Contractors Nervous About Losing Immunity in Iraq

[Joanne98]

The UN mandate governing the US military's deployment in Iraq will expire next month. To negotiate the way forward, Baghdad and Washington have been in feverish talks about an official Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which will set parameters for the US presence in Iraq, as well as set a date certain for withdrawal. US officials have now presented their Iraqi counterparts with that they call a "final text," committing US troops to be withdrawn to their bases by next June and withdrawn from Iraq entirely no later than 2011. Baghdad has been cagey about assenting to a final agreement for myriad political reasons, although today's New York Times suggests that Obama's election victory might help move things along—the Iraqis actually believe his stated desire to pull out the troops is sincere.

Fine, but what about private contractors? The "final text" US officials presented this week does not include immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts for privately employed personnel, be they with security firms or international NGOs. The risk of seeing their employees in the dock in Baghdad or elsewhere for alleged violations of Iraqi law is giving private industry fits and leading to speculation of an "exodus" of private contractors once the UN mandate expires.

The industry is so concerned, in fact, that the president of one of its leading trade groups fired off a letter (.pdf), dated October 8, to Condoleeza Rice, suggesting her that loss of contractor immunity could put the success of the US effort in Iraq at risk. Stan Soloway of the Professional Services Council, which counts leading Iraq contractors like Blackwater, DynCorp, Kroll, CACI, BAE, SAIC, EODT, and Bechtel among its members, warned against the "unintended consequences" of lifting immunity. Here's an excerpt:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/

[MNDemNY]

1. Too, bad, they can just leave.

[Donkeykick]

2. I believe in...

immunity for our armed forces personnel only; however, as for people (private indidviduals) that are over there making a profit,no; if they do not like the job for any reason, they do not have to accept it. :shrug:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. Is blanket immunity for our armed forces a good thing?

I think that, after everything that has happened during the past 8 years, we need to root out ANYBODY engaged in wrongdoing during the course of our occupation over there and I don't think it's quite fair that our soldiers deserve some kind of special immunity to operate anywhere in the world without fear of criminal prosecution (e.g. if done in accordance with due process of the ICC). Politically, of course, such a sentiment might not sell well but, frankly, our being in Iraq in the first place was wrong and IMHO if we are to be able to leave there with at least some modicum of honor and justice then ANYBODY who was deliberately engaged in ANY wrongdoing while serving over there should be held to account, particularly anybody, no matter how high-ranking or low-ranking, who was directly involved with the events that transpired at Abu Gharib.

[meow2u3]

4. BWAHAHAHA!!! Cheney's mercs and goons will no longer be above the law!!

My hemmorrhoids bleed for them! :nopity:

edit: spelling