Blackwater Bribes Iraqi Officials for Silence Over Massacre
Bribery, a form of pecuniary corruption, is an act implying money or gift given that alters the behavior of the recipient. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined by Black’s Law Dictionary as the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in discharge of a public or legal duty.
The New York Times has just broken a major story that charges Blackwater with buying the silence of politicians about a criminal slaughter of Iraqi (unarmed) citizens. Nearly 1 million dollars extended to Iraqi politicians. Xe Services, the new name of Blackwater, has at least four executives that have come forward with information that high level bribery was used to gag potential damning repercussions.
Blackwater’s strategy of buying off the government officials, which would have been illegal under American law, created a deep rift inside the company, according to the former executives. They said that Cofer Black, who was then the company’s vice chairman and a former top CIA and State Department official, learned of the plan from another Blackwater manager while he was in Baghdad discussing compensation for families of the shooting victims with United States Embassy officials. NY Times
Former top executives at Blackwater Worldwide say the U.S. security contractor sent about $1 million to its Iraq office with the intention of paying off officials in the country who were angry about the fatal shootings of 17 civilians by Blackwater employees. AP
Context of Tragedy
During an escort operation in Nisour Square, Baghdad, independent contractors working for Blackwater Worldwide killed 17 innocent (and unarmed) civilians when a distant Kia sedan failed to clear a path for the convey. Evidence, although conflicting, seemed to point at the private contractors whom misidentified the situation and unleashed a torrent firepower on (unarmed) civilians. Conflicting reports say there may or may not have been Iraqi shooters, but an Iraqi general Abdul-Karim Khalaf stated that the contractors fired indiscriminately and openly at (unarmed) people.
The NY Times also reported that “one member of the Blackwater security team continued to fire on (unarmed) civilians, despite urgent cease-fire calls from colleagues. The incident was resolved after another Blackwater contractor pointed his own weapon at the man still firing and ordered him to stop”. A report coming from the Interior Ministry of Iraqi was scathing, “the murder of (unarmed) citizens in cold blood in al-Nissour area by the Blackwater is considered a terrorist action against the civilians just like any other terrorist operations”.
Currently, 5 Xe Services employee’s face manslaughter charges, with a 6th having already plead guilty to these murders. Blackwater remains banned from Iraq, yet remains under various names and doing a variety of services. Note that a cozy relationship existed with the Bush administration where abuses were dealt with very softly – this firm policed itself largely unfettered by American or International Law.
For Profit Industry Cares — About Profit
It’s surprising that people are shocked when private company ethically balks when confronted by an with a cost/benefit analysis. Blackwater has been paying off the families of the victims for some time to avoid lengthy litigation and costly verdicts. Further, to the politicians held the future of lucrative service contracts in the balance. Surely a million dollars ‘invested’ in the political regime would pay off exponentially in future contracts. This must be the moral flexibility of unrestrained capitalism.
Justice by Jurisdiction
Using jurisdiction not inconsistent within the scope the Constitution, Blackwater is being held accountable for the carnage they cause overseas. Individuals seeking redress have begun recovery on a slate of alleged torts. Civil penalties imposed by the courts, if substantially punitive, would force corrective behavior that the government has failed to legislate. Under the Alien Tort Claims Act of 1789, non resident companies conducting business in the United States have been subject to jurisdiction of claims arising from the violation of international law, Blackwater exceeds that threshold by far. Holding Blackwater accountable in American courts will likely not be an issue; unless they are granted some special war time immunity by government mandate.
In North Carolina a grand jury has been investigating Blackwater for some time. A former executed stated,
“that he had told federal prosecutors there about the plan to pay Iraqi officials to drop their inquiries into the Nisour Square case. If Blackwater followed through, the company or its officials could face charges of obstruction of justice and violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans bribes to foreign officials” NY Times
Reflection
Blackwater officials with operative knowledge of this scheme may face criminal indictments. It is unfortunate that only after so many years is a history of institutional corruption boiling to the surface. Use of a private army of contractors is not appropriate to fight wars. By using these pseudo forces who follow a higher law, profit, engender hatred upon the civilian populations at large.
Blackwater has nearly 1/2 billion dollars of contracts in Iraq. They worked on secret assassination programs , drone attack programs, and guard members of congress. They know the dirty secrets of the Bush wars. It is alleged this influence has been used to coerce special treatment.
The mantra that the regular armed forces can not competitively compete on these projects is widely rejected in military circles.
Happy Veterans Day, haha.
Blackwater people are not veterans we celebrate, they are very well paid mercenaries (which begs the question how can there services be cheaper?). US Military personal are the veterans which deserve accolades – ask any military member, they don’t do it for the money. Well, maybe the health insurance…
Even on a day that is not Veterans Day, anyone who questions a statement like yours risks condemnation. Still, I question it.
Why the accolades? Even if you are right that they don’t do it for money like any other job, why should their motivations matter? What is that motivation exactly? Are military occupations the only ones that have individuals with those motivations?
What are the unintended consequences of broad praise of the military that admits no dissent? Does that contribute to jingoism and aggressive foreign policy?
This issue is muddled with the heavy politicization of the current wars. Surely, you can sympathize with those volunteered to fight against the Nazi war of aggression. I would also say that various peacekeeping missions – which are dangerous – deserve respect. Do accolades correspond with the type of mission people are tasked? Indeed I believe they do. Let’s remember though, these soldiers dodge bullets not political comments. So when a democratic nation declares war with Iraq (Remember the Powell UN Speech) under pretenses that were later deemed false, do we rescind our thanks because the mission changed? I think we have to moderate blind patriotism while advocating a strong stance against unnecessary violence and conflict.
I’m not against veterans or against respecting them. But there is a big difference between respecting people and their career choices and singling out one (violent militaristic) career and constantly elevating it in a way that promotes dangerous political ideas.
Also 1/3 of homeless are vets.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2009/11/13-of-homeless-today-are-veterans.html
Shocking. Largely victims of PTSD. Another associated cost of war that lingers for decades.
The significance of Veteran’s Day has taken on a weird dual meaning in recent years. …
read more
http://moraloutrage.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/remembering-poppy-day-november-11/
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BU3PJ20100101
“”" A federal judge threw out all charges on Thursday against five Blackwater Worldwide security guards accused of killing 14 Iraqi civilians in 2007, saying the U.S. government had recklessly violated the defendants’ constitutional rights. “”"
The case turned on poorly obtained and utilized a confession that was thrown out.
Fast forward to February 2010:
What goes around comes around. Iraqi Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani says 250 private security guards who have been told to leave Iraq within days because of links to Blackwater cannot appeal the order.
The expulsion comes in the wake of a U.S. judge’s dismissal of criminal charges against five Blackwater guards who were accused in the September 2007 shooting deaths of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad.
Meanwhile two former employees of Blackwater Worldwide, Brad and Melan Davis, have accused the private security company of defrauding the U.S. government for years by filing bogus receipts, double billing for the same services and charging government agencies for strippers and prostitutes, according to court documents unsealed this week.
http://moraloutrage.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/blackwater-woes-mercenaries-get-the-boot-from-iraq-plus-fraud-charges/#comment-282
I understand that the although a judge dismissed the charges, it is being appealed.
In fact I just pulled a great article from JURIST (legal news service from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law):
US appeal of Blackwater case dismissal a step towards accountability
6:46 PM ET
Shaista Shameem [Chairperson/Rapporteur, Working Group on the use of mercenaries, Special Procedures Branch - OHCHR]: “The United Nations Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the rights of peoples to self-determination welcomes the decision announced by the US Vice President Joe Biden to appeal a ruling dismissing charges against the five Blackwater guards in connection with the shooting in Nissour Square in Iraq in 2007 during which at least 14 people were killed and a further 20 injured, many seriously.
The Working Group expressed its concerns in a public statement released on January 7, 2010, following the decision of Judge Ricardo M. Urbina of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia on December 31, 2009 to dismiss the indictment against Blackwater. The Group stated that while it respected the independence of the United States judiciary and the requirements for due process, it felt such a decision may lead to a situation where no one would be accountable for grave human rights violations.
During its visit to the United States in July 2009, but the Department of State and the Department of Defense stressed to the Working Group the importance of ensuring oversight and accountability of private security companies working on its behalf. The authorities explained the legislative steps taken by the Congress following the 2007 Blackwater shooting in Iraq to expand and clarify jurisdiction over offenses committed by private security and military contractors operating in areas of armed conflict and in peacetime.
While these news statutes virtually permit the US justice system to punish all crimes prohibited by human rights or humanitarian law, recent litigation has demonstrated that it remains a challenge to do so.
The Working Group hopes that through the appeal of the Blackwater dismissal, the US justice system will be able to consider all evidence gathered in this case in accordance with the law.”
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/hotline/2010/02/us-appeal-of-blackwater-case-dismissal.php
Yes, it is indeed a sad state of affairs when such a decision will end up leading to “a situation where no one would be accountable for grave human rights violations.”
Unfortunately in certain quarters, this seems to have been the norm for years. We already seem to be there.