Return to Blackwater

(((Editorial Note: Below is a response to an earlier post I wrote about Blackwater. I wanted to bring it to the front page because it’s a thoughtful, first-hand account of working within the US military and working with Blackwater. There are also a few issues raised which I wanted to amplify, so there’s also an editorial comment at the end.)))

(((The degree to which we as US citizens should allow our military to become privatized is a profoundly important question. The degree to which we’ve allowed our national security to be turned over to private corporations is highlighted by this recent report noting that there are more military contractors serving in Iraq than US military. At the end of Tommy’s comment I’ll write about the roots of this type of privatization and why it’s a bad idea.)))

***

Tommy OSH: The problem isn’t Blackwater itself but the military and law enforcement agencies that under pay their best personnel. The best have figured out that their is more money in training, consulting and in personal security.

Blackwater took off because of its weapons experts, their vast firing ranges and the training they provided to nearly every government agency. When Blackwater entered the private security detail (PSD) business they were very new and not as experienced South African and British security firms. Blackwater PSD specialists comprising of former military special forces troops at its core did not have developed rules of engagement and followed the same rules of surrounding military units. Keep in mind though that in the early years of the Iraq war there wasn’t clear guidance for anyone to include the military.

Personally I have had different levels of experience with Blackwater. Their former special forces guys are excellent and very professional. Because of the performance of these key personal Blackwater was able to expand but they had to fill in the additional ranks with ex-military that could be characterized as less capable than the former special forces guys. That is probably what led to incidents leading to death of civilians in the 2005-2006 period. Plus the rules of engagement were tightening up on the military side as the Iraq government was taking more control of certain aspects of governance. The standard to fire warning shots or engage vehicles that were potential car bombs was tightening up. Incidents in which civilians were killed became significantly more costly to the Iraq-U.S. relationship. Some security firms did not evolve as quickly as the military in changing the rules of engagement, thinking that they could continue with business as usual.

Blackwater certainly has a very unique culture. It is a company that is favorable to Christian conservatives, which you could argue bodes well with the current administration. I believe the true reason it continues to expand its influence in the consulting field is because of its recruiting practices. It recruits through the military and law-enforcement good-old-boy system. Most of their employees were personally referred because they are known experts in their fields. It difficult for these guys to turn away $80-150,000 (sometimes more) salaries compared to the $35,000-$45,000 they are making from the government.

The government doesn’t pay individuals for their skills. When I was in the military I got paid the same amount as the guy handing out towels at the gym because we had the same rank. He also had more awards and medals than me despite never deploying. I served in 7 combat tours around the globe (4 in Iraq) and was one of only a dozen people in the Air Force that did what I did. So naturally I left the military to take a job with a consulting firm.

Given the amount of training Blackwater provides to the government it is of little surprise that Blackwater shirts are everywhere. I was once given a shirt by a Blackwater recruiter but gave it to a buddy who really wanted it. Shirts from Blackwater, Armor Group or other industry professionals say “I went to a Blackwater school or I was once employed by Blackwater,” which implies that you are skilled at your job.

Blackwater grew too fast and they learned that their rapid growth has consequences. Their biggest advantage is that they can get things done and provide support to the government without all of the bureaucratic red tape. On the other hand, Blackwater is learning which parts of that red tape process they need to incorporate into their business practices. Iraq created the Blackwater we know today, however it has struggled to keep contracts because of the bad press. The more experienced British firms have taken over some of the security contracts from Blackwater.

Blackwater will continue to succeed until the government starts paying people for their skills instead of rank. But that would require a drastic restructuring in the military rank system which really hasn’t changed since the Spanish American War.

I think Blackwater gets in over their heads. Most people within Blackwater are well intended but they are growing greedy and want to monopolize their industry. As the war on terror and post-Iraq over hiring boom fades (which it is) so will their contracts and they will probably have to scale back (just like the Starbucks over expansion). Their contracts are very dependent on Republican fear-mongering and keeping terrorism as a key issue. When the next terrorist attack kills American citizens somewhere in the world demand for Blackwater-type services will go up again. I can understand why Blackwater seems creepy, it’s the nature of their business. But the nature of that business requires people keep a close eye on the ambitions of Blackwater.

***

(((Editorial comment: The underpayment of the US military did not happen by accident, and both political parties bear responsibility for cutting government wages, in both the military and in other government service.

One reason for the cut in wages is because defunding programs is unpopular. Since simply cutting programs creates a negative backlash for the incumbents the Reagan administration struck upon the idea of underfunding various offices and departments, and underpaying government workers. This serves two purposes, it creates a culture of incompetence, (unmotivated and poorly paid workers don’t do a very good job) which in turn encourages people, including government offices and departments, to turn to the private sector rather than the government for help. So, while the United States government has always turned to private contractors for a wide variety of goods and services, they are prompted to do so even moreso today because of the culture of red tape and incompetence that has intentionally been created in Washington.

The dream is that this would lead to reducing the costs in two important domains. One, if salaries are kept stagnant, or reduced, that keeps costs down. Two, if there is a free market competition for contracts for services and goods, that should reduce the amount spent on those goods and services. Good ideas on the surface, but what has happened is that unmotivated and incompetent workers actually end up costing more because of error and indifference. And, without a governmental oversight system in place for private contractors, corruption, theft, and fraud have skyrocketed, leaving the taxpayer with the bill.

As the mainstream media has proven itself untrustworthy and ineffectual it has lost its place as the so-called fourth branch of government. The real fourth branch of government is the contracting agencies that receive tax dollars to do work for the government, but without government oversight. Blackwater is one of these contracting agencies, but is far from being the only one. I may think Blackwater is creepy, but not because of the company. I find Blackwater creepy because of the role it has taken in our society.

The problem with Blackwater is not the people involved. The problem with Blackwater is that it raises a larger and profoundly important question – How far are we willing to allow our military to be privatized?

Finally, I think most of Tommy’s comment is spot-on, one quibble I have is he suggests that Blackwater is losing contracts because of bad press. I think they lose contracts because they are in a competitive field. Losing, and gaining, contracts is just part of the corporate fabric. Exxon went through a period of bad press after the Valdez, but managed to bounce back. Tylenol went through a period of bad press after the Tylenol poisonings, but managed to bounce back. Union Carbide got bad press because of the Bhopal disaster, but managed to bounce back. If Blackwater fails, it’s not because of the press. If our press were engaged we’d be having a national debate about the role of Blackwater and other PSDs, rather than talking about it in the occasional blog post.