Previously, I posted an article about fascist mass murderers and torturers from Latin America's "dirty wars" against leftists being employed by Blackwater. Now, it seems that former members of South Africa's secret police, who tortured and murdered black activists during apartheid, are also mercenaries in Iraq.
Will Iraq's mercenaries be brought to book?
By Lawrence Smallman
Wednesday 23 June 2004, 15:47 Makka Time, 12:47 GMT
Private security firms are costing Iraq billions of dollars
Unaccountable and unregulated, the thousands of mercenaries currently operating in Iraq may not remain untouchable for much longer.
US viceroy Paul Bremmer is to issue an order defining the status of foreign troops and workers in Iraq before 30 June, according to a senior official quoted by Reuters.
But the multibillion dollar question is whether Bremer's decree will spell out the legal status of so-called private contractors.
State and corporate secrecy protects more than 35 private security firms connected to the US and UK political establishments from accountability for their conduct.
Yet these same military companies provide more support to the US-led occupation than the British army, with estimates putting their combined strength in excess of 20,000 individuals.
Whether it is guarding pipelines, protecting US officials or even driving tanks - Iraq's continued occupation relies heavily on the private sector.
Contracting military work to modern-day mercenary companies directed by prominent politicians, statesmen and security officials has become big business.
David Claridge, a director of a London security firm, has estimated that Iraq contracts have boosted the annual revenue of British-based security firms alone from $320 million to more than $1.7 billion.
Legal position
With an absence of guidelines, accountability goes largely unregulated. It has become clear that some legal loopholes are so big that scandals such as at Abu Ghraib prison abuses can slip through.
Private contractors in Iraq have signed agreements that provide them with immunity from prosecution under Iraqi law.
So Iraqi families without huge amounts of money will have little recourse to the rule of law should they suffer at the hands of thousands of heavily armed but unregulated mercenaries.
Speaking to Aljazeera.net on Tuesday, Human Rights Watch (HRW) spelled out the legal theory.
"The state with authority over the military contractor remains responsible under international law for the contractor's actions," says HRW's Middle East director, Joe Stork.
"Maintaining discipline
of contractor employees is the responsibility
of the contractor's management structure, not the military chain
of command"
US military field manual
But mercenaries cannot be prosecuted under US military law except during declared war, according to the US military field manual.
The manual adds: "Maintaining discipline of contractor employees is the responsibility of the contractor's management structure, not the military chain of command."
Grey area
Military contractors who are US nationals could be prosecuted by a US federal court under the War Crimes Act of 1996, but not so the numerous British, South African and one Israeli firm currently in Iraq.
Additionally, contractors working for the US Department of Defense could technically be prosecuted under the toothless Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000, known as MEJA.
MEJA was enacted in 2000 primarily to protect US soldiers and their dependents on US bases abroad, who became victims of crimes committed by military contractors with effective immunity from prosecution.
But MEJA remains untested because the Defense Department has yet to issue the regulations necessary to implement it.
Worrying trend
The need for regulation has become clear. The British/South African company Erinys, which won a $100 million-plus annual contract to provide security at Iraq's oil facilities and pipelines, appears to employ people with worrying backgrounds.
South African employee Francois Strydom, killed last January, had fought for the Koevoet pro-apartheid paramilitary in Namibia - according to Johannesburg's Mail and Guardian newspaper.
Only regular soldiers have been
questioned over Ghraib abuse
Another employee, Deon Gouws, was a former member of the South African secret police, Vlakplaas, and was charged by the South African Truth Commission for murdering an anti-apartheid activist in 1986.
A former South African judge, Richard Goldstein, has gone on the record as saying he knew of 150 former apartheid-era security operatives working as mercenaries in Iraq.
And to date, only regular US and UK soldiers have been brought to book for the Abu Ghraib scandal.
Friends in high places?
It may be that the former diplomats who run these private military companies, and thus supplement their countries' troop deployments, are also able to protect themselves from prosecution.
Former US president George Bush's Carlyle group is about as well connected to the political establishment as it is possible to be.
Its subsidiary, Diligence, was founded by a former CIA director – William Webster.
It is now owned by a former US ambassador, Richard Burt. Its deputy chairman, Joe Allbaugh, was the current president's campaign manager in 2000.
Allbaugh has also founded another security firm, New Bridge Strategies, and signed a contract with Diligence.
Similarly, the numerous British firms are equally well connected. ArmorGroup is directed by former British foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
Aljazeera + Agencies
By Lawrence Smallman
Wednesday 23 June 2004, 15:47 Makka Time, 12:47 GMT
Private security firms are costing Iraq billions of dollars
Unaccountable and unregulated, the thousands of mercenaries currently operating in Iraq may not remain untouchable for much longer.
US viceroy Paul Bremmer is to issue an order defining the status of foreign troops and workers in Iraq before 30 June, according to a senior official quoted by Reuters.
But the multibillion dollar question is whether Bremer's decree will spell out the legal status of so-called private contractors.
State and corporate secrecy protects more than 35 private security firms connected to the US and UK political establishments from accountability for their conduct.
Yet these same military companies provide more support to the US-led occupation than the British army, with estimates putting their combined strength in excess of 20,000 individuals.
Whether it is guarding pipelines, protecting US officials or even driving tanks - Iraq's continued occupation relies heavily on the private sector.
Contracting military work to modern-day mercenary companies directed by prominent politicians, statesmen and security officials has become big business.
David Claridge, a director of a London security firm, has estimated that Iraq contracts have boosted the annual revenue of British-based security firms alone from $320 million to more than $1.7 billion.
Legal position
With an absence of guidelines, accountability goes largely unregulated. It has become clear that some legal loopholes are so big that scandals such as at Abu Ghraib prison abuses can slip through.
Private contractors in Iraq have signed agreements that provide them with immunity from prosecution under Iraqi law.
So Iraqi families without huge amounts of money will have little recourse to the rule of law should they suffer at the hands of thousands of heavily armed but unregulated mercenaries.
Speaking to Aljazeera.net on Tuesday, Human Rights Watch (HRW) spelled out the legal theory.
"The state with authority over the military contractor remains responsible under international law for the contractor's actions," says HRW's Middle East director, Joe Stork.
"Maintaining discipline
of contractor employees is the responsibility
of the contractor's management structure, not the military chain
of command"
US military field manual
But mercenaries cannot be prosecuted under US military law except during declared war, according to the US military field manual.
The manual adds: "Maintaining discipline of contractor employees is the responsibility of the contractor's management structure, not the military chain of command."
Grey area
Military contractors who are US nationals could be prosecuted by a US federal court under the War Crimes Act of 1996, but not so the numerous British, South African and one Israeli firm currently in Iraq.
Additionally, contractors working for the US Department of Defense could technically be prosecuted under the toothless Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000, known as MEJA.
MEJA was enacted in 2000 primarily to protect US soldiers and their dependents on US bases abroad, who became victims of crimes committed by military contractors with effective immunity from prosecution.
But MEJA remains untested because the Defense Department has yet to issue the regulations necessary to implement it.
Worrying trend
The need for regulation has become clear. The British/South African company Erinys, which won a $100 million-plus annual contract to provide security at Iraq's oil facilities and pipelines, appears to employ people with worrying backgrounds.
South African employee Francois Strydom, killed last January, had fought for the Koevoet pro-apartheid paramilitary in Namibia - according to Johannesburg's Mail and Guardian newspaper.
Only regular soldiers have been
questioned over Ghraib abuse
Another employee, Deon Gouws, was a former member of the South African secret police, Vlakplaas, and was charged by the South African Truth Commission for murdering an anti-apartheid activist in 1986.
A former South African judge, Richard Goldstein, has gone on the record as saying he knew of 150 former apartheid-era security operatives working as mercenaries in Iraq.
And to date, only regular US and UK soldiers have been brought to book for the Abu Ghraib scandal.
Friends in high places?
It may be that the former diplomats who run these private military companies, and thus supplement their countries' troop deployments, are also able to protect themselves from prosecution.
Former US president George Bush's Carlyle group is about as well connected to the political establishment as it is possible to be.
Its subsidiary, Diligence, was founded by a former CIA director – William Webster.
It is now owned by a former US ambassador, Richard Burt. Its deputy chairman, Joe Allbaugh, was the current president's campaign manager in 2000.
Allbaugh has also founded another security firm, New Bridge Strategies, and signed a contract with Diligence.
Similarly, the numerous British firms are equally well connected. ArmorGroup is directed by former British foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
Aljazeera + Agencies
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 3 comments
Old Boys
26.06.2004 18:20
A career in the British Army gives you all sorts of useful contacts.
Not to suggest that it's just a matter of a name change and business as usual, mind.
jim
e-mail:
owhyowhy@yahoo.com
Gulf war 1
26.06.2004 23:42
Roman Road
Blackburn, Lancashire
BB1 2LE
sold to BAE in 1987: Ministry of Defence: sale of Royal Ordnance plc
BAe is a major aerospace and defence company with a turnover in 1994 of over £7 billion. It is mainly engaged in the design, development and production of civil and military aircraft, of guided weapon systems and of other defence support services. Its joint venture BAeSEMA provides ship design services and combat management systems. Its subsidiary Royal Ordnance (RO) manufactures ammunition and guns.
British Aerospace Public Limited Company and VSEL Plc: A report on the proposed merger competition commission
Until 1984 the Royal Ordnance factories were an integral part of the Ministry of Defence and were the principal suppliers of ammunition, land weapons and fighting vehicles to the UK armed forces. On 20 August 1984 the factories were incorporated and became Royal Ordnance plc. All of the shares were vested in the Secretary of State for Defence and the company therefore remained wholly Government-owned. Although after its incorporation Royal Ordnance plc operated as a commercial organisation, it was obliged to prepare annually a corporate business plan which had to be agreed by the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State was also answerable to Parliament for the Government's investment in Royal Ordnance. After an unsuccessful proposed public flotation, in April 1987 Royal Ordnance was sold in its entirety to British Aerospace plc.
Prior to its incorporation Royal Ordnance, by virtue of its status as part of the Crown, was not required to obtain licences for the export of its goods. However, there was an informal system in place which ensured that its exports were authorised by the relevant Departments. In particular, AWP applications were submitted before contracts were signed and were considered by the MOD and FCO in the normal way. After incorporation Royal Ordnance became subject to the ordinary export licensing regime. This obviously continued after its sale to British Aerospace.
Iraq watch
Arming Iraq
".... the ammunition [81mm mortar shells] was first delivered [by Royal Ordnance] to the Ammunition and Supply division of the Ministry of Defence.... From there, it was requisitioned and sent direct to Iraq by the Ministry of Defence via International Military Sales, the Ministry of Defence's private sales organisation. The letter of credit - number 450 - was issued by the military sales division of a British bank, and was good from the January 1st, 1986." Iraq watch
International Cartel
In evidence to the Inquiry Mr Cahill, Mr Gerald James (the former Chairman of Astra Holdings Plc) and Mr Tim Laxton have all referred to the existence of international cartels of companies supplying arms, ammunition, propellant and explosives to Middle East countries in the period covered by my terms of reference. The allegation made is that the cartels were operated in order to evade export licensing controls operable in the countries in which the companies were based, including the UK. Royal Ordnance, among other UK companies, were alleged to have been members of the various cartels.
Iraq watch
Captain Wardrobe
more here-
24.08.2005 10:47
UK private military in Iraq
Nicola