Erik Prince is the founder of Blackwater, a private military company that has a strong presence in Iraq and is tied to various evangelical organizations. Blackwater has recently been investigated by Congress due to allegations that members of the organization smuggled weapons into Iraq that later found their way into the hangs of Kurdistan Workers Party, which has been deemed a terrorist group by various organizations. Blackwater is probably best known for the high number of civilian deaths attributed to the group and the December 2006 killing of a VP guard in Iraq by a drunken Blackwater employee.
You would think with all these accusations against the company that Prince would step and "face the music" (for lack of a better term). But in his recent interview with Newsweek he comes across as whiny and at best sounds like an insolent child trying to deflect all responsibility from himself and his organization. Obviously, the CEO of a company is expected to protect it all costs, but I think his evasiveness with the public hurts Blackwater's image more than it helps it. He doesn't answer questions directly and instead provides a sort of half-answer.
An example of this can be seen when Newsweek asked him outright about the high civilian casualty rate:
Newsweek: On recent allegations and events, Blackwater [has been accused of] a higher civilian casualty rate than other contractors and a higher per-convoy casualty rate.
Prince: We operate … in Baghdad, which is where you also find the vast majority of U.S. military casualties, death, attacks. … There's 170-some security companies operating in Iraq. Many [don't have] the screening, vetting, training, oversight requirements we do.
There is no attempt to really explain why the high causality rate may not Blackwater's fault, he basically just says that there are a lot of deaths in Iraq. But how does that explain why his contractors have a high civilian causality rate? He just brushes Newsweek's statement under the table.
People like Prince tend to rub the wrong way. I'm not a super moralistic individual or anything, but I believe that people should try to avoid being evasive when asked about certain key issues (which civilian casualties certainly are).
I think I have too much time on my hands here to mull over issues like this, but on the positive side I also have the time to read articles and stuff that I probably wouldn't have had time to read were I still in school.
Oh, and in regards to my last "political post", I chose not to include Ron Paul in my list of viable candidates because I don't think he has the slightest chance of gaining the Republican nomination. And even if he was able to miraculously pull that off, I doubt he would be able to steal many people from the Democrats because of his obvious pro-life stance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I believe that people should try to avoid being evasive when asked about certain key issues.
While you might not be moralistic, you certainly are a bit optimistic about what to expect out of political affairs.
But it still goes without saying that Prince is about to be the burnt offering of a massive witch hunt for mercenaries. There is a clear correlation between the quality of officer training and these undisciplined homicidal acts. For instance, in the hearings for the My Lai massacre of 1968, it was exposed that the guilty CO's were inexperienced.
It is arguable whether Blackwater contractors, whose credentials are generally based upon special forces and recon work, have skills equivalent to the CO of a infantry platoon with adequate battle experience. That is, does elite forces training make you more qualified in terms of leadership?
Post a Comment