Explain to Me Why Sending Private Security Contractors to Afghanistan Makes Sense

Walter Pincus reported this morning that the Pentagon is getting out the contractor playbook once again, this time to "provide armed security guards to protect Forward Operating Bases in seven provinces in southern Afghanistan (Helmand, Kandahar, Nimruz, Zabol and Uruzgan)."  According to Pincus:

The hired guards would be required to carry out surveillance of the perimeter of the base from fixed positions to see whether someone is attempting to sneak inside. They are also to engage in counter-surveillance, watching to see whether someone is monitoring who enters and leaves the base. The contractor guards are also to be available to protect supply routes, facilities, convoys and property.

The guards would be required to employ "the appropriate force to neutralize any threat," particularly from individuals trying to enter illegally "with the intent to harm personnel or damage facilities and equipment . . . but are NOT authorized to undertake offensive operations."

There may be good reason for deploying private security contractors to rural Afghanistan, but it's hard to imagine worse optics.  In the coming months, the U.S. will have to maintain a delicate balancing act in Afghanistan -- doubling efforts, while still striving to keep the faith of it's people.  Introducing PSCs -- lightening rods for controversy in the Muslim world -- into an already volatile situation just seems nonsensical, especially on the heels of the announcement that troops from the 10th mountain division are headed to Kabul, and not the surrounding countryside where the insurgency is based (which may be an indicator of how precarious the security situation has become).  Why are we sending U.S. troops to Kabul and contractors to the heart of the insurgency?

Comments

[Hoosier84]

I haven't seen the specific RFP but why use American soldiers to guard fixed sites? That's putting a target out to guard a target.

The goal of using contractors is to *reduce* the burden on U.S. soldiers. Better to use locals if possible, they speak the language, know the customs and giving Afghans good jobs helps the economy and undermines the Taliban. They also cost about 1/100th as much as a soldier to the taxpayers - to do essentially the same simple task. In fact, more than 99% of private security in Afghanistan is Afghans - the folks who should be doing the security in their own country.

The U.S. military is the most professional it has ever been, asking truly professional soldiers to fill out all the menial tasks handled by contractors - cleaning, cooking and gate guarding - is demeaning and a waste of taxpayer money. Let the military focus on the policy stuff and ensure they get the support they need to stay focused.

-doug brooks, IPOA

[tbone99]

Explain to Me Why Sending Private Security Contractors to Afghanistan Makes Sense

Um , to avoid a coup at home ?

These men are ultra conservative trained mercenaries. - they must be appeased with large amounts of money . I figure the heads of the nation must want to keep them busy killing third world peasants so as to avoid the consequences of having 150 such companies returned , unemployed and pacing around restlessly , searching for their next rationale for disaster.

[Mnemanth]

It makes sense because we've legalized the employment of merc's to do the jobs of our soldiers.
We've placed a friendly corporate face on paramilitary businesses.
We'll see more of a privatized motherland security force soon enough.
Haven't you been paying attention?

[mgloraine]

It might make sense to send PSCs if those PSCs were Afghanis, some of the local tribal muscle with an interest in protecting their homeland. But the contracting company itself needs to be an Afghani company, locals employed by locals. An American company hiring locals would have no way of distinguishing between a patriotic Afghani motivated to protect his border and a Taliban supporter eager to take the arms and info straight to the enemy.

President Karzai should be encouraged to hire Afghani security contractors, or send regular Afghani troops to take charge of border security. American & NATO troops should be adopting a supporting role (rather than a leading one) and looking for an exit.

[motoGpifupleez]

Because it fills Right Wingers cauffers with taxpayer dollars which in turn translate into donations for Rethuglican candidates which fills the cauffers and return as donations and so on and so on.......

[LeftRight]

Whatever happened to the US military providing it's own food, it's own transportation, and it's own SECURITY!!! That's their FREAKING JOB, PEOPLE!!!!!