Hillary Gets it Right on Contractors Posted by Michael Cohen

Over at Washington Independent, Spencer Ackerman chastises Secretary of State-nominee Hillary Clinton for backing away in her congressional testimony today from her "campaign promise" to ban the use of private security contractors by the State Department.

"Our civilian employees need to be protected. As we withdraw our troops (from Iraq), we have to get assurances of their protection by Iraqi troops, or we have to use contractors.”

It first bears noting that whatever promises Hilary made during the campaign are not operative, since . . . well . . she lost. Second, her characterization of PSCs as "mercenaries" was wrong on the campaign trail. And its wrong today: PSCs are not mercenaries.

But lastly, and most important Hillary is correct about how the State Department should work with contractors in the near-term. Quite simply, the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security is not equipped, at this time, to provide personal security for U.S. diplomats in Iraq. The Pentagon also lacks the capacity and more important, the will to do the job. So in the end, State must rely on PSCs to protect their people.

While I have advocated for a transition away from PSCs performing private security work on behalf of the US government we are not yet at that point - although I certainly hope that under Clinton's leadership, the State Department begins to move in that direction.

And it also bears noting that in the recent IG report blasting the State Department's poor oversight of contractors during the Iraq war there is praise for steps taken by State since the tragic Nisour square incident:

"In addition to strengthened coordination, oversight, and accountability of the Embassy’s security program, actions taken . . . have resulted in a more professional security operation and the curtailment of overly aggressive actions by movement security teams toward Iraqi civilians while transporting Chief of Mission (COM) personnel."

UPDATE: One of the commenters below has made the oft-heard argument that the PSCs operating in Iraq are mercenaries - a charge that is heard quite often in the debate about contractors. But again, it is simply not correct:

According to the Geneva Conventions, a mercenary is any person who:

(a)  is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;

(b)  does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;

(c)  is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;

(d)  is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;

(e)  is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and

(f)  has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

However, contractors serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are forbidden by the U.S. government from taking direct part in combat or offensive operations and are used only in defensive and protective operations. In fact, the overwhelming majority of security contractors hired by the USG in Iraq work for the State Department, not the Pentagon and they are tasked with protecting US diplomats. They are not mercenaries.

Comments

[Eric Martin]

her characterization of PSCs as "mercenaries" was wrong on the campaign trail. And its wrong today: PSCs are not mercenaries

Some are. The gun toting security personnel are mercenaries. The cooks, janitors and other such contractors, not so much.

[Tiffany replica Bangle]

Some are. The gun toting security personnel are mercenaries. The cooks, janitors and other such contractors, not so much

[cheap coach bags]

Great comments! You are so nice, man! You never know how much i like'em!

[explosion proof light]

Iwiss Electric mainly manufacturer explosion-proof fixed professional light, such as flood light, spotlight, dome lamp, ceiling lamp, full plastic fluorescence light, anti-dazzle light, and low carbon light suppliers.

[Doll Penny]

People die for iphone 4 white is understandable, isn't it? The reason is quite simple, We all want to be differnt!