MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL

Blackwater's Man in Washington

Page 2 of 2


TOOLS

EmailE-mail article
PrintPrint article




BACKTALK

E-mail the editor





Google


One guy, one helicopter. The anecdote, which he made a point of telling me on two separate occasions, was meant to amplify the larger point of why he thinks the private sector should take a prominent role in peacekeeping: It's cheap, it's efficient, and it's adaptable. And in places where the United Nations refuses to act, private companies can fill the void, assuming a government entity is willing to pick up the tab. "This is the reason we created IPOA, really, because of 'Western-less' peacekeeping," Brooks explained. "The reality was that the West wasn't going to support humanitarian operations in places they don't give a shit about." He cited Congo and Darfur. "What would have happened if they had used ArmorGroup in Rwanda?"

Brooks launched the IPOA in April 2001, shortly after his return from Africa. It started small, with only six member companies, and for Brooks it continued to be more of a hobby than a career until the contracting bonanza that resulted from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Since then the IPOA's ranks have swelled with companies seeking to burnish their images with the private military industry equivalent of a Good Housekeeping Seal of approval. Brooks now manages a staff of full-time employees and interns. Members pay annual dues ($5,000 for logistics contractors, $15,000 for private security companies), which account for some 60 percent of the IPOA's annual operating budget. In return, members receive permission to display the IPOA logo on their marketing materials. As a condition of membership, the companies must agree to adhere to the association's code of conduct—stressing concepts like human rights, ethics, transparency, and accountability. If violations occur, they are subject to the IPOA's "enforcement mechanism." This is composed of a complex, multi-tiered system of committees that review potential infractions and determine what, if any, penalty should be imposed. It sounds much tougher than it actually is. After all, the worst punishment the IPOA can dole out is expulsion from the association, which Brooks calls "the commercial kiss of death." This has yet to happen, which probably speaks less to the good behavior of private military contractors than to an inherent conflict of interest in the association's oversight process: The organization is financially dependent on the companies it claims to be overseeing.

I asked Brooks if the IPOA would ever really expel one of its members. "If a company does something to sully the reputation of the association, it's not a big deal," he responded. "A company either sorts itself out or, if it's that bad, you get rid of them." What about Blackwater? Could last week's shootout lead to its expulsion? Brooks was noncommittal, saying only that "the mark of a good company is how they deal with the problem."

But the fact that, as yet, no companies have been kicked out has invited outside skepticism. "Doug has a great series [of] codes, [and] a lot of them make a lot of sense," says Peter W. Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and author of Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry. "But at the end of the day they're trying to deal with issues that are criminal, so you can't merely have a market solution to them." Moreover, Singer continued, "Being kicked out of IPOA is not the proper punishment for a criminal action. It's great that an organization is willing to do that, but it's sort of like kicking O.J. out of the country club." Deborah Avant, a political science professor at the University of California-Irvine and author of The Market for Force: The Consequences of Privatizing Security, agrees. "I think there is a fair amount of skepticism about the degree to which he is able to stand up to the industry as opposed to being a front for it."

Brooks acknowledges these shortcomings, at least to a point. "There're limits to what we can do, and people have to recognize that," he told me. "There are things we can do to put some constraints on companies that otherwise wouldn't be there, but we are not a government nor should we be, I would argue. Ultimately, if you don't have an effective legal accountability system that's by a government agency, you lose a big chunk of your capability to control these companies." He went on, though, to say there's "too much bullshit" being written about the dangers of "rogue" contractors. "The reality is, you stop paying a company and it goes away; it doesn't take over the government."

Brooks, who insists that his goal is "to help end wars," brims with excitement about the private sector's potential to save lives in conflict zones around the world. But the conduct in the Iraq War of companies like Blackwater, an IPOA founding member accused of multiple indiscriminant shootings in Iraq, has proven to be a distraction, as have accusations against other companies (not all of them IPOA members) of human trafficking, overbilling, corruption, and shoddy work. Though at times Brooks can make hired guns sound like U.N. peacekeepers, few people doubt his good intentions. "I've known Doug for a while, and I take him very seriously when talks about his focus on private peacekeeping. It's not just marketing," says Singer. The reality, he adds, is that ever since the Iraq invasion the IPOA "has been forced to steer in a completely different direction. You can see that in the press inquiries that Doug is having to answer all the time. He's doing a lot more talking right now about Blackwater and Baghdad than about using contractors in Congo or Darfur." It's a conflict that is perhaps unavoidable as Brooks struggles to ensure that recent contractor scandals "don't hamstring the humanitarian potential" of the IPOA's member companies. But according to Avant, the Iraq War has made it harder, not easier, for Brooks to promote standards in the private military industry. She points out that, especially early in the war, companies that bent the rules typically did better for themselves than companies that followed them. The premium placed on good behavior was weakened as a result. Still, she says, IPOA standards are a good first step. "The industry does have an incentive to say, 'Look, we're not just a group of cowboy mercenaries. This is the law we operate on; these are the standards.'"

Bruce Falconer is a reporter in Mother Jones' Washington, D.C., bureau.



 

Post a Comment

Your Name: 

Your Comment: 
 
Please press "Submit" only once to avoid double-posting.
All HTML formatting is removed from comments.
Read the Mother Jones community rules here.

Comments:

Jeez these guys are saints aren't they? When did killing unarmed civilians, kids included become a respectable business? Its guys like these who can make the most heinous crime seen like it was a humanitarian exercise, that scare the living hell out of me.Orwell would have been inspired by this guy.
Posted by:BoyacaSeptember 25, 2007 4:02:24 PMRespond ^
you forgot. Mitt Romney's campaign buddy... Mr. Cofer "Flies on the Eyes" Black... "Open Season on Blackwater?: "Will Iraq Kick Out Blackwater?"" - http://thiscanadian.typepad.com/thi s_canadian/2007/09/open-season-on-.html
Posted by:BlueBerry Pick'nSeptember 26, 2007 12:19:38 PMRespond ^
You have to give Brooks credit for trying to steer an industry in the right direction. The legal loopholes and lack of regulation is obviously there and companies really have no reason to push for proper oversight. Yet, Brooks has been practically begging for regulation for years under the (correct) assumption that proper regs would weed out the bad companies and reward the good. IPOA standards are a start and the fact that Brooks was able to get Blackwater to agree to them (even if the agreement is paper thin) means that there is a degree of willingness by some companies to be held accountable. It's the legislators that have been dropping the ball. If Singer is right and some of these acts are criminal, there are plenty of laws (esp in the US) that can be used to prosecute. But we wouldn't call for the shutdown of Washington Mutual if a few tellers robbed a bank, would we?
Posted by:KMBSeptember 26, 2007 12:30:22 PMRespond ^
I've served in Iraq. What is most interesting is that the "all volunteer" military that we have fighting along side these contractors are subject to UCMJ, while organizations like Blackwater and their ilk are only subject to banishment from a professional organization. We definitely need a higher standard.
Posted by:DMDSeptember 26, 2007 12:50:06 PMRespond ^
What seems to be missing from this entire discussion is that the whole industry of "Private security contractors" operating in a war zone is illegal under international agreements that the USA is party to. These firms are providing mercenaries. Mercenaries are illegal under the Geneva conventions. Should be the end of the story but then torture is also illegal under the Geneva conventions and our boys do that too.
Posted by:PeterSeptember 26, 2007 12:51:01 PMRespond ^
Evil always finds a way to justify itself. At the end of the day, he is in the business of defending the slaughter of other human beings. Mr. Brooks is buying himself a one-way ticket to Hell. It is interesting and sad that he is so energized about that prospect.
Posted by:Stephen KrizSeptember 26, 2007 1:01:27 PMRespond ^
If you look up Blackwater USA you will find they also was among the first responders in New Orleans "under Contract with Homeland Security" They killed some people there as well!
Posted by:MarthaSeptember 26, 2007 2:17:31 PMRespond ^
I would like to point out that contractors are in fact subject to UCMJ as well as MEJA. And indeed - they are subject to the Geneva Conventions as well. The IPOA Code of Conduct is an addendum and combination of international law, humanitarian laws as well as trade laws, to which all of their member companies are party, in addition to those original documents.
Posted by:JCBSeptember 26, 2007 2:23:18 PMRespond ^
I'm from Columbus, Indiana (yes, Indiana, not Ohio) which isn't far from Bloomington. I would agree that parts of Indiana do seem like God's country...But, in general, the people there are ignorant, prejudiced, stubborn, and rascist "good ol' boys" who like to shoot little animals while pounds of already slaughtered animal meat spoils on the shelves. Dougie might be from God's country, but he will be moving to a different country when he dies..or at least, he should. I wouldn't mind these types so much if they'd put their own sons in the way of whizzing 50 caliber bullets, but they're always sitting high up in an air-conditioned office. Because our corporate sponsored media refuses to show the true horrors of war, most people have no idea how truly horrible it is--and I include myself, even though I have seen the horrors, but only through video. No matter what religion one believes in, or if one is just a humanitarian, all the prophets and wise men, especially Jesus, have one law in common: do not kill...But, since man is the ultimate hypocrite and refuses to be peaceful, I can see that sometimes--like his story of the helicopter pilot--actions taken by such groups, while awful, are the lesser of two evils. But there has to be accountability--major accountability. I'm talking prison time. Of course, with the leader of the country, and his Administration, the ultimate example of no accountability--unless you piss them off, like the lady covert op. they burned---whose else is going to push for accountability? Apparently, the Democrats are still either powerless or spineless or both. It's up to us, the American people, to take our country back...Unfortunately, Americans are so attached to their precious lives, because we've always had it so easy, that most don't realize sometimes death is better than the injustices that will follow us down the path we're heading. I would rather die a quick death trying to defend the the things I believe in, than wait to be tortured for believing in them. The Gov't should fear us, not the other way around...I bet the French will never get too out of line with its people again. But I'm not for that--or only as a very last resort. But we have to start much more peaceful protest, and start it yesterday.
Posted by:AlanSeptember 26, 2007 4:16:23 PMRespond ^
When one of Code Pink's members told a Canadian reporter and film crew that it was our troops who are the terorists in Iraq, Gael Murphy said nothing to correct her and just kept smiling. That's pretty dreadful when you consider that Code PInk did that standing right in front of the sign at the main gate of Walter Reed Army Hospital. Search YouTube for the words [Code Pink Terrorists Walter Reed] and you'll find it. What a liar that woman is.
Posted by:RaoulSeptember 26, 2007 5:57:51 PMRespond ^
Executive Outcomes had a contract in Rwanda. Only a few million for a few hundred people. But the professional left wing whiners about "Private Military Companies" like today's Medea Benjamin and Gael Murphy made it sound of so dreadful. So they got their way and it was cancelled and 800,000 people of color were slaughtered for the beliefs of rich white "progressives".
Posted by:RaoulSeptember 26, 2007 6:03:09 PMRespond ^
Response to Raoul: If Gael Murphy tacitly agreed that American soldiers in Iraq are terroists, then I am in full agreement with her. Right on, Gael.
Posted by:Phillip in NCSeptember 26, 2007 7:45:22 PMRespond ^
let's see who can press further.
Posted by:Dr.QSeptember 26, 2007 8:43:08 PMRespond ^
JCB wrote "I would like to point out that contractors are in fact subject to UCMJ as well as MEJA. And indeed - they are subject to the Geneva Conventions as well." Being 'subject' to some laws and being held accountable are two very different things. I thought we were, as a country, 'subject' to the Geneva Conventions as well...but in all the wrong-doing that has taken place, have you seen or heard of anyone to sentenced to any kind of penalty at all? When our own un-duly elected top officials get away with torture because they have some expensive lawyer conjure up some important sounding jargon, and the people buy it...well, the days of accountability, at least for those on the far right, seem to be gone. I can't believe that, after a court finally striking down this administrations warrantless-wiretapping programs, the Democratic majority-controlled Congree went and made it legal. The Gov't employs some real wizards when it comes to making a pile of crap smell like roses. In all the rights we have lost, what have we gained? Osama bin Laden is still a free man, reports indicate that al-qaeda is stronger than ever...We still have a huge pile of questions concerning the events of 9/11. Evidence has been gathered to show that many people in our Gov't were very aware of an impending attack, taking lengths to fly privately themselves, but American citizens not given the slightest indication something might be amiss...The largest mass murder in U.S. history given a shoe-string budget...Our Gov't failed us miserably on that day, resulting in thousands of lives lost...Yet, has anyone been held accountable?
Posted by:AlanSeptember 26, 2007 9:21:39 PMRespond ^
I wouldn't call our troops terrorists; they are just doing their job. But the people that put them their certainly did not have the Iraqi citizen's interests in mind when they sent our troops over there. After 9/11 there was a lot of talk about how this was a new kind of war, requiring new tactics, etc--which was and is true. Bush never had any intention of going after the real terrorists, his agenda was always the removal of Saddam--he even makes a "Freudian slip" when giving one of his speeches. A reporter asked him about bin Laden, and he replied "of course we're after Saddam Hu--I mean Osama bin Laden. Not too long ago, when asked again about bin Laden, he said, basically, "I don't care about bin Laden..he's never been the mission." So, after all this talk about a new kind of war, which was correct--the way to bring the terrorists to justice, or their death beds, is through small elite strike units, going wherever the terrorists are and taking them out. Instead, we attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, and now has us mired there for decades. Yes, there are terrorists there now! We went and approached our unconventional war in a completely conventional way, and against a country that's only interest to us was its oil. The mission there has chnged so many times I've lost count, but they will never admit the obvious (to anyone that isn't a right-winged idiot who believes everything he sees on Fox News)reason we really went to Iraq, which never had anything to do with terrorism. Furthermore, there's evidence that we've used chemical weapons, some very nasty cocktails, one very similar to the 'outlawed' napalm of Vietnam, on the citizens of Faluja...How else can you explain bodies burned all the way to the bone, sometimes through the bones, in the hundreds. Bodies of children and women...innocent citizens, burned alive. And this was confirmed by at least one soldier who was there...he said they used a chemical weapon that burns the skin like lye..but it also burns through any protective coating you may be wearing. The military, he said, nickname this chemical weapon "whiskey pete" and he claimed it was used extensively and indiscriminately on the citizens of Faluja, killing thousands of innocents while maybe getting a handful of "bad guys." There has never been any link proven between 9/11 and Iraq, there were no WMDs...so, killing thousands of mostly innocent--as far as acts against us go, before we went there, anyway--citizens in this way...if not a form of terrorism, what would you call it, Raoul? Just some good ol' fashioned ass-wuppin'? Oh, the folly and ignorance of humans never ceases to amaze me.
Posted by:AlanSeptember 26, 2007 9:56:01 PMRespond ^
To be up front I work in the industry and have since 2002, before that I spent 20 years in the military, I also know Doug and have written an article for him on Private Security Company operations in Afghanistan. Having said that I found this acticle and many of the comments submitted to be outlandish and over the top. Doug is simply trying (and it's an uphill lonely struggle) to do for this industry what has been done over time to ever other large industry and that is to bring common standards of conduct to bare. As this industry is in its infancy so are Doug's attempts to regulate it, but it has to start someplace. For those that don't believe there are sanctions being considered against Blackwater by the DoS stand-by, not only will Blackwater eventually suffer a huge financial penalty in the loss of a massive contract if they are found to be neglegent in Iraq but their future would become quickly uncertain as the vast majority of their contracts are with either the US Government directly or with USG funded companies but we before we jump onto the put all Blackwater's men in jail bandwagon we need to have a full and independent investigation that takes a hard look at the so-called Iraqi witness statements and this mysterious video the press has been reporting on. Having spent some time in both Afghanistan and Iraq I can tell you that embellishment is a sport there. Private security companies for the most part do their best to fill the void that was left when the US Military (and almost all Western NATO militaries) was drastically reduced in size in the 90's (the so-called peace dividend after the cold war). They are not evil nor is the military and governments they support, perhaps it's time to focus your disgust and anger at those who hate. They hated us in the 80's, the 90's and now, it's not about an administration, if it was then there wouldn't have been 5 major attacks against US interest during the Clinton administration resulting in 54 US deaths, 1081 US wounded, 246 non US deaths and 4372 non US wounded. Don't forget the go ahead for 9/11 was issued by UBL prior the GW Bush even getting the nomination. The reality is they will continue to hate us no matter who is President or what our countries foreign policy is. They (radical Islamic fundimentalists) only have one agenda and that is to rule the world, they will fight each other or us it doesn't matter but once they've defeated their enemies within they will come for us. I know I've gotten off on a rant but it's because I made the mistake of reading the other comments instead of simply commenting on the article. To summarize the private security industry is a necessary one and if that's the case and I believe it is, it needs to be regulated and standarized, Doug is trying and needs help not blanket comdenation and name calling. I'd rather see the industry and Doug stand up and take this on then let Congress tackle the issue.
Posted by:T Lee HumphreySeptember 27, 2007 4:17:27 AMRespond ^
Nothing like having 180,000 mercenaries at the beck and call of a president who revels in calling himself "The War President". Nothing like the State Department and Pentagon paying out a TRILLION dollars a year for these goons! Every time something serious is going on in Iraq, the mercenaries take off (along with the so-called Iraqi "soldiers") and leave our soldiers to take care of the action. They are paid approximately $600 a day, and have the best of the armored vehicles and weapons. Why not leave Bush's private (and secretive up until now) army in Iraq and Afghanistan, and bring home our underpaid and over-extended soldiers!!! How long do you think it will be until Blackwater is turned loose to control our country, just as they did in New Orleans after Katrina??? This group was given the authority to operate in 2001, by a so-called "signing statement" by Bush.
Posted by:L. DavisSeptember 27, 2007 6:15:32 AMRespond ^
I keep hearing politions belly ache that there are not standards or laws that apply to the security contractors. Don't they make laws? Unfortunatly the Iraqi people have allowed their contry to be inundated with people that don't care about killing women, children, young and old. How does a contractor defend a client and himself without sometimes offending and even unwitingly killing inocents. I ask you, what is the alternative? You saw how long the State Department could actually stand down. Anytime they are not out on missions, somebody is not getting paid for reconstruction; insergents win.
Posted by:BryceSeptember 27, 2007 7:19:00 AMRespond ^
Nice response T. Thanks for your service and your insites.
Posted by:BryceSeptember 27, 2007 7:23:52 AMRespond ^
I think war is war, and if they're going to fight wars, then such wars should be declared by Congress and fought by US servicemembers, and not do things by half-measures. I think our country is 9 trillion in the red thanks to BushCo 'creative management', and war profiteers make millions/billions off the suffering of others. I support impeachment as well as the abolition of Bush's mercenary army. Dishonesty is one of the hallmarks of just about everything you read about Iraq, I think they should bring EVERYone home, and start impeachment and prosecutions where applicable. Take away Bush's blanket license to screw up other countries so that he and his oil buddies can make their fortunes, by throwing him and his buddies out of office, and let that serve as a warning to the next bunch. Be a 'decider' and sign up at www.impeachbush.org
Posted by:BertSeptember 27, 2007 9:44:23 AMRespond ^
If you wouldn t call our troups terrorists then what would you call them peacemakers??they are just doing there job!!What kind of logic do you have?They are in the business of killing,plain and simple.For an Iraki they are terrorist.How would you feel if an Iraki invaded the US because there leader doesn t like the way you live or want to take your oil.Then you would have private Iraki military obeying to the rules from there country whatever they are.This is insane,anyone involved in this is spreading hate,killing and incouraging anyone to become a terrorist.Americans are blind and there government as been and still is responsible for many coups d etats all over the planet.Irak is the latest one,they are hundreds of books reporting the wrong doing of the United states ,some you have short term memorys,Saddam was put in place by the cia not that long ago,the Shaw was put in p[lace in Iran,ben laddin was trained and was on the US payroll,etc....Read all about it and when you are done tell us who the terrorists are.The admnistration is guilty of all these crimes but americans are guilty as well for electing these war mongers.Its looking more and more like a banana republic
Posted by:jackSeptember 27, 2007 11:19:56 PMRespond ^
Corporations should never be allowed to run armies, or they will overrun us. I don't want to live in that world.
Posted by:seanSeptember 28, 2007 12:24:41 AMRespond ^
I wouldnt call our troops terrorist, they are doing what they are told to do. If they dont, they could go to jail, or worse. But you have to remember that who is a terrorist mostly depends on who's side you are on. If you wanted to look at this from both sides, consider that many Iraqis, Saddam (did), and all of Al Qaeda would consider the US troops terrorist, and that Saddams troops were only doing what they were told, or they would go to jail or worse. The Terrorist all depends on what side your on. Israel considers Palestinians terrorist, were Palestinians consider Israelis terrorist.
Posted by:livesiPogSeptember 28, 2007 1:10:03 AMRespond ^
Call them what you may, they are still just the same old mercenaries that are recruited by the questionable "Soldier of Fortune" magazine. Highly paid, well quartered killers. Sociopaths who have no other life skills than to take the lives of other humans, their ultimate objective. If someone needs this type of protection, perhaps they shouldn't be there in the first place. There is new movie about to hit the screen. It is called "The Kingdom" with Jamie Foxx and others that glorify this type of freewheeling gunmen. If there ever was the wrong movie at the wrong time, this is the one. But back to Brooks. I think any of us can see the obvious. He is a highly educated, articulate prostitute. Just like the guns for hire people he presents to us as saints with guns, he is responsible for the deaths of just as many with the lies that come from his lips. But hey, what person or organization condoned by the Bush administration has a soul? I think they have sold theirs to the highest bidder.
Posted by:MichaelSeptember 29, 2007 7:54:55 AMRespond ^
Great story. For more on the powers behind Blackwater and the other top military contractors, and how top Washington lawyers keep IPOA members insulated from costly legal liability, see "Military Contractors' Go-To Guy," at http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1182848789672
Posted by:Daphne EviatarOctober 4, 2007 8:21:27 AMRespond ^
The byline of the article attempts to paint Doug Brooks as a "blank check" advocate for Blackwater, et. al., but if you read more deeply in the article, or visit the IPOA web site (http://ipoaonline.org/), you'll see that the organization's mission is to attempt to assert ethical rules upon the member companies. To those commenting above that condemn him to hell and accuse him of lieing, I would like to see some justification for your hatred, and documentation of the alleged lies. Hating Blackwater thuggery does not equate to hating Brooks, or his organization, IPOA. Please rein in your rage and try to love (or at least respect) your fellow man.
Posted by:EdricOctober 4, 2007 2:01:45 PMRespond ^
Dear Boyaca (and all of you wannabe paper tigers), get off your pacifist, humanitarian butt and walk your talk.. Yeah, that's right mouthpiece... literally go to a war zone and protect people... do a little research on Sierra Leone and see what really happened... the only heinous crime.. is mealymouths that have no idea how the real world works.
Posted by:HenryOctober 7, 2007 6:47:14 AMRespond ^
I am an Alien Republican, and learned of MJ while attending IU Bloomington. Can you tell me why the Link TV need for growth will not established commerical sells and links with the "Tell & Truth" industry? Can NPR, PBS, MJ, Nation, Black Planet, be so far to the right of Link TV, that they can help this important resource to grow expontentially? I need responses to help form an eblog opinion piece I am drafting. Thank you!! Love MJ for ever!!

whiteprivilegeworks@gmail.com
Posted by:Terry L DawsonMarch 23, 2008 9:52:53 AMRespond ^

Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com
















Obama's Game Plan

Obama's Speech

Obama's Speech

Core Inflation


More MoJo voices...



bookIN PRINT

CLICK HERE
for more great reading

headphones IN TUNE
New music every issue

CLICK TO LISTEN


This article has been made possible by the Foundation for National Progress, the Investigative Fund of Mother Jones, and gifts from generous readers like you.

© 2007 The Foundation for National Progress

About Us   Support Us   Advertise   Ad Policy   Privacy Policy   Contact Us   Subscribe   RSS