Having trouble viewing this email?
Click herehttp://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=o8b4necab&v=001KKT...
The Privatization of War: Mercenaries, Private Military and Security
Companies (PMSC) Beyond the WikiLeaks Files
By Jose L. Gomez del Prado
URL of this article:www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21826
Global Research, November 8, 2010 UN Working Group on Mercenaries
- 2010-11-07
The United Nation Human Rights Council, under the Universal Periodic
Review, started on 5 November 2010 in Geneva, reviewing the human
rights record of the United States. The following is an edited
version of the presentation given by Jose L. Gomez del Prado in
Geneva on 3 November 2010 at a parallel meeting at the UN Palais
des Nations on that occasion.
Private military and security companies (PMSC) are the modern
reincarnation of a long lineage of private providers of physical
force: corsairs, privateers and mercenaries. Mercenaries, which had
practically disappeared during the XIXth and XXth centuries,
reappeared in the 1960s during the decolonization period operating
mainly in Africa and Asia. Under the United Nations a convention
was adopted which outlaws and criminalizes their activities.
Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions also contains a
definition of mercenary.
These non-state entities of the XXIst century operate in extremely
blurred situations where the frontiers are difficult to separate.
The new security industry of private companies moves large quantities
of weapons and military equipment. It provides services for military
operations recruiting former militaries as civilians to carry out
passive or defensive security.
However, these individuals cannot be considered as civilians, given
that they often carry and use weapons, interrogate prisoners, load
bombs, drive military trucks and fulfill other essential military
functions. Those who are armed can easily switch from a passive/defensive
to an active/offensive role and can commit human rights violations
and even destabilize governments. They cannot be considered soldiers
or supporting militias under international humanitarian law either,
since they are not part of the army or in the chain of command, and
often belong to a large number of different nationalities.
PMSC personnel cannot usually be considered to be mercenaries for
the definition of mercenaries as stipulated in the international
conventions dealing with this issue does not generally apply to the
personnel of PMSCs which are legally operating in foreign countries
under contracts of legally registered companies.
Private military and security companies operate in a legal vacuum:
they pose a threat to civilians and to international human rights
law. The UN Human Rights Council has entrusted the UN Working Group
on the use of mercenaries, principally, with the mandate: To monitor
and study the effects of the activities of private companies offering
military assistance, consultancy and security services on the
international market on the enjoyment of human Rights (...) and to
prepare draft international basic principles that encourage respect
for human rights on the part of those companies in their activities.
During the past five years, the Working Group has been studying
emerging issues, manifestations and trends regarding private military
and security companies. In our reports we have informed the Human
Rights Council and the General Assembly about these issues. Of
particular importance are the reports of the Working Group to the
last session of the Human Rights Council, held in September 2010,
on the Mission to the United States of America (20 July to 3 August
2009), Document A/HRC/15/25/Add.3; on the Mission to Afghanistan
(4-9 April 2009), Document A/HRC/15/25/Add.2, and the general report
of the Working Group containing the Draft of a possible Convention
on Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) for consideration
and action by the Human Rights Council, Document A/HRC/15/25.
In the course of our research, since 2006, we have collected ample
information which indicate the negative impact of the activities
of private contractors, private soldiers or guns for hire, whatever
denomination we may choose to name the individuals employed by
private military and security companies as civilians but in general
heavily armed. In the cluster of human rights violations allegedly
perpetrated by employees of these companies, which the Working Group
has examined one can find: summary executions, acts of torture,
cases of arbitrary detention; of trafficking of persons; serious
health damages caused by their activities; as well as attempts
against the right of self-determination. It also appears that PMSCs,
in their search for profit, neglect security and do not provide
their employees with their basic rights, and often put their staff
in situations of danger and vulnerability.
Summary executions
On 16 September 2007 in Baghdad, employees of the US-based firm
Blackwater[1] were involved in a shooting incident in Nisoor Square
in which 17 civilians were killed and more than 20 other persons
were wounded including women and children. Local eyewitness accounts
indicate the use of arms from vehicles and rocket fire from a
helicopter belonging to this company.
There are also concerns over the activities and approach of PMSC
personnel, their convoys of armored vehicles and their conduct in
traffic, in particular their use of lethal force. This particular
incident was not the first of its kind, neither the first involving
Blackwater.
According to a congressional report on the behaviour of Xe/Blackwater
in Iraq, Xe/Blackwater guards were found to have been involved in
nearly 200 escalation-of-force incidents that involved the firing
of shots since 2005. Despite the terms of the contracts which
provided that the company could engage only in defensive use of
force, the company reported that in over 80 per cent of the shooting
incidents, its forces fired the first shots.
In Najaf in April 2004 and on several other occasions, employees
of this company took part in direct hostilities, as well as in May
2007, where another incident involving the same company reportedly
occurred involving guards belonging to the company and forces
belonging to the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior allegedly exchanged
gunfire in a sector of Baghdad.
Also in central Baghdad the shooting of employees of the PMSC, Unity
Resources Group (URG)[2], protecting a convoy, left two Armenian
women, Genevia Antranick and Mary Awanis dead on 9 October 2007
when their car came too close to a protected convoy. The family of
Genevia Antranick was offered no compensation and has begun court
proceedings against URG in the United States.
This company was also involved in the shooting of 72-year-old
Australian Kays Juma. Professor Juma was shot in March 2006 as he
approached an intersection being blockaded for a convoy URG was
protecting. Professor Juma, a 25-year resident of Baghdad who drove
through the city every day, allegedly sped up his vehicle as he
approached the guards and did not heed warnings to stop, including
hand signals, flares, warning shots into the body of his car and
floodlights. The incident occurred at 10am[3].
Torture
Two United States-based corporations, CACI and L-3 Services (formerly
Titan Corporation), were involved in the torture of Iraqi detainees
at Abu Ghraib. CACI and L-3 Services, contracted by the Government
of the United States, were responsible for interrogation and
translation services, respectively, at Abu Ghraib prison and other
facilities in Iraq.
Seventy two Iraqi citizens who were formerly detained at military
prisons in Iraq, have sued L-3 Services, Inc. (L-3), a military
private contractor which provided civilian translators for United
States military forces in Iraq and Adel Nakhla, a former employee
of L-3 who served as one of its translators there under the Alien
Tort Statute. They allege having been tortured and physically and
mentally abused during their detention and that they should be held
liable in damages for their actions. The plaintiffs assert 20 causes
of action, among which: torture; cruel, inhuman, or degrading
treatment; assault and battery; intentional infliction of emotional
distress[4].
Arbitrary detention
A number of reports indicate that private security guards have
played central roles in some of the most sensitive activities of
the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) such as the arbitrary detention
and clandestine raids against alleged insurgents in Iraq and
Afghanistan[5] and the involvement in CIA rendition flights[6] as
well as joint covert operations[7]. Employees of PMSC would have
been involved in the taking of detainees, from pick up points (such
as Tuzla, Islamabad or Skopje) transporting them in rendition flights
and delivering them to drop off points (such as Cairo, Rabat,
Bucharest, Amman or Guantanamo) as well as in the construction,
equipping and staffing of CIAs black sites.
Within this context, the American Civil Liberties Union has filed
a lawsuit in May 2007 against Jeppesen DataPlan Inc. (a subsidiary
company of Boeing) on behalf of five persons who were kidnapped by
the CIA disappearing in overseas prisons kept by USA secret services.
Jeppesen would have participated in the rendition by providing
flight planning and logistical support. The five persons were
tortured during their arbitrary detention[8].
Health
The 2009 annual report of DynCorp International refers to four
lawsuits concerning the spraying of narcotic plant crops along the
Colombian border adjacent to Ecuador on behalf of 3 Ecuadorian
Providences and 3266 plaintiffs[9].
From 1991, the United States Department of State contracted the
private company DynCorp to supply services for this air-spraying
program against narcotics in the Andean region. In accordance with
the subscribed contract of 30 January 1998, DynCorp provides the
essential logistics to the anti-drug Office of activities of Colombia,
in conformity with three main objectives: eradication of cultivations
of illicit drugs, training of the army and of personnel of the
country, and dismantling of illicit drug laboratories and illicit
drug-trafficking networks.
An NGO report indicated the consequences of the spraying carried
out within the Plan Colombia had on persons living in the frontier
region[10]. One third of the 47 women in the study exposed to the
spraying showed cells with some genetic damage. The study established
the relationship of the air fumigations of the Plan Colombia with
damages in the genetic material. The study demonstrates that when
the population is subjected to fumigations the risk of cellular
damage can increase and that, once permanent, the cases of cancerous
mutations and important embryonic alterations are increased that
prompt among other possibilities the rise in abortions in the area.
This example is particularly important given that Plan Colombia has
served as the model for the arrangements that the United States
would apply later to Iraq and Afghanistan. Plan Colombia provides
immunity to the employees of the PMSC contracted (DynCorp) the same
as Order 14 of the Coalition Provisional Authority did in Iraq.
Self-determination
The 2004 attempted coup ditat, which was perpetrated in Equatorial
Guinea is a clear example of the link between the phenomenon of
mercenaries and PMSCs as a means of violating the sovereignty of
States. In this particular case, the mercenaries involved were
mostly former directors and personnel of Executive Outcomes, a PMSC
that had become famous for its operations in Angola and Sierra
Leone. The team of mercenaries also included security guards who
were still employed by PMSCs as was the case of two employees of
the company Meteoric Tactical Systems providing security to diplomats
of Western Embassies in Baghdad-among which to the Ambassador of
Switzerland. It also included a security guard who had previously
worked for the PMSC Steele Foundation and had given protection to
President Aristide of Haiti and conducted him to the plane who took
him to exile[11].
Trafficking in persons
In 2005, 105 Chileans were providing/or undergoing military training
in the former army base of Lepaterique in Honduras. The instruction
consisted in anti?guerrilla tactics such as possible ambushes and
deactivation of explosives and mortars how to avoid them. The
Chileans had entered Honduras as tourists and were illegally in
Honduras. They used high?caliber weapons such as M?16 rifles or
light machine guns. They had been contracted by a subsidiary of
Triple Canopy.
They were part of a group, which included also 189 Hondurans recruited
and trained in Honduras. Triple Canopy had been awarded a contract
by the United States Department of State. The strong contingent
left the country by air from San Pedro Sula, Honduras, in several
groups with a stopover in Iceland. Then reached the Middle East and
were smuggled into Iraq[12].
The majority of the Chileans and Hondurans were engaged as security
guards at fixed facilities in Iraq. They had been contracted by
Your Solutions Honduras SRL, a local agent of Your Solutions
Incorporated, registered in Illinois, United States of America,
which in turn had been subcontracted by Triple Canopy, based in
Chicago, United States of America. Some of the Chileans are presently
working in Baghdad providing security to the Embassy of Australia
under a contract by Unity Resources Group (URG).
Human rights violations committed by PMSC to their employees
PMSC often put the contracted private guards in situations of danger
and vulnerability, such as the private contractors of Blackwater,
killed in Fallujah in 2004 allegedly due to the lack of the necessary
safety means that Blackwater was supposed to provide in order to
carry out the mission.
It should not be forgotten that this incident changed dramatically
the course of the war and the occupation by the United States in
Iraq. It may be considered as the turning point in the occupation
of Iraq. This led to an abortive US operation to recapture control
of the city and a successful recapture operation in the city in
November 2004, called Operation Phantom Fury, which resulted in the
death of over 1,350 insurgent fighters. Approximately 95 America
troops were killed, and 560 wounded.
The U.S. military first denied that it has use white phosphorus as
an anti-personnel weapon in Fallujah, but later retracted that
denial, and admitted to using the incendiary in the city as an
offensive weapon. Reports following the events of November 2004
have alleged war crimes, and a massacre by U.S. personnel, including
indiscriminate violence against civilians and
children.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah- cite_note-17 This
point of view is presented in the 2005 documentary film, Fallujah,
the Hidden Massacre. In 2010, the International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, a leading medical journal, published a
study, which shows that the rates of cancer, infant mortality and
leukemia exceed those reported in Hiroshima and Nagasaki[13].
The over 300 000 classified military documents made public by
Wikileaks show that the Use of Contractors Added to Wars Chaos in
Iraq, as has been widely reported by the international media recently.
The United States has relied and continues to rely heavily on private
military and security contractors in conducting its military
operations. The United States used private security contractors to
conduct narcotics intervention operations in Colombia in the 1990s
and recently signed a supplemental agreement that authorizes it to
deploy troops and contractors in seven Colombian military bases.
During the conflict in the Balkans, the United States used a private
security contractor to train Croat troops to conduct operations
against Serbian troops. Nowadays, it is in the context of its
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in particular that the State is
massively contracting out security functions to private firms.
In 2009, the Department of Defense employed 218,000 private contractors
(all types) while there were 195,000 uniformed personnel. According
to the figures, about 8 per cent of these contractors are armed
security contractors, i.e. about 20,000 armed guards. If one includes
other theatres of operations, the figure rises to 242,657, with
54,387 United States citizens, 94,260 third country nationals and
94,010 host-country nationals.
The State Department relies on about 2,000 private security contractors
to provide United States personnel and facilities with personal
protective and guard services in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and
Pakistan, and aviation services in Iraq. The contracts for protective
services were awarded in 2005 to three PMSCs, namely, Triple Canopy,
DynCorp International and the U.S. Training Center, part of the Xe
(then Blackwater) group of companies. These three companies still
hold the State Department protective services contracts today.
Lack of transparency
The information accessible to the public on the scope and type of
contracts between the Government of the United States and PMSCs is
scarce and opaque. The lack of transparency is particularly significant
when companies subcontract to others. Often, the contracts with
PMSCs are not disclosed to the public despite extensive freedom of
information rules in the United States, either because they contain
confidential commercial information or on the argument that
non-disclosure is in the interest of national defense or foreign
policy. The situation is particularly opaque when United States
intelligence agencies contract PMSCs.
Lack of accountability
Despite the fact of their involvement in grave human rights violations,
not a single PMSC or employee of these companies has been sanctioned.
In the course of litigation, several recurring legal arguments have
been used in the defense of PMSCs and their personnel, including
the Government contractor defense, the political question doctrine
and derivative immunity arguments. PMSCs are using the Government
contractor defense to argue that they were operating under the
exclusive control of the Government of the United States when the
alleged acts were committed and therefore cannot be held liable for
their actions.
It looks as if when the acts are committed by agents of the government
they are considered human rights violations but when these same
acts are perpetrated by PMSC it is business as usual.
The human rights violation perpetrated by private military and
security companies are indications of the threat posed to the
foundations of democracy itself by the privatization of inherently
public functions such as the monopoly of the legitimate use of
force. In this connection I cannot help but to refer to the final
speech of President Eisenhower.
In 1961, President Eisenhower warned the American public opinion
against the growing danger of a military industrial complex stating:
(...) we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence,
whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The
potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and
will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination
endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take
nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can
compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military
machinery of defence with our peaceful methods and goals, so that
security and liberty may prosper together.
Fifty years later, on 8 September 2001, Donald Rumsfeld in his
speech in the Department of Defence warned the militaries of the
Pentagon against an adversary that poses a threat, a serious threat,
to the security of the United States of America (...) Let's make
no mistake: The modernization of the Department of Defense is (...)
a matter of life and death, ultimately, every American's. (...) The
adversary. (...) It's the Pentagon bureaucracy. (...)That's why
we're here today challenging us all to wage an all-out campaign to
shift Pentagon's resources from bureaucracy to the battlefield,
from tail to the tooth. We know the adversary. We know the threat.
And with the same firmness of purpose that any effort against a
determined adversary demands, we must get at it and stay at it.
Some might ask, how in the world could the Secretary of Defense
attack the Pentagon in front of its people? To them I reply, I have
no desire to attack the Pentagon; I want to liberate it. We need
to save it from itself."
Rumsfeld should have said the shift from the Pentagons resources
from bureaucracy to the private sector. Indeed, that shift had been
accelerated by the Bush Administration: the number of persons
employed by contract which had been outsourced (privatized) by the
Pentagon was already four times more than at the Department of
Defense.
It is not anymore a military industrial complex but as Noam Chomsky
has indicated "it's just the industrial system operating under one
or another pretext.
The articles of the Washington Post Top Secret America: A hidden
world, growing beyond control, by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin
(19 July 2010) show the extent that The top-secret world the
government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept.
11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that
no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs,
how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do
the same work.
The investigation's findings include that some 1,271 government
organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related
to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about
10,000 locations across the United States; and that an estimated
854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington,
D.C., hold top-secret security clearances. A number of private
military and security companies are among the security and intelligence
agencies mentioned in the report of the Washington Post.
The Working Group received information from several sources that
up to 70 per cent of the budget of United States intelligence is
spent on contractors. These contracts are classified and very little
information is available to the public on the nature of the activities
carried out by these contractors.
The privatization of war has created a structural dynamic, which
responds to a commercial logic of the industry.
A short look at the careers of the current managers of BAE Systems,
as well as on their address-books, confirms we are not any longer
dealing with a normal corporation, but with a cartel uniting high
tech weaponry (BAE Systems, United Defence Industries, Lockheed
Martin), with speculative financiers (Lazard Frhres, Goldman Sachs,
Deutsche Bank), together with raw material cartels (British Petroleum,
Shell Oil) with on the ground, private military and security
companies[14].
The majority of the private military and security companies has
been created or are managed by former militaries or ex-policemen
for whom it is big business. Just to give an example MPRI (Military
Professional Resources Incorporation) was created by four former
generals of the United States Army when they were due for retirement[15].
The same is true for Blackwater and its affiliate companies or
subsidiaries, which employ former directors of the C.I.A.[16].
Social Scientists refer to this phenomenon as the Rotating Door
Syndrome.
The use of security contractors is expected to grow as American
forces shrink. A July report by the Commission on Wartime Contracting,
a panel established by Congress, estimated that the State Department
alone would need more than double the number of contractors it had
protecting the American Embassy and consulates in Iraq.
Without contractors: (1) the military engagement would have had to
be smaller--a strategically problematic alternative; (2) the United
States would have had to deploy its finite number of active personnel
for even longer tours of duty -a politically dicey and short-sighted
option; (3) the United States would have had to consider a civilian
draft or boost retention and recruitment by raising military pay
significantly--two politically untenable options; or (4) the need
for greater commitments from other nations would have arisen and
with it, the United States would have had to make more concessions
to build and sustain a truly multinational effort. Thus, the tangible
differences in the type of war waged, the effect on military
personnel, and the need for coalition partners are greatly magnified
when the government has the option to supplement its troops with
contractors[17].
The military cannot do without them. There are more contractors
over all than actual members of the military serving in the worsening
war in Afghanistan.
CONCLUSIONS OF THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE impact of Private
Security Contracting on U.S. Goals in Afghanistan[18]
Conclusion I: The proliferation of private security personnel in
Afghanistan is inconsistent with the counterinsurgency strategy.
In May 2010 the U.S. Central Command's Armed Contractor Oversight
Directorate reported that there were more than 26,000 private
security contractor personnel operating in Afghanistan. Many of
those private security personnel are associated with armed groups
that operate outside government control.
Conclusion 2: Afghan warlords and strongmen operating as force
providers to private security contractors have acted against U.S.
and Afghan government interests. Warlords and strongmen associated
with U.S.-funded security contractors have been linked to anti
Coalition activities, murder, bribery, and kidnapping. The Committee's
examination of the U.S. funded security contract with ArmorGroup
at Shindand Airbase in Afghanistan revealed that ArmorGroup relied
on a series of warlords to provide armed men to act as security,
guards at the Airbase.
Open-ended intergovernmental working group established by the HR
Council
Because of their impact in the enjoyment of human rights the Working
Group on mercenaries in its 2010 reports to the UN Human Rights
Council and General Assembly has recommended a legally binding
instrument regulating and monitoring their activities at the national
and international level.
The motion to create an open ended intergovernmental working group
has been the object of lengthy negotiations, in the Human Rights
Council, led by South Africa in order to accommodate the concerns
of the Western Group, but primarily those of the United States and
the United Kingdom and of a lot a pressure exerted in the capitals
of African countries supporting the draft resolution. The text of
the resolution was weakened in order to pass the resolution by
consensus. But even so the position of the Western States has been
a fin de non recevoir.
The resolution was adopted by a majority of 32 in favour, 12 against
and 3 abstentions. Among the supporters of this initiative are four
out of the five members of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, China and South
Africa) in addition to the African Group, the Organization of the
Islamic Conference and the Arab Group.
The adoption of this resolution opens an interesting process in the
UN Human Rights Council where civil society can participate in the
elaboration of an international framework on the regulation,
monitoring and oversight of the activities of private military and
security companies. The new open ended intergovernmental working
group will be the forum for all stakeholders to receive inputs, not
only the draft text of a possible convention and the elements
elaborated by the UN Working Group on mercenaries but also of other
initiatives such as the proposal submitted to the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Montreux Document and the
international code of conduct being elaborated under the Swiss
Initiative.
However, the negative vote of the delegations of the Western Group
indicates that the interests of the new staggering security industry
its annual market revenue is estimated to be over USD one hundred
billion have been quite well defended as was the case in a number
of other occasions. It also shows that Western governments will be
absent from the start in a full in-depth discussion of the issues
raised by the activities of PMSC.
We urge all States to support the process initiated by the Council
by designating their representatives to the new open-ended
intergovernmental working group, which will hold its first session
in 2011, and to continue a process of discussions regarding a legally
binding instrument.
The participation of the UK and USA main exporters of these activities
(it is estimated at 70% the industry of security in these two
countries) as well as other Western countries where the new industry
is expanding is of particular importance.
The Working Group also urges the United States Government to implement
the recommendations we made, in particular, to:
support the Congress Stop Outsourcing Security (SOS) Act, which
clearly defines the functions which are inherently governmental and
that cannot be outsourced to the private sector;
rescind immunity to contractors carrying out activities in other
countries under bilateral agreements;
carry out prompt and effective investigation of human rights
violations committed by PMSCs and prosecute alleged perpetrators;
ensure that the oversight of private military and security contractors
is not outsourced to PMSCs;
establish a specific system of federal licensing of PMSCs for their
activities abroad;
set up a vetting procedure for awarding contracts to PMSCs;
ensure that United States criminal jurisdiction applies to private
military and security companies contracted by the Government to
carry out activities abroad; and
respond to pending communications from the Working Group.
Notes
[1] Blackwater Worldwide abandoned its tarnished brand name in order
to shake its reputation battered by its criticized work in Iraq,
renaming its family of two-dozen businesses under the name Xe, see
Mike Baker, Blackwater dumps tarnished brand name, AP News Break,
13 February 2009.
[2] URG, an Australian private military and security company, uses
a number of ex military Chileans to provide security to the Australian
Embassy in Baghdad. Recently one of those private guards shot
himself, ABC News, reported by La Tercera, Chile, 16 September 2010.
[3]J.Mendes & S Mitchell, Who is Unity Resources Group?, ABC News
Australia, 16 September 2010.
[4] Case 8:08-cv-01696-PJM, Document 103, Filed 07/29/10. Defendants
have filed Motions to Dismiss on a number of grounds. They argue,
among others, that the suit must be dismissed in its entirety because
they are immune under the laws of war, because the suit raises
non-justiciable political questions, and because they possess
derivative sovereign immunity. They seek dismissal of the state law
claims on the basis of government contractor immunity, premised on
the notion that Plaintiffs cannot proceed on state law claims, which
arise out of combatant activities of the military. The United States
District Court for the district of Maryland Greenbelt Division has
decided to proceed with the case against L-3 Services, Inc. It has
not accepted the motions to dismiss allowing the case to go forward.
[5] Mission to the United States of America, Report of the Working
Group on the use of mercenaries, United Nations document,
A/HRC/15/25/Add.3, paragraphs 22.
[6] James Risen and Mark Mazzetti, Blackwater guards tied to secret
C.I.A. raids , New York Times, 10
December 2009.
[7] Adam Ciralsky, Tycoon, contractor, soldier, spy, Vanity Fair,
January 2010. See also Claim No. HQ08X02800 in the High Court of
Justice, Queens Bench Division, Binyam Mohamed v. Jeppesen UK Ltd,
report of James Gavin Simpson, 26 May 2009.
[8]ACLU Press Release, UN Report Underscores Lack of Accountability
and Oversight for Military and Security Contractors, New York, 14
September 2010.
[9] The reports also indicates that the Revenues of DynCorp for
2006 were of USD 1 966 993 and for 2009 USD 3 101 093
[10] Mission to Ecuador, Report of the Working Group on the use of
mercenaries, United Nations document, A/HRC/4/42/Add.2
[11] A number of the persons involved in the attempted coup were
arrested in Zimbabwe, other in Equatorial Guinea itself the place
where the coup was intended to take place to overthrow the government
and put another in its place in order to get the rich resources in
oil. In 2004 and 2008 the trials took place in Equatorial Guinea
of those arrested in connection with this coup attempt, including
of the British citizen Simon Mann and the South African Nick du
Toit. The President of Equatorial Guinea pardoned all foreigners
linked to this coup attempt in November 2009 by. A number of reports
indicated that trials failed to comply with international human
rights standards and that some of the accused had been subjected
to torture and ill-treatment. The government of Equatorial Guinea
has three ongoing trials in the United Kingdom, Spain and Lebanon
against the persons who were behind the attempted coup.
[12] Report of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries, Mission
to Honduras, United Nations document A/HRC/4/42/Add.1.
[13] Wikipedia [14] Mercenaries without borders by Karel Vereycken,
Friday Sep 21st, 2007 [15] Among which General Carl E. Vuono, Chief
of the Army during the Gulf War and the invasion of Panama; General
Crosbie E. Saint, former Commander in Chief of the USA Army in
Europe and General Ron Griffith. The President of MPRI is General
Bantant J. Craddock.
[16] Such as Cofer Black, former Chief of the Counter Terrorism
Center; Enrique Prado, former Chief of Operations and Rof Richter,
second in command of the Clandestine Services of the Company [17]
Article published in the Spring 2010 issue of the University of
Chicago Law Review, titled "Privatization's Pretensions" by Jon D.
Michaels, Acting Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law [18]
INQUIRY INTO THE ROLE AND OVERSIGHT OF PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTORS
IN AFGHANISTAN, R E P O R T TOGETHER WITH ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE, 28 September 2010
Please support Global Research Global Research relies on the financial
support of its readers.
Your endorsement is greatly appreciated
Subscribe to the Global Research e-newsletter Disclaimer: The views
expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on
Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility
of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not
be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements
contained in this article.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title
are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be
displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or
other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
crgedi...@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.cacontains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We are making such material available to our readers under the
provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding
of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If
you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair
use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgedi...@yahoo.com
Copyright Jose L. Gomez del Prado, UN Working Group on Mercenaries,
2010
The url address of this article is:www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21826
Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca Web site engine by Polygraphx
Multimedia ) Copyright 2005-2007