army Central Command’s second‐quarter fiscal year 2009 census reflected 242,657 active DoD contractor personnel in its Southwest Asia area of operations. This total includes 132,610 in Iraq, 68,197 in Afghanistan, and 41,850 in other Southwest Asia locations.

ARMED “SECURITY CONTRACTORS”

According to a chart contained in the report, the total number of DoD PSCs in Iraq is: 12,942 and 3,321 for the State Department. In Afghanistan, there are 4,373 DoD PSCs and 689 State Department PSCs. As we previously reported, in the first quarter of 2009, there has been a 29% increase in the number of PSCs in Afghanistan and will continue to grow. The report also raises concerns about the poor or inadequate training some of the PSCs receive, particularly Third Country Nationals hired to guard US bases and facilities: “Poorly trained and ill-equipped contractor employees providing security for our operating bases put American forces at increased risk of harm.”

  • In Iraq, 25,000 to 30,000 PSC personnel work for U.S. agencies, the government of Iraq, coalition governments, and U.S. contractors. These numbers exceed the PSC census data in the table above because they include PSC support to the government of Iraq and coalition governments. The total U.S. spending for PSCs is estimated to be between $6 billion and $10 billion from 2003 to 2007. Of this amount, $3 billion to $4 billion is estimated to be for obligations made directly by U.S. government agencies, and $3 billion to $6 billion is estimated to have been spent by U.S. contractors to acquire PSC support.

Regarding accountability, the report notes that the U.S. civilian laws covering contractors are rarely enforced:

  • The MEJA (Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act) statute has been used infrequently. From MEJA’s enactment in 2000 through March 2008, DoD has referred 58 cases involving PSCs and other contractors to the Department of Justice. Federal prosecutors brought charges in 12 of those cases, and state prosecutors brought charges in one other case. Of those, eight resulted in a conviction and five await trial.

WASTE, FRAUD ABUSE

According to the Commission’s report, there is a severe shortage of oversight personnel to monitor these massive contracts and contractors. The report notes that within the Defense Contract Audit Agency “overall staffing levels have remained relatively constant at roughly 4,000 since FY 2000, even though DoD contract transactions have increased by 328 percent—from 304,500 in FY 2000 to over 1.3 million in FY 2006.”

  • Through fiscal year 2008, the DCAA has taken exception to over $13 billion in questioned and unsupported costs associated with the efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  • Inadequate oversight, combined with poorly written statements of work, lack of competition, and contractor inefficiencies have contributed to billions of dollars in wasteful spending. The drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq brings the risk of more waste. Money is being wasted on completing projects that are no longer needed. And poor control of U.S. government property in Iraq that must be moved, handed over to the Iraqis, or scrapped could cause even more waste.
  • Without proper oversight, the government cannot confirm that contractors are performing in accordance with contract requirements, cannot support payment of award or incentive fees, cannot support the certification of invoices for services performed, and cannot ensure that services critical for the completion of our military and reconstruction missions are performed. Any one of these conditions invites waste and abuse. Taken together, they are a perfect storm for disaster.

CONTRACTORS “SELF-POLICING”

The Defense Contract Management Agency “told the Commissioners that contractor ‘self policing’ had been tried, but ‘did not work out.’” Some contracts are actually being “monitored” by investigators physically located in the United States. While the Commission asserts there have been improvements in contractor oversight in Iraq, the system in Afghanistan “is very different and raises significant concerns about contracting for certain functions generally performed by the government.” Similar to what happened in Iraq, a contractor was hired to monitor contractors as part of the Armed Contractor Oversight Division (ACOD). The company that won the contract is Aegis, the British-owned firm headed by famed mercenary Tim Spicer. According to the report, ACOD is “primarily staffed” by the company:

Aegis’s work raises heightened inherently governmental concerns because the ACOD receives limited U.S. government supervision. Since its establishment, ACOD in Afghanistan has primarily been run by contractor personnel from Aegis. Aegis’s responsibilities include working with the Afghan Ministry of Interior in investigations concerning PSC escalation‐of‐force incidents. CJTF‐101 submitted an expedited request for four field‐grade officers for ACOD; however, as of mid‐May the request had yet to be approved and there were still no senior U.S. military officials assigned full‐time to the directorate. A review of the Aegis contracting documents showed that without these military officers in place, Aegis is in a role of significant official responsibility in reviewing activities of other private security contractors.

According to the report, “DoD interviewees informed the Commission that sufficient military manpower and/or expertise did not exist in Afghanistan, and that contracting with Aegis allowed the Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF‐101) to obtain expertise quickly. Aegis does not currently provide armed contractors in Afghanistan, and as the ACOD is currently structured, an Aegis contractor serves as the Deputy Director and has day‐to‐day responsibility for managing the directorate. Should they be awarded a PSC contract under the current structure, there would be a conflict of interest.”

KBR

  • The Commission believes that the services provided by contractor KBR under LOGCAP III -- with $31.4 billion funded through March 20, 2009 -- could have been delivered for billions of dollars less.
  • DCAA is reviewing $277 million in LOGCAP III subcontracts involving KBR employees or ex‐employees that have been or may have been involved in improper procurement activities. The purpose of DCAA’s review is to assess the reasonableness of payments under those subcontracts.

The report notes that KBR is still firmly entrenched in the latest LOGCAP contract:

  • LOGCAP IV, the fourth iteration of the program, is a multiple‐award contract competitively awarded in April 2008 to DynCorp International LLC, Fluor Intercontinental, and KBR Services. Each contractor can receive up to $5 billion of work under the contract in a given year, so total spending over the possible 10‐year life of the contract could be as high as $150 billion. Meanwhile, work contracted under LOGCAP III continues, so a slow segue from one contract to another is under way.

The full report can be downloaded on the website of the Commission on Wartime Contracting.

Digg!

Tagged as: iraq, afghanistan, jim webb, kbr, carlyle group, booz allen hamilton, claire mccaskill, dov zakheim, vulcans

Jeremy Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army.


Blaming Muslims For the Fort Hood Massacre Will Only Create More Victims
Whatever was in the mind of alleged shooter Major Nidal Malik Hasan is no reason to question the loyalty of Muslim Americans.
Post by Wajahat Ali. November 9, 2009.
Report: Hasan Snapped Under Weight of Bullying, Anxiety Over Deployment
That's not stopping the usual suspects from crying "jihad."
Post by Joshua Holland. November 6, 2009.
Who's Been Held Accountable for the Crimes of Bush's "War on Terror"? Four Italians ... Sort of
Certainly not those who ran our shadowy network of secret prisons, nor their superiors who created it.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 5, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Private For Profit Military contractors Pose a Grave threat to National Security
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jun 15, 2009 7:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what happens when another country Out bids US on a For Hire Military contract? How many of these contractors employees are allied with other nations?
Our Founders deemed a Citizens militia and national Defense fundemental to our soverignty. If our enlisted numbers are dwindling and the Private Contractors employee ranks are growing from the profits they are making off not only Our Tax dollars, but other countries revenues- How Secure is our nation?
so China not only has more people who were required to serve int their military, they also have more money than US.It wouldn't be the first time in our nations history some of our own people fought on the opposing side. And what loyality could we expect if the majority of the Contractors employees are from 3rd world nations like say Yemen.
Not only do these Private contractors pose a problem operating around the World, cloaked in our Flag as protection; They pose a problem as to Where their Loyality/allegience lies, With US or just their bottom line?
I doubt Seriously this is what Our founders envisioned as an Acceptable system for National Defense.In fact had they thought so, they would have merely instructed US to hire Pirates to defend the country instead- Just like the Monarchies had, which ultimatley bit them in the ass too!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DURING THE VIET NAM WAR
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jun 15, 2009 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was a slogan" "What if they held a war and nobody showed up". Turns out that now we can do exactly that. Many of the wrong people get killed and it's very expensive, but it's possible. Between unmanned drones and paid mercenaries, it all becomes eerily remote. Some guy in an ergonomically correct chair in an undisclosed military hide-out plays the game. I don't know how effective this is militarily. But we are playing with the world's head. I wonder about the cost of killing the "enemy" (whoever they are) and making enemies all around the world. Everytime a family is wiped out on the way to a wedding, how many people per casualty turn into enemies of the U.S. At what point will they develop their own new wave weapons? Remember when we had the only Atomic Bomb in the world? That didn't last very long. As in sports, records are made to be broken. We will not have the market cornered on this morally questionable form of waging war for much longer. Apparently the whole mess is once again over oil and natural gas. Afganistan is the third poorest nation in the world. Aside from the poppy crop they have no source of money. However, their real estate is valuable. Why not pay them for the rights to run pipelines and provide for jobs, theirs and ours. "Buy them" the way we did the people of Alaska in the 1970's. Lots of money was and is still being made on that deal. If the real motive is to democratize people, start by giving them a way to earn a decent living. It can't be anymore expensive than killing their people and waiting to find out what they decide to do with us. Payback is a bitch. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: DURING THE VIET NAM WAR Posted by: robert.noll
Good old Bill Clinton started this one two, and let's see, 100,000 more police
Posted by: RR#1 on Jun 19, 2009 12:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
workfare, limits on welfare, In Bosnia not a single American life was lost as the fight was carried on from the air, the patriot act, and so it goes. The democrates are elected when the status quo feels it needs the confidence of the working class for a particular policy to go forward, thus, get them dems in there while we gut the treasury to make things better for the little guy. Walk one inch with the corporations and your done. Obama all of that promise and in the end things will never be the same, we will never have generations of people doing better than their parents again-we will have a large permanent underclass and if it is not domestic we will import them legally or illegally from Mexico.
Cya Later Suckers, that has to be what they think or I had no other choice, I did the best that could be done within the parameters set by others... lmae lame lame...
Cheers,
RR

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]