November, 17 2008, 01:26pm EDT
Blueprint for the Next President Provides Step-by-Step Guide to End Private Contractor Impunity
WASHINGTON
Since the killings of 17 Iraqi civilians by Blackwater security contractors in Baghdad's Nisoor Square
last year, lack of accountability of contractors has been a central
issue in negotiations over a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between
the U.S. and Iraqi governments. While yesterday's signing in Baghdad of a SOFA agreement that reportedly expands the scope of Iraqi jurisdiction over U.S. government personnel and contractors is a step forward, much remains to be done by the U.S.
government to hold its contractors to account. Today, a leading human
rights organization unveiled a detailed, multi-phased blueprint for the
next administration to effectively end private contractor impunity, in Iraq and elsewhere.
Along
with the blueprint, the group released a report card grading the
performance of key elements of the U.S. government - Congress, the
Defense Department, the White House, the State Department, and the
Justice Department - in acting, and in failing to act, to address
contractor accountability since September 2007, when the Nisoor Square
killings took place. Both Iraqi government and U.S.
military officials concluded these killings were unprovoked. Human
Rights First awarded "B"s to Congress and the Department of Defense for
their work since Nisoor Square on contractor accountability. The Department of Justice earned an "F."
Human Rights First's blueprint - How to End Impunity for Private Security and Other Contractors - offers
President-elect Obama a practical strategy for putting into place the
key components of a comprehensive system of accountability for U.S.
government contractors working abroad. Read the full blueprint here and read the report card here. In the course of the just-completed presidential campaign, President-elect Obama expressed his understanding that America's reputation, and its national security interests, have been damaged by contractor abuse.
"The
U.S. government's systematic failure to hold contractors accountable
for acts of violence and abuse has created a culture of impunity that
threatens the safety of Iraqi and Afghan civilians, American troops and
U.S. military missions, and the contractors themselves," said Elisa Massimino, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of Human Rights First
There are now well over 200,000 U.S. government private contractors in Iraq, far greater than the number of U.S.
military personnel. But as the U.S. government increasingly relies on
contractors in its missions abroad, it has yet to make an effective
commitment to accountability, to ensure that contractors can and will
be held responsible when they commit violent crimes. Over the last
several years, scores of well-documented reports of serious abuse by
private contractors have gone uninvestigated and unprosecuted. Fourteen
months after Nisoor Square
none of the Blackwater security contractors there have yet been
charged. Justice Department leaks over the last year suggest - at best
- glacial progress in the investigation; while the investigation has
dragged on, Blackwater's contract for providing security services in
Iraq was extended by the State Department another year.
"Anybody sent to war by the U.S.
government who commits a violent crime must be held accountable -
soldier, government civilian or contractor," Massimino added. "With
well over a quarter-million U.S. government contractors employed in Iraq and Afghanistan,
it's like having the adult population of an entire city of people, many
of them armed, without any laws in place, or resources committed, to
hold them accountable when they commit crimes."
"It's been over four years since Abu Ghraib and more than a year since Nisoor Square,
and we are still waiting for prosecutions of the contractors implicated
in these abuses. In the meantime, contractors continue to operate in a
culture of impunity. It's time for action," said Massimino.
Human
Rights First's three-stage blueprint sets forth concrete
recommendations for action by President-elect Obama beginning on day
one and continuing through the first year of the next administration,
including:
-
Expressly
announcing that all contractors will be held accountable for serious
crimes, and declaring a moratorium on U.S government civilian agencies
sending more contractors abroad until adequate accountability
mechanisms have been put in place; - Ensuring that existing laws are enforced, including criminal laws as well as bans on torture and cruel treatment;
- Directing
the Attorney General to make prosecution of contractor crime a
priority, including by conducting appropriate judicial reviews and
allocating necessary resources for pending and future investigations
and prosecutions; - Supporting legislation that clarifies and expands criminal jurisdiction over contractors;
- Strengthening
government standards for procurement, contracting, and management of
contractors, backed with an effective reporting mechanism; - Placing
legal obligations on companies for vetting, training, controlling and
managing their personnel, and charging the Department of Defense with
establishing a robust certification or licensing program for all U.S.
government security contractors; and - Working
with Congress, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State to
establish and mandate compensation mechanisms for victims of contractor
abuse.
"The United States must take responsibility for the civilian contractors it fields on U.S.
government missions abroad. Contractors perform necessary and often
courageous service, but letting even a few act with impunity stains our
reputation and undermines the credibility of our efforts. At stake is
our integrity as a nation committed to the rule of law," Massimino
added.
In January, Human Rights First released a comprehensive report, Private Security Contractors at War: Ending the Culture of Impunity,
that laid out the broad problem of contractor impunity, analyzed the
current legal framework, and set forth detailed recommendations to
establish accountability. The report found that although should be
strengthened, current laws provide an adequate basis for criminal
accountability for many contractors, and that government
inaction - particularly on the part of the Justice Department - has been
the main stumbling block. The new blueprint lays out concrete steps for
the next administration to reverse course and end impunity.
The blueprint, How to End Impunity for Private Security and Other Contractors: Blueprint for the Next Administration,
is the third in a series of strategy papers released by Human Rights
First to guide the next administration in restoring American leadership
in human rights in critical spheres. The first paper in the series, How to Close Guantanamo: A Blueprint for the Next Administration, was released in August 2008, and the second, How to End Torture and Cruel Treatment: Blueprint for the Next Administration, was released in October 2008.
Human Rights First is a non-profit, nonpartisan international human rights organization based in New York and Washington D.C. Human Rights First believes that building respect for human rights and the rule of law will help ensure the dignity to which every individual is entitled and will stem tyranny, extremism, intolerance, and violence.
LATEST NEWS
As Senate Prepares for NDAA Vote, Progressive Caucus Says It Is 'Past Time' to Slash Pentagon Budget
"This legislation on balance moves our country and our national priorities in the wrong direction," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal.
Dec 12, 2024
As Senate Democrats prepared to move forward with a procedural vote on the annual defense budget package that passed in the House earlier this week, the Congressional Progressive Caucus outlined its objections to the legislation and called for the Pentagon budget to be cut, with military funding freed up to "reinvest in critical human needs."
CPC Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said following the passage of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2025 (H.R. 5009) that "it should alarm every American taxpayer that we are nearing a trillion-dollar annual budget for an agency rampant with waste, fraud, and abuse."
Jayapal, who was one of 140 lawmakers to oppose the package, emphasized that the Pentagon has failed seven consecutive annual audits.
Despite being the only federal agency to never have passed a federal audit, said Jayapal, the Department of Defense "continues to receive huge boosts to funding every year. Our constituents deserve better."
As Common Dreams reported last month, more than half of the department's annual budget now goes to military contractors that consistently overcharge the government, contributing to the Pentagon's inability to fully account for trillions of taxpayer dollars.
The $883.7 billion legislation that was advanced by the House on Wednesday would pour more money into the Pentagon's coffers. The package includes more than $500 million in Israeli military aid and two $357 million nuclear-powered attack submarine despite the Pentagon requesting only one, and would cut more than $621 million from President Joe Biden's budget request for climate action initiatives.
Jayapal noted that the legislation—which was passed with the support of 81 Democrats and 200 Republicans—also includes anti-transgender provisions, barring the children of military service members from receiving gender-affirming healthcare in "the first federal statute targeting LGBTQ people since the 1990s when Congress adopted 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and the Defense of Marriage Act."
"This dangerous bigotry cannot be tolerated, let alone codified into federal law," said Jayapal.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday that the legislation "has some very good things we Democrats wanted in it, it has some bad things we wouldn't have put in there, and some things that were left out," and indicated that he had filed cloture for the first procedural vote on the NDAA.
The vote is expected to take place early next week, and 60 votes are needed to begin debate on the package.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime critic of exorbitant U.S. military spending, said in a floor speech on Wednesday that he plans to vote no on the budget.
"While middle-class and working-class families are struggling to survive, we supposedly just don't have the financial resources to help them," he said. "We just cannot afford to build more housing, we just cannot afford to provide quality childcare to our kids or to support public education, or to provide healthcare to all."
"But when the military industrial complex and all of their well-paid lobbyists come marching in to Capitol Hill," he continued, "somehow or another, there is more than enough money for Congress to provide them with virtually everything that they need."
Jayapal noted that the funding package includes substantive pay raises for service members and new investments in housing, healthcare, childcare, and other support for their families.
"Progressives will always fight to increase pay for our service members and ensure that our veterans are well taken care of," said Jayapal. "However, this legislation on balance moves our country and our national priorities in the wrong direction."
By cutting military spending, she said, the federal government could invest in the needs of all Americans, not just members of the military, "without sacrificing our national security or service member wages."
"It's past time we stop padding the pockets of price gouging military contractors who benefit from corporate consolidation," said Jayapal, "and reallocate that money to domestic needs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Urge Biden to Limit Presidential Authority to Launch Nuclear War Before Trump Takes Charge
"As Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office, it is more important than ever to take the power to start a nuclear war out of the hands of a single individual and ensure that Congress's constitutional role is respected and fulfilled," wrote Sen. Edward Markey and Rep. Ted Lieu.
Dec 12, 2024
Two Democratic lawmakers sent a letter to outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden Thursday, urging him to place more checks on potential nuclear weapons use by mandating that a president must obtain authorization from Congress before initiating a nuclear first strike.
The letter writers, Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), argue that "such a policy would provide clear directives for the military to follow: A president could order a nuclear launch only if (1) Congress had approved the decision, providing a constitutional check on executive power or (2) the United States had already been attacked with a nuclear weapon. This would be infinitely safer than our current doctrine."
The two write that time is of the essence: "As Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office, it is more important than ever to take the power to start a nuclear war out of the hands of a single individual and ensure that Congress's constitutional role is respected and fulfilled."
The Constitution vests Congress, not the president, with the power to declare war (though presidents have used military force without getting the OK from Congress on multiple occasions in modern history, according to the National Constitution Center).
During the Cold War, when nuclear weapons policy was produced, speed was seen as essential to deterrence, according to Jon Wolfsthal, the director of global risk at the Federation of American Scientists, who wrote an op-ed for The Washington Post last year that makes a similar argument to Markey and Lieu.
"There is no reason today to rely on speedy decision-making during situations in which the United States might launch first. Even as relations with Moscow are at historic lows, we are worlds removed from the Cold War's dominant knife's-edge logic," he wrote.
While nuclear tensions today may not be quite as high as they were during the apex of the Cold War, fears of nuclear confrontation have been heightened due to poor relations between the United States and Russia over the ongoing war in Ukraine, among other issues. Last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree lowering the threshold for potential nuclear weapons use not long after the U.S. greenlit Ukraine's use of U.S.-supplied long range weapons in its fight against Russia.
This is not the first time Markey and Lieu have pushed for greater guardrails on nuclear first-use. The two are the authors of the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act, a proposed bill first introduced in 2017 that would bar a U.S. president from launching a nuclear first strike without the consent of Congress.
"We first introduced this act during the Obama administration not as a partisan effort, but to make the larger point that current U.S. policy, which gives the president sole authority to launch nuclear weapons without any input from Congress, is dangerous," they wrote.
In their letter, Markey and Lieu also recount an episode from the first Trump presidency when, shortly after the January 6 insurrection, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley ordered his staff to come to him if they received a nuclear strike order from Trump.
But Milley's ability to intervene was limited, according to Lieu and Markey, because his role is advisory and "the president can unilaterally make a launch decision and implement it directly without informing senior leaders." They argue this episode is a sign that the rules themselves must change.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amnesty Urges War Crimes Probe of 'Indiscriminate' Israeli Attacks on Lebanon
"The latest evidence of unlawful airstrikes during Israel's most recent offensive in Lebanon underscores the urgent need for all states, especially the United States, to suspend arms transfers," said one campaigner.
Dec 12, 2024
Amnesty International on Thursday called for a war crimes investigation into recent Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon that killed dozens of civilians, as well as a suspension of arms transfers to Israel as it attacks Gaza, the West Bank, and Syria.
In a briefing paper titled The Sky Rained Missiles, Amnesty "documented four illustrative cases in which unlawful Israeli strikes killed at least 49 civilians" in Lebanon in September and October amid an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) campaign of invasion and bombardment that Lebanese officials say has killed or wounded more than 20,000 people.
"Amnesty International found that Israeli forces unlawfully struck residential buildings in the village of al-Ain in northern Bekaa on September 29, the village of Aitou in northern Lebanon on October 14, and in Baalbeck city on October 21," the rights group said. "Israeli forces also unlawfully attacked the municipal headquarters in Nabatieh in southern Lebanon on October 16."
Erika Guevara Rosas, Amnesty's senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, said in a statement that "these four attacks are emblematic of Israel's shocking disregard for civilian lives in Lebanon and their willingness to flout international law."
The September 29 attack "destroyed the house of the Syrian al-Shaar family, killing all nine members of the family who were sleeping inside," the report states.
"This is a civilian house, there is no military target in it whatsoever," village mukhtar, or leader, Youssef Jaafar told Amnesty. "It is full of kids. This family is well-known in town."
On October 16, Israel bombed the Nabatieh municipal complex, killing Mayor Ahmad Khalil and 10 other people.
"The airstrike took place without warning, just as the municipality's crisis unit was meeting to coordinate deliveries of aid, including food, water, and medicine, to residents and internally displaced people who had fled bombardment in other parts of southern Lebanon," Amnesty said, adding that there was no apparent military target in the immediate area.
In the deadliest single strike detailed in the Amnesty report, IDF bombardment believed to be targeting a suspected Hezbollah member killed 23 civilians forcibly displaced from southern Lebanon in Aitou on October 14.
"The youngest casualty was Aline, a 5-month-old baby who was flung from the house into a pickup truck nearby and was found by rescue workers the day after the strike," Amnesty said.
Survivor Jinane Hijazi told Amnesty: "I've lost everything; my entire family, my parents, my siblings, my daughter. I wish I had died that day too."
As the report notes:
A fragment of the munition found at the site of the attack was analyzed by an Amnesty International weapons expert and based upon its size, shape, and the scalloped edges of the heavy metal casing, identified as most likely a MK-80 series aerial bomb, which would mean it was at least a 500-pound bomb. The United States is the primary supplier of these types of munitions to Israel.
"The means and method of this attack on a house full of civilians likely would make this an indiscriminate attack and it also may have been disproportionate given the presence of a large number of civilians at the time of the strike," Amnesty stressed. "It should be investigated as a war crime."
The October 21 strike destroyed a building housing 13 members of the Othman family, killing two women and four children and wounding seven others.
"My son woke me up; he was thirsty and wanted to drink. I gave him water and he went back to sleep, hugging his brother," survivor Fatima Drai—who lost her two sons Hassan, 5, and Hussein, 3, in the attack—told Amnesty.
"When he hugged his brother, I smiled and thought, I'll tell his father how our son is when he comes back," she added. "I went to pray, and then everything around me exploded. A gas canister exploded, burning my feet, and within seconds, it consumed my kids' room."
Guevara Rosas said: "These attacks must be investigated as war crimes. The Lebanese government must urgently call for a special session at the U.N. Human Rights Council to establish an independent investigative mechanism into the alleged violations and crimes committed by all parties in this conflict. It must also grant the International Criminal Court jurisdiction over Rome Statute crimes committed on Lebanese territory."
"Israel has an appalling track record of carrying out unlawful airstrikes in Gaza and past wars in Lebanon taking a devastating toll on civilians."
Last month, the court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with Israel's 433-day Gaza onslaught, which has left more than 162,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing in the embattled enclave.
The tribunal also issued a warrant for the arrest of Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri for alleged crimes committed during and after the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, in which more than 1,100 people were killed and over 240 others were kidnapped.
Meanwhile, the International Court of Justice is weighing a genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel. Last week, Amnesty published a report accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.
The United States—which provides Israel with tens of billions of dollars in military aid and diplomatic cover—has also been accused of complicity in Israeli war crimes in Palestine and Lebanon.
"Israel has an appalling track record of carrying out unlawful airstrikes in Gaza and past wars in Lebanon taking a devastating toll on civilians," Guevara Rosas said. "The latest evidence of unlawful air strikes during Israel's most recent offensive in Lebanon underscores the urgent need for all states, especially the United States, to suspend arms transfers to Israel due to the risk they will be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular