Comments and thoughts of an American Muslim on US Foreign policy in the Middle East and the so-called War on Terror,examining the contradictions from a perspective of justice, fairness and human rights.
Since the onslaught of the Reagan administration in 1981, the “free market” has been promoted as the panacea to cure all economic ills. The idea is that “market forces,” Adam Smith’s “invisible hand,” best determines the most efficient distribution of scarce economic resources.[i] The free market solution, also known as privatization or deregulation, has been applied to everything from private companies such as railroads and telephone companies, once thought of as having an obligation to serve the public, to governmental agencies such as water systems, public transit and even prisons. Now, the free market solution is slowly being applied to the US military as well as civilian police forces.
Enter Blackwater, co-founded in 1997 by Erik Prince, a former Navy Seal and Gary Jackson, a major Republican Party contributor. Erik Prince is a billionaire, right-wing fundamentalist Christian with strong Republican Party connections, who gave some $80,000 to the Republican National Committee in support of Bush’s presidential coup in 2000 and more in 2004.[ii] Blackwater by its own admission, says on its web site
“We are not simply a "private security company." We are a professional military, law enforcement, security, peacekeeping, and stability operations firm who provides turnkey solutions. We assist with the development of national and global security policies and military transformation plans.”[iii]
Blackwater co-founder, fellow Navy Seal and president Gary Jackson has great aspirations for the company. He has stated "I would like to have the largest, most professional private army in the world."[iv] Additionally, Blackwater also appears to be in the torture business through its subsidiary Aviation Worldwide Services, allegedly providing air service for the CIA extraordinary rendition program.[v]
The war in Iraq has been a growth market for Blackwater, as well as Halliburton, Northrup-Grumman subsidiary Vinnell, MPRI, Nour USA and other members of the private military industry.[vi] In fact, private military firms are the second largest segment of the so-called coalition forces in Iraq.[vii] The initial Blackwater contract in Iraq was $21 million to protect Coalition Provisional Authority head Paul Bremer.[viii] Four of its mercenaries were killed in Falluja in March of 2004, resulting eventually in a three-week US assault and massacre there in November.[ix] By that time, the firm was experiencing a growth rate of 600%, no doubt due to its strong Republican connections and help from a PR firm, Alexander Strategy Group, reputed to have connections to former House majority leader Tom Delay.[x]
Blackwater, and similar private military firms, are also being used internally as is the case in New Orleans, where Blackwater is under contract with the Department of Homeland Security to provide security for FEMA reconstruction projects. The number of private security firms registered in Louisiana rose from 185 to 235 within the two weeks after Hurricane Katrina and included Blackhawk, American Security Group, DynCorp, Intercon, Wackenhut and Instinctive Shooting International (ISI) an Israeli company.[xi]In order to maintain peace, security and stability, a nation-state will establish police forces and prisons to protect its citizens from internal threats, such as murderers, robbers and other criminals, and armed forces to protect against attack by enemies outside its borders, such as other belligerent states or “terrorist” organizations. If the state fails to do this, then the people will form their own militias to protect themselves and to help them achieve the security and stability necessary for day-to-day life. We have seen this happen before our eyes in Iraq with the growth of numerous armed militias such as Jaysh Al-Mahdi, the well-known militia of revered Shi’a cleric Moqtada As-Sadr.[xii]
For a democracy to thrive, it is important to separate the police force (internal security) from the armed forces (external security) as to allow the army to take on the civilian functions of police and operating prisons will quickly lead to consolidation and abuse of power, militarization of society and dictatorship.[xiii] This is precisely why after the Civil War the US Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878[xiv] (which bans the use of US military forces in civilian law enforcement) and also why Bush and some of his predecessors have been working hard behind the scenes to circumvent it.[xv]
Let us examine some of the consequences of the state privatizing its prisons and then look by analogy at the implications for privatizing the armed forces. In theory, “market forces” will operate, prison operating companies will compete with each other to run the prisons, the most efficient company will get the contract and the tax-paying citizens will save some of their hard-earned money. If the incumbent company becomes inefficient, the state will dismiss it and put another company in its place or so goes the story according to the Gospel of Free Market Economics.
History has shown that the reality is quite different. The company that receives the contract to run the prisons will want to minimize costs and maximize profits so it will strive to minimize the number of guards, maximize the number of prisoners and provide an absolute minimum of services to them. Incarcerating prisoners requires expensive professional services such as doctors and nurses and the prison operator will want to minimize these costs. Rehabilitating prisoners calls for psychologists and other mental health professionals so it will be a contract add-on at extra cost. As a result, the prison operator has basic interests counter to the very concept of rehabilitation and every incentive to incarcerate an ever-increasing number of prisoners. This is exactly what we are seeing today with more and more prison operating companies demanding contracts that require governments to guarantee minimum prison populations such as the 95% occupancy guarantee granted by the US Bureau of Prisons in all 5 of its privatized facilities.[xvi] Prison companies also will lobby for tougher laws and longer sentences and will make campaign contributions to candidates who will support their agenda.[xvii] It should come as no surprise that Texas leads the US in capacity of private prisons with almost 3 times that of California.[xviii]
The implications for privatizing military forces are even more frightening and sinister than those of privatizing prisons. In theory, the scenario is the same as before; market forces operate, different private military firms compete and the most economically efficient army operator receives the contract to protect the state. The state can reduce the military budget and the citizen-taxpayers will be able to pursue their lives in peace and security, knowing that the most economically efficient army is protecting their country.
Once again, what will actually happen is quite different. The army operating company will want to minimize costs and maximize profits. The larger the army it operates, the more money it will receive, so like the prison operators, it will demand minimum troop strength guarantees from the government of the nation-state it is contracting with to protect. Increased troop strengths are best justified by war, or imminent threats of war, so the army operator has every incentive to see that there are perpetual wars to fight and has absolutely no incentive to strive for peace. This is exactly what has happened in the US with the so-called “defense” industry, as President Eisenhower warned us prophetically in his 1961 farewell address.[xix]
“We must never let the weight of this combination [the military-industrial complex] endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. “
In a democracy, the fundamental problem with using a private military firm or mercenary armed force is the absence of citizen alertness and knowledge due to the lack of parliamentary debate and oversight. In the US, Congress alone has (according to the US Constitution) and should have the exclusive power to declare war as its members are ultimately answerable to the people who elected them. On the other hand, the private military firm will be primarily answerable to its owners or shareholders (and thus loyal to them) and secondarily to whoever pays its bills. It is highly questionable whether the Congress would retain any control over the private military firm because of these economic loyalties, even if it had some semblance of control over its funding. Also, the contract details and budget could be classified information, which runs counter to the procedures necessary to promote a modern democracy.[xx]
Other problems exist with the use of private military firms such as Blackwater, which not only threaten the institutions of democracy and the advancement of human rights, but also are in conflict with progress towards world peace. There is the matter of conflict between profit maximization and costs of protecting employees in life- threatening situations. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chaired by Henry Waxman (D, CA) has heard accusations of war profiteering by Blackwater which resulted in the deaths of employees.[xxi] The families of the 4 contractors killed in Falluja in March of 2004 have brought a wrongful-death suit against Blackwater, alleging that it failed to provide adequate protective equipment. Blackwater itself has brought a counter-suit against the attorney representing the estates of the 4 contractors killed in Falluja.[xxii]
Additionally, there are issues of legal accountability by the private military firm. Blackwater contends that since it is an extension of the military, its actions fall outside the jurisdiction of domestic courts.[xxiii] What will happen if a contract employee uses lethal force in a foreign country? This occurred in Iraq on 24 Dec 2006, when a Blackwater employee killed an Iraqi security guard under questionable circumstances.[xxiv] It is doubtful that the employee will face murder charges in the US or Iraq.
When a private military firm secures a contract from the Department of Defense, the President effectively has control over it as Commander in Chief. As Congress may not know what is budgeted for each military contract, its members would probably be unaware of the size, cost and use of the mercenary army. Even Pentagon officials admit not having exact knowledge of the number of private military personnel in use in Iraq.[xxv] As a result, the President could deploy the mercenary army at will to wage war wherever he or his corporate sponsors would desire, effectively giving him, rather than Congress, the power to declare war. The Congress and US Constitution would be bypassed as would accountability to the citizens. It would be as if the US President had his own “Republican” Guards (double pun intended) to do with as he wished, just like Saddam Hussein, the tyrannical dictator Bush claims to have invaded Iraq to remove.
In a free and democratic society, the citizens cannot allow their government to wage war with private armies without expecting an increase in secrecy, a decrease of public accountability and a dangerous concentration of power. Privatization of the armed forces or allowing them to function in the capacity of a civilian police force will lead to the abuse of power by the government and to the eventual breakdown of the democratic process itself. Clearly, with Bush in control of his own “Republican Guard” to use as he and his corporate backers see fit, there is a huge threat not only to democracy in the US but also to world peace, and the spread of true democracy, which is self-determination by free peoples everywhere.
Yuram
2007-16-2
[i] Helen Joyce, Adam Smith and the invisible hand, Plus Magazine, March 2001, http://plus.maths.org/issue14/features/smith/ (Accessed 6 February 2007)
[ii] Jeremy Scahill, Blackwater Down, The Nation, October 10, 2005 http://www.columbia.edu/itc/journalism/cases/katrina/Press/Nation/Nation Scahill 2005.pdf (Accessed 4 February 2007)
[iii] Blackwater USA Web Site, http://www.blackwaterusa.com/about/ (Accessed 2 February 2007)
[iv] After Fallujah: The Truth About the Blackwater Mercenaries, Revolutionary Worker #1236, 11 April 2004, http://revcom.us/a/1236/blackwater.htm (Accessed 16 February 2007)
[v] Sourcewatch Web Site, http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Aviation_Worldwide_Services%2C_LLC (Accessed 2 February 2007)
[vi] Peter W. Singer, Warriors for Hire in Iraq, Salon.com – Brookings Institute, 15 April 2004, http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/fellows/singer20040415.htm (Accessed 6 February 2007)
[vii] Ian Traynor, The Privatisation Of War, The Guardian, 10 December 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1103566,00.html (Accessed 7 February 2007)
[viii] PBS, Private Warriors, Frontline, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/warriors/contractors/companies.html (Accessed 2 February 2007)
[ix] Mike Baker. Blackwater Seeks $10M from Plaintiff in Wrongful-Death Suit, The Mercury, 19 January 2007 http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/16502469.htm (Accessed 14 February 2007)
[x] Jeremy Scahill, Blackwater Down, Op. Cit.
[xi] Jeremy Scahill, Blackwater Down, Op. Cit.
[xii] Solomon Moore, Rising Violence Swells Ranks Of Iraq's Militias, Los Angeles Times, 28 November 2006 http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-militias28nov28,1,2044626.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage (Accessed 7 February 2007)
[xiii] Rut Diamint, The Role Of Armed Forces And Security Forces, Conference on Democratic Transition and Consolidation Reports, March 2005, http://www.clubmadrid.org/cmadrid/fileadmin/The_Role_of_the_Armed_Forces_and_Security_Forces_-_Rut_Diamint.pdf (Accessed 7 February 2007)
[xiv] The Posse Comitatus Act: A Principle In Need Of Renewal, 75 Wash. U. L.Q. 953, Summer 1997, http://law.wustl.edu/WULR/75-2/752-10.html (Accessed 6 February 2007)
[xv] Major Craig T. Trebilcock, U.S. Army Reserve, The Myth of Posse Comitatus, October 2000, http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/Trebilcock.htm (Accessed 6 February 2007)
[xvi] Joseph T. Hallinan, Federal Government Saves Private Prisons as State Convict Population Levels Off, Wall Street Journal, 6 November 2001, http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1106-05.htm (Accessed 10 February 2007)
[xvii] Prison Privatization and the Use of Incarceration, The Sentencing Project, http://www.sentencingproject.org/inc_prisonprivatization.pdf (Accessed 10 February 2007)
[xviii] Stephen Mcfarland, Chris Mcgowan, Tom O'toole, Prisons, Privatization and Public Values, December 2002, http://government.cce.cornell.edu/doc/pdf/PrisonsPrivatization.pdf (Accessed 6 February 2007)
[xix] Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961, http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html (Accessed 6 February 2007)
[xx] Rut Diamint, The Role Of Armed Forces And Security Forces, Op. Cit.
[xxi] S. A. Miller, Iraq Contractor Focus of Hearing, The Washington Times, 8 February 2007, http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070207-111135-4870r.htm (Accessed 14 February 2007)
[xxii] Mike Baker. Blackwater Seeks $10 M from Plaintiff in Wrongful-Death Suit, Op. Cit.
[xxiii] Mike Baker. Blackwater Seeks $10 M from Plaintiff in Wrongful-Death Suit, Op. Cit.
[xxv] Peter W. Singer, Warriors for Hire in Iraq, Op. Cit.Peter W. Singer, Warriors for Hire in Iraq, Salon.com – Brookings Institute, 15 April 2004, http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/fellows/singer20040415.htm (Accessed 6 February 2007)
Your commentary is great...for prisons in the USA.And they do not work very well, no matter how much is spent. I prefer the Sheriff Arpaio method. Theat prisoners humanely, but as prisoners. No TV, or other frills. Lawbreakers do notreturn to the sheriff's county!
John Nagle | 07/10/2007, 13:43 [ Reply ]