This article from NYTimes.com 
has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Price of Iraqy Freedom!!!

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

/-------------------- advertisement -----------------------\

Explore more of Starbucks at Starbucks.com.
http://www.starbucks.com/default.asp?ci=1015
\----------------------------------------------------------/

Have Guns, Will Travel

July 21, 2003
 By P. W. SINGER 




 

WASHINGTON 
It is often said that war is too important to be left to
the generals. But what about the C.E.O.'s? The Pentagon's
plan to hire a private paramilitary force to guard sites in
Iraq may have surprised many Americans, but it was really
just another example of a remarkable recent development in
warfare: the rise of a global trade in hired military
services. 

Known as "privatized military firms," these companies are
the corporate evolution of old-fashioned mercenaries - that
is, they provide the service side of war rather than
weapons. They range from small consulting firms that offer
the advice of retired generals to transnational
corporations that lease out battalions of commandoes. There
are hundreds of them, with a global revenue of more than
$100 billion a year, operating in at least 50 countries. 

Even the world's most dominant military has increasingly
become reliant on them. From 1994 to 2002, the Pentagon
entered into more than 3,000 contracts with private
military firms. Companies like Halliburton, Vice President
Dick Cheney's former employer, now provide the logistics
for every major American military deployment. Corporations
have even taken over much of military training and
recruiting, including the Reserve Officer Training Corps
programs at more than 200 American universities. (Yes,
private employees now train our military leaders of
tomorrow.) 

Perhaps nothing better illustrates the industry's growing
role than the campaign against Iraq. Private employees
worked on everything from feeding and housing coalition
troops to maintaining weapons systems like the B-2 bomber.
Indeed, there was roughly one private military worker in
the region for every 10 soldiers fighting the war (as
opposed to one for every 100 troops in the 1991 gulf war). 

And companies will play an even greater role in the
occupation. In addition to the proposed security force, the
new Iraqi military will be trained by corporate
consultants. Washington has also contracted DynCorp, whose
pilots have long helped the Pentagon destroy coca fields in
Colombia, to train the new police force. 

In many cases, privatizing war has allowed for greater
military capacities and cost efficiency. A problem,
however, is that while the industry has developed at a
breakneck pace, governments and global bodies have
responded at a bureaucratic crawl. There are almost no
international laws or national regulations that have
significant bearing on the industry. 

This mix of profit motive with the fog of war raises
several concerns. First, the good of private companies may
not always be to the public good. All the normal worries
one has with contractors (overcharging, overbilling hours,
poorly trained workers, quality assurance) raise their ugly
head; but in this case one is not dealing with a new
plumber - lives are at stake. For example, a former DynCorp
employee has accused the company of cutting costs by hiring
former waiters and security guards to work as mechanics on
Army helicopters. 

Second, just like lawyers, some military contractors work
only for ethical clients while others choose to make money
from less savory types. As a result, some companies have
helped save democratic regimes and aided humanitarian
groups while others have supported dictators, rebel groups,
drug cartels and terrorists. 

In addition, foreign and military affairs are the
government's domain. Undertaking public policy through
private means can mean that some initiatives that might not
pass public approval - such as the increasing American
involvement, outside Congressional oversight, in Colombia's
civil strife - still get carried out. 

Also, privatized operations do not always go as planned. In
1998 the Colombian Air Force, working from intelligence
supplied by an American company, mistakenly bombed a
village, killing 17. In 2001 a plane carrying missionaries
was shot down over Peru after private workers under
contract to the Central Intelligence Agency alerted the
Peruvian military that the plane seemed suspicious. 

International and national laws must be updated so that
governments gain some control over whom military firms are
allowed to work with and can be certain the companies can
be held accountable when things go wrong. Likewise, as
governments come to rely more on private help, they must
become more business-savvy, establishing good competition
and oversight in their outsourcing. This is the only way to
ensure that the public, not just the industry, enjoys the
benefits of military privatization. 


P.W. Singer is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and
author of "Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized
Military Industry." 

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/21/opinion/21SING.html?ex=1059792134&ei=1&en=c4b1d2a183d11ce7


---------------------------------

Get Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. Imagine
reading The New York Times any time & anywhere you like!
Leisurely catch up on events & expand your horizons. Enjoy
now for 50% off Home Delivery! Click here:

http://www.nytimes.com/ads/nytcirc/index.html



HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters 
or other creative advertising opportunities with The 
New York Times on the Web, please contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our online media 
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam

Reply via email to