Boys Gone Wild!!! The Kabul Edition
Sep 4, 2009 Industry News, Jake's Posts
Recent allegations of misconduct, failing to meet contractual obligations, (to say nothing of just general stupidity and juvenile antics) by Armor Group staff at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul raises serious questions about leadership both at Armor Group and at the U.S. State Department.
We’ve yet to hear anyone from Armor Group comment in detail on this case but I can just imagine the way it will sound when it comes out.
We take this very seriously…
we are investigating…
it’s an isolated incident…
we are getting it fixed…
Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater, when pressed on questions of contractor behavior of his Blackwater staff likes to say, “Listen, these guys are all patriots, military veterans and professionals.” As if being a patriot and a veteran meant no oversight is necessary? It’s another way of saying, “You’re an idiot for questioning us. We could not possibly do anything wrong.”
History contains any number of idiots who were military veterans and who viewed themselves as patriots yet clearly took actions which were against the interests of the U.S. One prime example is Timothy McVeigh, who was convicted and later executed for bombing the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. The point is that being a veteran does not mean you are faultless or that you don’t need oversight.
Listen, I served as an officer in the U.S. Marine Corps and I consider that organization to hold the highest standard in military professionalism. They are the consummate ‘professional’ but at no time are they ever devoid of oversight or the possibility of prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
The command structure, the rules, regulations, policies, guidelines and standing operating procedures which are normal in any military organization do not exist to any meaningful degree within the private security/military industry. At best you have a few companies who, relatively speaking, do better than most but even that’s a pretty low standard to meet.
Furthermore, the consequences for breaking rules (that is…the few rules that actually exist) is virtually non-existent. In the U.S. military the UCMJ governs service personnel and all soldiers, airmen and Marines know that failure to comply with any lawful order, law or rule or even policy or guideline runs the risk of prosecution non-judicial punishment (NJP), or court martial under the UCMJ. Again, nothing even close to this exists within the world of private security. There really is no accountability comparable to the UCMJ and NJP amounts only to dismissal from your current contract. And we all know that this is, in reality, no punishment at all since the offender often simply pop-ups somewhere else for another firm in a matter of weeks or months.
So, in short…no rules to follow at the industry level and no consequences for failing to follow any rules which may or may not exist. If these were the ingredients for today’s dinner I doubt if anyone would be eating it.
Now then. That takes care of the industry side of the equation. What about the client side? Increasingly it is coming to light that government clients, in contrast with private clients, are systemically inept at managing the procurement, selection and oversight of security contracts. I have personally worked on contracts which have both private clients and government clients and though neither do a very good job, the government side and in particular the U.S. State Department are painfully ill equipped to do this work. The reasons for this are puzzling, especially as at this stage, after 8 years of war in Afghanistan and 6+ years in Iraq there are literally hundreds of senior contractors with multiple years of operational management experience who could be hired by State in to sit on the ‘client side’ of the table during contract negotiations as well as during the later phases of contract execution.
For decades the U.S. State Department’s Diplomatic Security Services (DSS) program was always a sleepy little backwater in the security world. It was, and to some degree still is, full of lifelong government civil servants who, despite their hard work and good intentions, have not been able to adapt to the pace and complexity that operating in a war-zone imposed on them. They got pushed into a fast-paced and complex game that they were not prepared for.
But to date this has been like asking a local high school football coach, no matter good his record has been at that level, to jump into the NFL. Oh sure, on the surface there are many similarities, the field is the same dimensions, it’s still 11 vs. 11 players and the rules are mostly the same and certainly the concepts is the same in principle. But the speed, level of complexity and knowledge and experience to say nothing of the media attention necessary to perform at the highest level make it impossible for him to take go from High School to the NFL without a natural maturation process which usually involves a stop for many years at the university level.
The DSS small staff of only a couple thousand agents oversees (and I am using that term lightly) over 30′000 contract personnel in the protection of over 200 Embassies and consulates around the world. But, the problem is that your standard, run-of-the-mill, contract and mission to protect the Embassy in Berlin or even Kuala Lumpur or Mumbai is still about three solar-systems away from what is required to protect the Kabul embassy. Kabul and Baghdad are the big leagues and the DSS has not demonstrated anything near the capability of playing on that field. They certainly do not have a commanding position of respect or authority over the security firms they are supposed to supervise. At best they are perceived as an administrative nuisance which should be avoided at every opportunity.
To some degree the State Department knows they are are in over their head and they have relied, far too heavily, on the professionalism (I use that term lightly as well…) of the private security sector to pull their bacon out of the fire. But, as I have alluded to before the professionalism they desire and frankly rely on generally just does not exist.
The State Department needs to ‘grow up’ and on-board a wave of professional staff to oversee these programs. Preferably former senior military officers with combat experience. I can guarantee that if these programs were run by retired Colonels who had on their staff retired Majors and recently separated Captains and a cadre of former Senior Staff NCOs who know how to act professionally and provide security at the same time they will be able to hold accountable any private firm who wins the contract. Having the, in-house know-how is the first step but State also needs to get a spine and have the guts to dismiss any firm who is not meeting their contractual obligations. A PSC should be pissing in their boots when a DSS officer is in his AO. But that only happens when the DSS officer knows what to look for and has the initiative and authority to do something when he sees something amiss.
What State seems to be missing is the fact that everyone in this industry wants the U.S. government as a client. The State Department is in the drivers seat here. They can have anything they want. They can drive a hard bargain and they can run roughshod over any service provider because the line outside for the privilege of winning the contract is long. You can’t perform? Next…
State’s problem is they don’t know what to ask for, how to ask for it or know what it should look like when it gets delivered.
Tags: Afghanistan, Blackwater, contractors, contracts, Iraq, Jobs, Marines, regulation, services, wanted
SOC Seeking Qualified Operators
Nov 21, 2008 Uncategorized
Below is a thread I picked up recently via my network. I know nothing about this company so I cannot offer any relevant advice as to them.
Jake
___________________________________________________________
SOC, (www.soc-usa.com) is currently gathering interest for future operations of 100+, highly-trained, special-operations skilled individuals. ***Candidates MUST have 6 years of documented experience in world-wide special operations (NO exceptions)!!!
This mission is subject to contract award.
All who are offered employment with SOC will operate in a low visibility PSD, high threat environment.
***MUST meet one of the following clearance requirements:
a) Active Interim Secret
b) Active Secret clearance or higher
c) Verifiable through our Security Officer a valid security investigation with a DoD/DoS angency within the last 5 years.
PAY is extremely competitive!!!
All Candidates who meet these qualifications and are interested, please send an updated resume and DD-214 to Angela Broyles at: abroyles@soc-smg.com ASAP.
***Deadline for candidate interest is NLT 10 Dec. ***If you are unavailable and/or not interested, please feel free to forward to anyone you think is qualified and ready. Thanks!
Kindest Regards,
Angela Broyles
SOC Recruiting Team
abroyles@soc-usa.com
www.soc-usa.com
