T Go to War Without 'Em: Private Military Contractors
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Foreign Policy at BROOKINGS POLICY PAPER Number 4, September 2007 Can’t Win With ‘Em, Can’t Go To War Without ‘Em: Private Military Contractors and Counterinsurgency P. W. Singer The Brookings Institution 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20036-2103 www.brookings.edu Foreign Policy at BROOKINGS POLICY PAPER Number 4, September 2007 Can’t Win With ‘Em, Can’t Go To War Without ‘Em: Private Military Contractors and Counterinsurgency P. W. Singer Executive Summary he recent incident involving Blackwater con- choices that might not reflect public interest. The Ttractors in Iraq has brought to light a series of Abrams Doctrine, which has stood since the questions surrounding the legal status, oversight, start of the all-volunteer force in the wake of management, and accountability of the private mili- Vietnam, has been outsourced. tary force in Iraq. This for-hire force numbers more • Enables a “bigger is better” approach to opera- than 160,000, more than the number of uniformed tions that runs contrary to the best lessons of U.S. military personnel in Iraq, and it is a good thing that military strategy. Turning logistics and opera- attention is finally being paid to the consequences of tions into a for-profit endeavor helped feed the our outsourcing critical tasks to private firms. “Green Zone” mentality problem of sprawling bases, which runs counter everything General An underlying question, though, is largely being Petraeus pointed to as necessary to winning a ignored, whether it made sense to have civilians in counterinsurgency in the new Army/USMC this role in the first place. Regardless of whether the manual he helped write. Blackwater contractors were right or wrong in the re- • Inflames popular opinion against, rather than cent shootings, or even whether there is proper juris- for, the American mission through operational diction to ensure their accountability or not, there is practices that ignore the fundamental lessons of a crucial problem. counterinsurgency. As one set of contractors described. “Our mission is to protect the prin- The use of private military contractors appears to cipal at all costs. If that means pissing off the have harmed, rather than helped the counterinsur- Iraqis, too bad.” gency efforts of the U.S. mission in Iraq. Even worse, • Participated in a series of abuses that have un- it has created a dependency syndrome on the private dermined efforts at winning “hearts and minds” marketplace that not merely creates critical vulner- of the Iraqi people. The pattern of contractor abilities, but shows all the signs of the last downward misconduct extends back to 2003 and has spirals of an addiction. If we judge by what has hap- involved everything from prisoner abuse and pened in Iraq, when it comes to private military con- “joyride” shootings of civilians to a reported tractors and counterinsurgency, the U.S. has locked incident in which a drunken Blackwater con- itself into a vicious cycle. It can’t win with them, but tractor shot dead the security guard of the can’t go to war without them. Iraqi Vice President after the two got into an argument on Christmas Eve, 2006. The study explores how the current use of private • Weakened American efforts in the “war of military contractors: ideas” both inside Iraq and beyond. As one Iraqi government official explained even be- • Allows policymakers to dodge key decisions that fore the recent shootings. “They are part of carry political costs, thus leading to operational the reason for all the hatred that is directed Foreign Policy at Brookings III at Americans, because people don’t know contractors, especially armed roles within counterin- them as Blackwater, they know them only as surgency and contingency operations. It needs to de- Americans. They are planting hatred, because termine what roles are appropriate or not for private of these irresponsible acts.” firms, and what roles must be kept in the control of • Reveals a double standard towards Iraqi civilian those in public service. As part of this determination, institutions that undermines efforts to build up it is becoming clear that many roles now outsourced, these very same institutions, another key lesson of including the armed escort of U.S. government of- counterinsurgency. As one Iraqi soldier said of ficials, assets, and convoys in a warzone, not only are Blackwater. “They are more powerful than the inherently government functions, but that the out- government. No one can try them. Where is sourcing has created both huge vulnerabilities and the government in this?” negative consequences for the overall mission. A pro- • Forced policymakers to jettison strategies designed cess must immediately begin to roll public functions to win the counterinsurgency on multiple occa- back into public responsibility. sions, before they even had a chance to succeed. The U.S. Marine plan for counterinsurgency Our military outsourcing has become an addiction in the Sunni Triangle was never implemented, that is quickly spiraling to a breakdown. Many of because of uncoordinated contractor decisions those vested in the system, both public and private in 2004 that helped turn Fallujah into a ral- leaders, will try to convince us to ignore this cycle. lying point of the insurgency. More recently, They will describe such evident pattern of incidents while U.S. government leaders had planned to as “mere anomalies,” portray private firms outside press the Iraqi government on needed action on the chain of command as somehow “part of the total post-“surge” political benchmarks, instead they force,” or claim that “We have no other choice.” These are now having to request Iraqi help in cleaning are the denials of pushers, enablers, and addicts. Only up the aftermath of the Blackwater incident. an open and honest intervention, a step back from the precipice of over-outsourcing, can break us out The U.S. government needs to go back to the draw- of the vicious cycle into which we have locked our ing board and re-evaluate its use of private military national security. IV Private Military Contractors and Counterinsurgency Author’s Note ife has its odd way of coming full circle. It was ca’s standing in the world and undermining the ef- Lten years ago this very week that I first revealed forts of our uniformed troops in the field. to the security studies program I was attending that I planned on doing my dissertation on private mili- The views expressed in this report represent a de- tary firms. A senior professor thereupon informed cade’s worth of research on the topic and literally me that I would do well to quit graduate school and hundreds of interviews and discussions over this instead “Go become a screenwriter in Hollywood,” time with everyone from private military firm em- for thinking to waste his time even to speak of such ployees to active and retired soldiers, extending fiction. As the news broke this week of shootings in- from the level of 4 star generals down to the spe- volving a contractor of the Blackwater firm, just one cialist. However, the conclusions are my own. I am of the more than 160,000 private military contrac- not paid either to lobby for the industry or paid to tors deployed in Iraq, I wonder how this professor attack it. squares his past idea of fiction with our new reality (Even more odd, the recent Blackwater episode in I fully anticipate that the conclusions I have come to Iraq happened the same day that a fictional version will draw great controversy, and perhaps even more. of the firm, amusingly called “Blackriver,” was in- Writing on the private military industry has proven troduced as the villain of the new TV cop drama to be quite educational as to how private interests K-Ville). often try to influence public policy research. Over the last years, I have received multiple offers to prof- In many ways, perhaps he was right. From its un- it by joining firm boards or to consult for investors derstandable origins in the privatization revolution interested in the industry. I declined all of these in of the 1980s and the downsizing of the military af- order to maintain my independence. In turn, I have ter the Cold War’s end, the private military industry also received two death threats, three assault threats, has morphed into something else. It is clear that the and two threats of lawsuits from companies. Nota- trend has gone too far, too fast. bly, all of these received their revenue from the U.S. taxpayer; so in a sense, I was going after myself. I had planned to move away from writing on this is- sue, to focus my research on other aspects of changes So, in discussing the context that surrounds the poli- in war. But after this week’s affair, I felt compelled to cy decisions made about the private military industry, write this report. It is not merely due to the Hol- you may think that I would invoke the memory of lywood-like episodes of private military companies Dwight Eisenhower, who is likely spinning over in operating with impunity from the law, while at the his grave at this embodiment of a new military in- same time hawking baseball caps on their websites. dustrial complex. But I actually think that the guid- Rather, it is that private action has truly begun to ance of the very first American conservatives is more have terrible public consequences, harming Ameri- helpful. Foreign Policy at Brookings VII The authors of the Federalist Papers, John Jay, Alex- public views on public policy are stifled, government ander Hamilton, and James Madison, warned about makes policies that do not match the public interest.