You know, when I first saw the headline on this article, I thought, "Stalls? On what? Whatever FOR?"
Three years ago, President Bush declared that he had "zero tolerance" for trafficking in humans by the government's overseas contractors, and two years ago Congress mandated a similar policy. But notwithstanding the president's statement and the congressional edict, the Defense Department has yet to adopt a policy to bar human trafficking.
A proposal prohibiting defense contractor involvement in human trafficking for forced prostitution and labor was drafted by the Pentagon last summer, but five defense lobbying groups oppose key provisions and a final policy still appears to be months away, according to those involved and Defense Department records.
The lobbying groups opposing the plan say they're in favor of the idea in principle, but said they believe that implementing key portions of it overseas is unrealistic. They represent thousands of firms, including some of the industry's biggest names, such as DynCorp International and Halliburton subsidiary KBR, both of which have been linked to trafficking-related concerns. Lining up on the opposite side of the defense industry are some human-trafficking experts who say significant aspects of the Pentagon's proposed policy might actually do more harm than good unless they're changed. These experts have told the Pentagon that the policy would merely formalize practices that have allowed contractors working overseas to escape punishment for involvement in trafficking, the records show....
Really, you have to wonder. It seems like it would be simple enough: if you participate, in any way, shape or form, in human trafficking, you lose your Defense contract, and any immunity you may possess to legal proceedings as a defense contractor. The appropriate US consulate or embassy will report you to the appropriate local authorities to deal with as they see fit. This is not rocket sciences. There are no difficult principles involved here.
And then there was this nugget buried within:
...In a two-part series published in October, the Tribune detailed how Middle Eastern firms working under American subcontracts in Iraq, and a chain of human brokers beneath them, engaged in the kind of abuses condemned elsewhere by the U.S. government as human trafficking. KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary, relies on more than 200 subcontractors to carry out a multibillion-dollar U.S. Army contract for privatization of military support operations in the war zone.
The Tribune retraced the journey of 12 Nepali men recruited from poor villages in one of the most remote and impoverished corners of the world and documented a trail of deceit, fraud and negligence stretching into Iraq. The men were kidnapped from an unprotected caravan and executed en route to jobs at an American military base in 2004.
At the time, Halliburton said it was not responsible for the recruitment or hiring practices of its subcontractors, and the U.S. Army, which oversees the privatization contract, said questions about alleged misconduct "by subcontractor firms should be addressed to those firms, as these are not Army issues."
Once implemented, the new policy could dramatically change responsibilities for KBR and the Army....
And of course, suddenly the institutional opposition makes sense. It simply would not do to have the vice president's company hindered from exploiting the local people in any way ... that is, it would not do to have the vice president's company linked with such practices, when it was all the fault of the subcontractors whose behavior KBR somehow did not monitor at all. (To be fair, this particular Tribune article contains a bit of shoddy writing; it's not clear from what they say that the issue was the presence of the men in that particular caravan at all; if the subcontractor hadn't been exploiting the local people, they wouldn't have been in a position to be kidnapped and killed.) And the main contractors understandably don't want to be in a position where they not only have to pay attention to what their subcontractors are doing, make certain that their subcontractors aren't also kidnapping people and forcing them into prostitution (as has happened) but also refer cases to both the local police and the US embassy/consulate to make sure that the people so involved get prosecuted when they get home.
After all, this could put a crimp in their recruiting.
Posted by iain at December 27, 2005 08:50 PM
