Wednesday
Nov252009
Assassination in Pakistan: Is Blackwater Involved with US Military Hit Squads?
Wednesday, November 25, 2009 at 9:54 
Jeremy Scahill, author of the breakthrough book on Blackwater in Iraq, now casts an eye on the possible involvement of the company, renamed Xe, in the US military's covert operations in Pakistan. He writes in The Nation:At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help run a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.
Coming Soon to Your Country: US Government “Hit Squads”?
The source, who has worked on covert US military programs for years, including in Afghanistan and Pakistan, has direct knowledge of Blackwater's involvement. He spoke toThe Nation on condition of anonymity because the program is classified. The source said that the program is so "compartmentalized" that senior figures within the Obama administration and the US military chain of command may not be aware of its existence.
The White House did not return calls or email messages seeking comment for this story. Capt. John Kirby, the spokesperson for Adm. Michael Mullen, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Nation, "We do not discuss current operations one way or the other, regardless of their nature." A defense official, on background, specifically denied that Blackwater performs work on drone strikes or intelligence for JSOC in Pakistan. "We don't have any contracts to do that work for us. We don't contract that kind of work out, period," the official said. "There has not been, and is not now, contracts between JSOC and that organization for these types of services."
The previously unreported program, the military intelligence source said, is distinct from the CIA assassination program that the agency's director, Leon Panetta, announced he had canceled in June 2009. "This is a parallel operation to the CIA," said the source. "They are two separate beasts." The program puts Blackwater at the epicenter of a US military operation within the borders of a nation against which the United States has not declared war--knowledge that could further strain the already tense relations between the United States and Pakistan. In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country. Blackwater, which recently changed its name to Xe Services and US Training Center, denies the company is operating in Pakistan. "Xe Services has only one employee in Pakistan performing construction oversight for the U.S. Government," Blackwater spokesperson Mark Corallo said in a statement to The Nation, adding that the company has "no other operations of any kind in Pakistan."
A former senior executive at Blackwater confirmed the military intelligence source's claim that the company is working in Pakistan for the CIA and JSOC, the premier counterterrorism and covert operations force within the military. He said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North-West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan. This arrangement, the former executive said, allows the Pakistani government to utilize former US Special Operations forces who now work for Blackwater while denying an official US military presence in the country. He also confirmed that Blackwater has a facility in Karachi and has personnel deployed elsewhere in Pakistan. The former executive spoke on condition of anonymity.
His account and that of the military intelligence source were borne out by a US military source who has knowledge of Special Forces actions in Pakistan and Afghanistan. When asked about Blackwater's covert work for JSOC in Pakistan, this source, who also asked for anonymity, told The Nation, "From my information that I have, that is absolutely correct," adding, "There's no question that's occurring."
"It wouldn't surprise me because we've outsourced nearly everything," said Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff from 2002 to 2005, when told of Blackwater's role in Pakistan. Wilkerson said that during his time in the Bush administration, he saw the beginnings of Blackwater's involvement with the sensitive operations of the military and CIA. "Part of this, of course, is an attempt to get around the constraints the Congress has placed on DoD. If you don't have sufficient soldiers to do it, you hire civilians to do it. I mean, it's that simple. It would not surprise me."
The Counterterrorism Tag Team in Karachi
The covert JSOC program with Blackwater in Pakistan dates back to at least 2007, according to the military intelligence source. The current head of JSOC is Vice Adm. William McRaven, who took over the post from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who headed JSOC from 2003 to 2008 before being named the top US commander in Afghanistan. Blackwater's presence in Pakistan is "not really visible, and that's why nobody has cracked down on it," said the source. Blackwater's operations in Pakistan, he said, are not done through State Department contracts or publicly identified Defense contracts. "It's Blackwater via JSOC, and it's a classified no-bid [contract] approved on a rolling basis." The main JSOC/Blackwater facility in Karachi, according to the source, is nondescript: three trailers with various generators, satellite phones and computer systems are used as a makeshift operations center. "It's a very rudimentary operation," says the source. "I would compare it to [CIA] outposts in Kurdistan or any of the Special Forces outposts. It's very bare bones, and that's the point."
Blackwater's work for JSOC in Karachi is coordinated out of a Task Force based at Bagram Air Base in neighboring Afghanistan, according to the military intelligence source. While JSOC technically runs the operations in Karachi, he said, it is largely staffed by former US special operations soldiers working for a division of Blackwater, once known as Blackwater SELECT, and intelligence analysts working for a Blackwater affiliate, Total Intelligence Solutions (TIS), which is owned by Blackwater's founder, Erik Prince. The military source said that the name Blackwater SELECT may have been changed recently. Total Intelligence, which is run out of an office on the ninth floor of a building in the Ballston area of Arlington, Virginia, is staffed by former analysts and operatives from the CIA, DIA, FBI and other agencies. It is modeled after the CIA's counterterrorism center. In Karachi, TIS runs a "media-scouring/open-source network," according to the source. Until recently, Total Intelligence was run by two former top CIA officials, Cofer Black and Robert Richer, both of whom have left the company. In Pakistan, Blackwater is not using either its original name or its new moniker, Xe Services, according to the former Blackwater executive. "They are running most of their work through TIS because the other two [names] have such a stain on them," he said. Corallo, the Blackwater spokesperson, denied that TIS or any other division or affiliate of Blackwater has any personnel in Pakistan.
The US military intelligence source said that Blackwater's classified contracts keep getting renewed at the request of JSOC. Blackwater, he said, is already so deeply entrenched that it has become a staple of the US military operations in Pakistan. According to the former Blackwater executive, "The politics that go with the brand of BW is somewhat set aside because what you're doing is really one military guy to another." Blackwater's first known contract with the CIA for operations in Afghanistan was awarded in 2002 and was for work along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
One of the concerns raised by the military intelligence source is that some Blackwater personnel are being given rolling security clearances above their approved clearances. Using Alternative Compartmentalized Control Measures (ACCMs), he said, the Blackwater personnel are granted clearance to a Special Access Program, the bureaucratic term used to describe highly classified "black" operations. "With an ACCM, the security manager can grant access to you to be exposed to and operate within compartmentalized programs far above 'secret'--even though you have no business doing so," said the source. It allows Blackwater personnel that "do not have the requisite security clearance or do not hold a security clearance whatsoever to participate in classified operations by virtue of trust," he added. "Think of it as an ultra-exclusive level above top secret. That's exactly what it is: a circle of love." Blackwater, therefore, has access to "all source" reports that are culled in part from JSOC units in the field. "That's how a lot of things over the years have been conducted with contractors," said the source. "We have contractors that regularly see things that top policy-makers don't unless they ask."
According to the source, Blackwater has effectively marketed itself as a company whose operatives have "conducted lethal direct action missions and now, for a price, you can have your own planning cell. JSOC just ate that up," he said, adding, "They have a sizable force in Pakistan--not for any nefarious purpose if you really want to look at it that way--but to support a legitimate contract that's classified for JSOC." Blackwater's Pakistan JSOC contracts are secret and are therefore shielded from public oversight, he said. The source is not sure when the arrangement with JSOC began, but he says that a spin-off of Blackwater SELECT "was issued a no-bid contract for support to shooters for a JSOC Task Force and they kept extending it." Some of the Blackwater personnel, he said, work undercover as aid workers. "Nobody even gives them a second thought."
The military intelligence source said that the Blackwater/JSOC Karachi operation is referred to as "Qatar cubed," in reference to the US forward operating base in Qatar that served as the hub for the planning and implementation of the US invasion of Iraq. "This is supposed to be the brave new world," he says. "This is the Jamestown of the new millennium and it's meant to be a lily pad. You can jump off to Uzbekistan, you can jump back over the border, you can jump sideways, you can jump northwest. It's strategically located so that they can get their people wherever they have to without having to wrangle with the military chain of command in Afghanistan, which is convoluted. They don't have to deal with that because they're operating under a classified mandate."
In addition to planning drone strikes and operations against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Pakistan for both JSOC and the CIA, the Blackwater team in Karachi also helps plan missions for JSOC inside Uzbekistan against the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, according to the military intelligence source. Blackwater does not actually carry out the operations, he said, which are executed on the ground by JSOC forces. "That piqued my curiosity and really worries me because I don't know if you noticed but I was never told we are at war with Uzbekistan," he said. "So, did I miss something, did Rumsfeld come back into power?"
Read rest of article....
Reader Comments (10)
It is difficult to discern the main issues. There are a lot of buzz words that will inflame readers' passions and hatred. Some of the names dropped will provoke an automatic hate response from the reader who will be blinded to the underlining issues that could be addressed.
Does everyone agree that killing the Taliban and Al Qaeda is a good thing? Would everyone acknowledge that on any battlefield, small or large that engaging an enemy often results in innocent civilian casualties and/or casualties of persons of mixed motives?
Is it agreed that spies and assassins must have cover stories, secret identities, operating bases etc. ... secret networks... and that spies living in hostile environments have cover stories and lives including owning companies?
The names, places, details, buzz words and buzz-Names and hated personalities is not the issue necessarily.
What are the main issues here? Oversight? Killing of innocent civilians? That could be something to be discussed and analyzed. Giving away secrets and causing diplomatic scandals doesn't seem like a good idea.
If the President is the commander-in-chief, can't he himself or his delegated agents with his permission jump the chain of command downward to any level? How should the President establish oversight and who of his delegates should inform Congress? Is the President or any of his inner circle informed about these rogue elements? When the President delegates authority he can not be informed by this delegated person or persons on a second by second basis, so what would be a briefing method that would work?
Front companies, secret companies is not the issue per se. Nor is it about personalities. Finding a disturbing and secret operation with the involvement of a hated personality is not necessarily an "ah ha" moment.
Hmmmm ... so Blackwater has taken over from the Navy Seals?
That would be true if we are to believe Seymour Hersh's description of the "executive assassination ring" (cue in Twilight Zone music): http://www.truthout.org/031209J
"It's complicated because the guys doing it are not murderers, and yet they are committing what we would normally call murder. It's a very complicated issue. Because they are young men that went into the Special Forces. The Delta Forces you've heard about. Navy Seal teams. Highly specialized".
Jeremy Scahill's breathless, doubtless Pulitzer-motivated reportage is interesting to the informed and concerned reader, however the comments by "Doug" are spot-on.
Whether we like it or not the types of people and actions described are and have always been an unfortunate but vital necessity during the course of lethal conflicts between combatants. Schahill obviously lacks the judgemental skills to fully comprehend that open discussion of these subjects have consequences of which he's either unaware of (unlikely), or indifferent to (likely). The next time we see, for example, a blindfolded UN food aid distribution worker or a US service member on a Jihadi web site having his head sawn off with a butcher knife while Schahill's article is being quoted, we can conclude that such connections are a reality, and that in the netherworld of certain regions unsubstantiated speculation in printed form quickly transmongrifies into actionable "facts" and revealed "truth".
The beauty of Schahill's type of journalism is that detailed and confirming fact-checking is not possible (it's editor-proof), thus by using his admitted writing skills he can easily have cobbled together a melange of wire-service stories, conversations with convincing Rambo wannabe's, a fertile imagination, and possibly indiscreet comments by some who actually know what they're talking about. One is reminded of certain notorious former reporters for national US news organizations. Those of Schahill's persuasion wrap themselves in sanctimony about "open government", claims of First Amendment rights, and appeals to idealized standards of behavior which are just that - idealized, and thus divorced from both reality and necessity.
Should Schahill wish to have a real story I recommend him to visit with some of the Jihadis currently resident in Afhanistan and Pakistan, engaging them in detailed discussions of the theological justifications and rationales behind their activities, pointing out to them that better-credentialed Islamic scholars than they feel that their actions are contrary to the teachings of their religion. The outcome of such an interview will be some hard-hitting journalism, or perhaps something else.
You both make good points. I don't know if Schahill addresses the following issues directly as I haven't had time to read the entire article yet, but they were discussed the other day on CNN's 'Amanpour' show in a related context: the use of drones in Afghanistan. One reason why bringing these sorts of stories to light could be beneficial is to have an open discussion of the legality of allowing civilians (CIA, Blackwater) to carry out acts of war instead of military forces and the Defense Dept. Another is if you go outside the war zone (to Pakistan for example) and target people, that is not war but an infringement of Pakistani sovereignty, and in that case if you still want to apprehend those individuals you need to follow the rule of law, pursue them and bring them to justice. And regardless whether the CIA contracts targeted killings out to Blackwater or does them itself, should the CIA be used as as a means of targeting people for death, seeing as historically it's been mostly an intelligence-gathering organisation? Does this mean that the United States now has an official policy of targeted assassination? Is that legal domestically and internationally? Who makes the policy? Who is accountable? Who has oversight? It would seem that if revelations like Schahill 's are out in the open then at least issues of legality and accountability should be part of the equation.
Quoting Catherine -- "And regardless whether the CIA contracts targeted killings out to Blackwater or does them itself, should the CIA be used as as a means of targeting people for death, seeing as historically it’s been mostly an intelligence-gathering organisation?"
********
They have in the past. Plans were devised for the 'Cuban Project' (Mongoose) to assassinate Fidel Castro. The CIA was also involved in the assassination of the Congo's Lumumba. And those are just 2 examples.
There are more example, too, which is why I said "mostly".
Well, the CIA has a long history in that. So why not?
[Duplicate post due to being caught in spam filter- sorry pessimist -MD]
Quoting -- "Should Schahill wish to have a real story I recommend him to visit with some of the Jihadis currently resident in Afhanistan and Pakistan, engaging them in detailed discussions of the theological justifications and rationales behind their activities, pointing out to them that better-credentialed Islamic scholars than they feel that their actions are contrary to the teachings of their religion. The outcome of such an interview will be some hard-hitting journalism, or perhaps something else."
**********
But we don't see scholars of Islam criticising jihadi interpretations of the Koran - Muslim scholars especially. I believe that these jihadists really are practicing 7th century Islam. Acts of war and other violence can be found in the Bible as well, but there is a difference here -- The Crusades have to be taken into historical context and the battles in the Bible are DESCRIPTIVE. There was a specific time and place for such actions. In the Bible, God ordered the killing of the Canaanites. But in no way were acts of war codified in Jewish law. It is historical context only. It is also important to note that the Crusades were defensive. The Christians wanted to take back their lands and stop the advancing Muslim tidal wave. The Koran, on the other hand, is PRESCRIPTIVE. What the jihadists practice and preach is actually part of Islamic theology. It is codified in Islamic law and applies at all times. Unlike the Old Testament, the Koranic 'sword-verses' transcend time. They apply today just as much as they did yesterday.
(BTW, I posted this earlier but it never got posted, technical glitch ?)
What struck me most is this revolving thing, army going to private, but hugely paid, yet paid for by state institutions = tax payers money. Thing is, it's not even sure it's on the bills, so the overall cost of the wars are higher than official statements. This means that sometimes it's financed by other sources..
Then there's the money that goes to the Taliban through all these contracted big and smaller groups just to get the logistics through (other nyt article I think)
As in all wars, bizniz is bizniz.
Shayton :
<I recommend him to visit with some of the Jihadis currently resident in Afhanistan and Pakistan, engaging them in detailed discussions of the theological justifications and rationales behind their activities, pointing out to them that better-credentialed Islamic scholars than they feel that their actions are contrary to the teachings of their religion.
No need to go anywhere, you can do that on their blogs. They're fully aware of 'better credentialed' scholars, and one one site I saw how some were complaining that they weren't educated enough to argue with them.
and update with Dave's reply, in fact they do seem to disagree, among themselves and with educated scholars