Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > Area Studies > Africa

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-23-2010, 10:30   #1
Blackdog
Quiet Professional
 
Blackdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fayetteville
Posts: 14
AFRICOM (DOD) or STATE - Who's the real lead in Africa

Comments by General Ward recently that AFRICOM doesn't use PMCs were true, but not completely accurate. State has several vehicles for addressing security sector issues and has been keeping contractors busy for a while. I'm cutting in a David Isenberg piece below. While I currently have a vested interest in State retaining primacy in security sector training on the continent, Its easy to see how our allies, friends interests and detractors might find the situation, at best confusing, and at worst nefarious.

Writes Isenberg:

"With all the attention being paid to private military and security contractors working in Iraq and Afghanistan it is easy to forget they operate in other parts of the world. But it would be wrong to do so. While PMCs are to the best of my knowledge not, at least not yet, operating in the Arctic, they are just about everywhere else.

And one region where they are increasingly prominent is Africa, the region most closely identified with the modern private security contractor. This is the region that produced the now disbanded Executive Outcomes, the most famous PMC in modern history. Just as Africa is the birthplace of humanity it is also the birthplace of the modern PMC.

While EO no longer exists the use of PMC by the U.S. and commercial firms has steadily increased.

One impetus for the growth of PMC there was the Pentagon's October 2007 establishment of AFRICOM (United States African Command), the U.S. military's most recent unified command. To its credit, unlike other unified commands, AFRICOM, responsible for military relations with 53 African nations, focuses on war-prevention, rather than war-fighting. But because the U.S. military deliberately chooses to keep a small military presence in Africa it must rely to a greater degree on private contractors.

As Aviation Week reported on March 17:

The prospect of a mass deployment of U.S. contractors is worrisome to more than a few observers outside of Africom. Contractors have generally performed creditably in Iraq and Afghanistan, but their presence raises issues pertaining to control of their activities, which authority--U.S. or local--has legal responsibility for them and, of course, their cost. Many observers argue that the money spent on contractors is excessive and would be better invested in local economies.

But where Africom might not have the capacity to perform these missions across the continent (it has a staff of about 1,200 spread over 53 countries), the State Dept. is spending almost $100 million a year to pay military contractors to train local forces through its African Contingency Operations Training and Assistance program. In the Fiscal 2010 State-Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, the Obama administration is asking for $96.8 million in funding for the program, which, since 2005, has trained more than 77,000 from about two dozen African nations. But the program is not without critics. A June 2008 Government Accountability Office report found that the State Dept. has had trouble "assessing the proficiency of trained peacekeepers against standard skills taught in training and accounting for the activities of trained instructors."


It is not hard to find examples of PMC doing work for AFRICOM. In January the State Department awarded DynCorp International a task order for operations and maintenance support in Liberia, under the AFRICAP contract.

AFRICAP is a State Dept. program that uses contractors to provide military training, perform advisory missions and provide logistical support and construction services for State's programs across Africa. In September 2009, the department awarded a 5-year, multiple-award, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to three companies: PAE Government Services; DynCorp International and Protection Strategies Inc., with the ceiling for each coming in at $375 million.

The task order, with a value of $5.2 million for the initial 6 month base period, has a potential total value of $20 million over two years if all options are exercised. Under the task order, DynCorp will provide operations and maintenance support for facilities of the Armed Forces of Liberia at Edward B. Kesselly Barracks and Camp Ware in Liberia. Services provided will include electrical power generation, water supply, waste disposal, and vehicle maintenance.

In 2008 I noted that DynCorp has previously provided logistical support and training for peacekeepers in Liberia and Somalia.

In Liberia DynCorp and PAE worked together in the Security Sector Reform program, funded by the State Department. DynCorp was contracted to provide basic facilities and basic training for the Armed Forces of Liberia, while PAE won the contract for building some bases, forming and structuring the AFL and its component units, and for providing specialized and advanced training, including mentoring the AFL's fledgling officer and non-commissioned officer corps. DynCorp's job was essentially to "recruit and make soldiers," while PAE is employed to "mentor and develop" them into a fully operational force.

MPRI has also provided training for the militaries of Benin, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mali, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda and Senegal under the State Department's African Contingency Operations and Assistance Program, (formerly the African Crisis Response Initiative), and separately provided training and analysis to the South African military.

Northrop Grumman also operated under a $75 million contract to support the ACOAP program, which aimed to train 40,000 African peacekeepers over five years.

KBR provided services to at least three bases in Djibouti, Kenya and Ethiopia used by the U.S. Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa.

Just last week NATO reported that in response to the African Union request for strategic airlift support to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), the United States used DynCorp to conduct airlift missions under the NATO banner in support of the Ugandan troop rotations. The airlift, which commenced on 5 Mar 2010 and was completed on 16 Mar 2010, transported 1700 Ugandan troops from Uganda into Mogadishu and re-deploying 850 Ugandan troops out of Mogadishu.

Back in January Gen William Ward, the head of AFRICOM, in an interview with Radio France said, that AFRICOM does not use PMC. But the AFRICOM public affairs office later clarified his statement to indicate that he referred only to security contractors. More importantly, State Department AFRICAP and ACOTA contracts do use security companies.

While, to date, Western PMCs, are thought to have conducted themselves reasonably well and fulfilled their contracts competently they are still viewed by many as being on probation. Last year Eeben Barlow, who founded Executive Outcomes, wrote on his blog:

A number of PMCs/PSCs are sponsored by Western governments who have motives that are not always obvious. These PMCs become their favoured companies to use - and they act on behalf of the sponsoring government's foreign policy and also act as intelligence fronts. They are not there to help clients but rather to advance their government's agendas - usually to the detriment of the client-government."
Blackdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2010, 14:59   #2
Richard
Quiet Professional
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NorCal
Posts: 15,370
Reading the Isenberg piece brought back memories - I certainly hope progress can be made there this time whoever has the lead.

And so it goes...

Richard's jaded $.02
__________________
“Sometimes the Bible in the hand of one man is worse than a whisky bottle in the hand of (another)… There are just some kind of men who – who’re so busy worrying about the next world they’ve never learned to live in this one, and you can look down the street and see the results.” - To Kill A Mockingbird (Atticus Finch)

“Almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.” - Robert Heinlein
Richard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 07:15   #3
afchic
Area Commander
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,644
Why would AFRICOM be different than any other Geographic COCOM out there?
afchic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2010, 20:12   #4
Marina
Guerrilla
 
Marina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa
Posts: 138
I think what General Ward was trying to say was that we do not use private security companies to protect US missions in Africa. Local guards (Africans) protect US embassies and consulates in Africa just like other local nationals protect 260 US missions in all other locations except Iraq, Afghanistan, and one or two other high threat areas.

USG does employ contractors to deliver training and other security assistance.

Who has primacy? Rather - who has resources? And authorities. SecDef has argued for two years or more that State needs resources to carry out its mission. DoD budget is around $650-700 billion; State is $25 billion to operate 265 overseas missions plus $25 billion in foreign assistance. Much of the assistance is earmarked for foreign military financing, contributions to international organizations and humanitarian projects. Very little goes to bilateral or regional security assistance in Africa.

Isenberg mentions a few of the programs. None of them are large. All of them are difficult with high political risk. Even combined, they are small ball compared to DoD programs.

Then there's the fact that USG couldn't get an appropriate African country to host AFRICOM. These countries may want some mil-mil, but they don't want a US COCOM and they certainly don't want our military training their civilians or gendarmerie. That is one reason why CJTF-HOA is such great proof of concept. USCG programs in Kenya and the Gulf of Guinea too.

State using contractors is a fig leaf that covers a full range of jerry-rigged solutions.
Marina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2010, 10:51   #5
KLB
Asset
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NC
Posts: 33
FOLLOW UP: AFRICOM AND PIRATES

Following up on the expanded role of AFRICOM... Go Navy!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USS Nicholas captures suspected pirates

<U.S. Naval Forces Africa Public Affairs>


INDIAN OCEAN, Apr 1, 2010 — USS Nicholas (FFG 47) captured suspected pirates on Thursday, April 1, 2010, after exchanging fire, sinking a skiff, and confiscating a suspected mother ship.

While operating west of the Seychelles in international waters, Nicholas reported taking fire at 12:27 a.m. local time from a suspected pirate skiff and returned fire before commencing pursuit of the vessel until the disabled skiff stopped.

At 1:59 a.m. personnel from Nicholas boarded the disabled skiff and detained three personnel. The boarding team found ammunition and multiple cans of fuel on board.

After taking the suspected pirates on board, Nicholas sank the disabled skiff at 2:59 a.m.

An additional two suspected pirates were captured on the confiscated mother ship.

The suspected pirates will remain in U.S. custody on board Nicholas until a determination is made regarding their disposition.

Piracy is an international maritime issue that consistently affects the safety and security of the sea. The U.S. Navy works to uphold maritime law in order to prevent an environment conducive to piracy.

Nicholas, an Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate homeported in Norfolk, Va., is currently supporting U.S. Naval Forces Africa. U.S. Naval Forces Africa is the naval component in support of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).

For more information, contact U.S. Naval Forces Africa Public Affairs at +39-081-568-3223 or e-mail: m-na-cne-c6fpao-gd@eu.navy.mil.
__________________
“For myself, I debarked in the country upon as doleful a frame as I had ever known. The place cheered me. It was like dying and going to hell. Nothing could be worse, so you might as well perk up.” - Slapdash
KLB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:32.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies