Wheaton Wire

Issue date: 11/7/07 Section: Commentary

Media Credit: Heather Langley ’10

The recent events in Iraq involving the alleged "near-miss" shootings of Iraqi civilians by contractors employed by Blackwater USA have raised the public's awareness of contractors, and the pronounced role they play in America's overseas operations. The alleged "near-miss" shootings, if true, are tragic and deeply hurtful to the American endeavor in Iraq. But let's transcend this incident, and move beyond discussion of one company.

The question the American public should be asking pertains not the specific events of September, but rather to the utility and correctness of our government's increasing reliance on contractors. While companies are often contracted for mundane duties such as machinery maintenance, food service and construction, many contractors serve as defacto soldiers, carrying-out security operations and conducting interrogations. With two wars raging and a War on Terrorism likely to last decades, America must ask the tough questions regarding this massive and multiplying "mercenary phenomena."

According to U.S. Central Command, the U.S. military is operating alongside 100,000 contractors in Iraq alone. While many of these hired civilians perform mundane tasks, many serve in a security capacity. This number represents an exponential increase in contractors compared to the 9,200 who served in Operation Desert Storm. The Labor Department reports that 650 contractors have died in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The Government Accountability Office has warned that friendly fire incidents are higher among contractors, for coordination among the many companies is lacking.

Clearly, these contractors are significant and substantial. I believe that their role, while practically vital in light of personnel shortages, is having a pernicious effect of America's military-political efforts.

First, these contracting are relatively opaque entities that deny the American public and its government the transparency and accountability that is necessary. These companies act on our behalf. Their activities and policies should be totally visible to and under the control of our government.

Second, in a philosophical sense, public goods should not be provided by private entities. The American enterprise in Iraq is a national mission and should not be freelanced out to corporations.

What's next, Operation Spread Liberty, brought to you by Tostitos? Or, the Lexus Occupation of Syria, the passionate pursuit of stability?

Third, the remedy to a shortage of manpower is not creased reliance on mercenaries. The political leadership in this country has failed to do one of two things: Either it has embarked on a war too unpopular to conduct, or it has failed to mobilize and enlist the American public in the struggle. In either case, the use of contractors is not a remedy, but rather a band-aid.

And finally, the U.S. use of contractors is increasing the military-industrial complex. This is a sad and dangerous path.

Whenever you allow corporations to profit from war, you increase the likelihood that war will be pursued for less-than-noble purposes. War should not be a tool of profit; it should a course of last resort. While we can never eliminate the economic upside of war, we can mitigate it. A strong first step would the phased but drastic reduction in the military's reliance of security contractors.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools