Blackwater Doesn’t Need Bribes To Operate In Afghanistan
Topic: Beltway Outsider, Central Intelligence Agency, Dept. of Defense, Dept. of State11. November 2009 |
Print This Post
|
Email This Post
|
Good news! The New York Times’ James Risen and Mark Mazetti report:
Top executives at Blackwater Worldwide authorized secret payments of about $1 million to Iraqi officials that were intended to silence their criticism and buy their support after a September 2007 episode in which Blackwater security guards fatally shot 17 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad, according to former company officials.
How could this possibly be good news? Because Iraqi officials didn’t listen! Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki was so adamant about kicking Blackwater out of the country that he wouldn’t let U.S. troops stay in Iraq unless the State Dept. agreed to hire a new private security contractor. The not so good news is that the State. Dept. — and the CIA, and the Pentagon — continue to employ Blackwater in Afghanistan. Jeremy Scahill of the Nation reports that Blackwater provides protection to Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and U.S. Afghanistan/Pakistan ambassador Richard Holbrooke when they visit Afghanistan.
The reason Blackwater is winning contracts is probably not because they also bribe American officials. It’s that the U.S. military doesn’t have enough personnel and there isn’t exactly a buyers market for companies qualified to provide security, intelligence and general war-making operations. That the U.S. desperately keeps returning to Blackwater is a small but not insignificant reason of why the Obama administration and Congress need to re-evaluate this whole Afghanistan escalation plan.





understandinggov.org