It's this: the hollowing out of the federal government and the military services by outsourcing core public services to mercenaries. Embassy protection had always been the responsibility of the U.S. Marine Corps. The guys who work for outfits like ArmorGroup North America (AGNA) are paid reams more of the green stuff than leathernecks and soldiers. And the outfits they work for don't provide these essential services out of patriotism: they're duty-bound to make as much profit as possible for the flagship corporation --- in this case "Wackenhut," which sounds like a name that would be given to one of the inhumanoid demons scrawled and splattered into existence by Ralph Steadman (see upper left).
This variety of heist has to be obvious to everyone in the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill. It's justified by the baldfaced lie that the business sector does everything more efficiently than the government. In fact, the only thing the business sector does more efficiently than government is pillage the U.S. Treasury on behalf of corporation executives. I'll award an aluminum-plated Gordian Knot for the first MBA who can convince me that a corporation can provide highly trained and disciplined security personnel, loyal only to the defense of the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, for a lower price than the salary and benefits of a U.S. Marine.
It should go without saying that the situation at the embassy in Kabul is a completely logical and predictable outcome of using mercenaries to perform inherently governmental work, and it is intolerable that the Congress and the White House should allow this situation to persist for even another day.
Editor's note: the portrait of "Sir Wackenhut" (my nomenclature) is by Ralph Steadman, copyright owned by him or his masters. Fair use is claimed as the image is used here solely for purposes of social commentary and education, for no profit to anyone.
The "long tail" costs of benefits, retirements, rehabilitation and care (for life) from injuries, relatively occassional burial benefits, etc. just might justify only the upfront cost comparison. Fundamental motivations, contingency scenarios of switching sides on you, level of fielded preparedness/training, and other aspects also enter the debate.
ReplyDeleteAnon: exactly my point, but I didn't have the right words to express it like you did. My general gloss on it was one of loyalty, i.e., mercenaries don't have it.
ReplyDeleteAnother consideration --- although there are probably dirty little laws to cover this --- might be government liability for mercs who violate treaties, international laws, criminal statutes, etc. There's no bargain there anywhere for the U.S. Treasury, the taxpayer, or the people in the field who depend on the mercs for their safety and mission effectiveness.