This story is probably the best example of what President Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex,” who’s ever expanding desire to make money off of military conflict has continually distorted our democracy. Businesses conected to defense are rarely held to the same standard that public outrage would normally demand.

Despite repeated criticisms from both the Afghan government and western news agencies, private U.S. companies whose employees have repeatedly been accused of participating in the sex-slave trade, are still receiving Defense Department contracts worth billions. According to newly leaked diplomatic cables, the private security (aka mercenary) group DynCorp is again accused of actively participating in the illegal drug, sex and slave trade.

In one of the recently leaked confidential cables, US assistant ambassador Joseph Mussomeli and Afghan Interior Minister Hanif Atmar discussed an incident involving DynCorp in April of 2009. The Afghans complained the group was paying money to drug dealers and pimps. DynCorp employees are accused of “purchasing a service from a child” which is illegal in Afghanistan and has been since the Taliban took power in 1996.

According to the cable, while training Afghan police forces, DynCorp employees paid for services including a “bacha bazi” or a “boy play” party, which the State Department calls a “widespread, culturally accepted form of male rape.”

Yes, raping children too.

According to the Houston Press, “bacha bazi is a pre-Islamic Afghan tradition that was banned by the Taliban. Bacha boys are eight to 15 years old. They put on make-up, tie bells to their feet and slip into scanty women’s clothing, and then, to the whine of a harmonium and wailing vocals, they dance seductively to smoky roomfuls of leering older men.”

In the cable, the Afghan government pressed the ambassador to resolve the situation. The U.S. ambassador said, “An investigation is on-going, disciplinary actions were taken against DynCorp leaders in Afghanistan… Beyond remedial actions taken, we still hope the matter will not be blown out of proportion, an outcome which would not be good for either the U.S. or Afghanistan.”

Last August, Afghan President Hamid Karzai demanded that all private security companies in Afghanistan be disbanded, but backed off the decree after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a personal appeal to the president to allow the groups to continue working in the country until at least February. Last Monday, Karzai again agreed to revise his position allowing private security companies to continue working in Afghanistan until their contracts expire.

DynCorp employees have had a long history in illegal activities dating back to 1998 in Bosnia where, according to Salon.com, 13 employees were sent home and at least seven of them were fired “for purchasing women or participating in other prostitution-related activities.”

A whistleblower and former DynCorp employee detailed the underage sex-trade. According to the informant, contractors could purchase a slave for $600 to $700 “with all the rights of ownership attaching.”

“DynCorp employees and supervisors engaged in sex with 12 to 15 year old children, and sold them to each other as slaves,” the Chicago Tribune reported in 2005. “None of the girls were from Bosnia itself, but were kidnapped by DynCorp employees from Russia, Romania and other places.” The informant said the employees would brag about how young their girl was.

In addition, DynCorp has been found guilty of racial discrimination. In 2008, DynCorp was found guilty and forced to pay $10 million in punitive damages, but the damages were successfully appealed “due to a technicality involving clarity of jury instructions” according to The Weekly Challenger, an African American newspaper.

DynCorp makes hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct and indirect contributions to politicians and their political action committees. According to the non-partisan website OpenSecrets.org, DynCorp has donated over $250,000 in the last three years. DynCorp splits its contributions between Democrats and Republicans equally.

The cable states that it is not possible to embed government agents in Dyncorp missions due to the nature of the contract. The US government has yet to comment.

Further Reading:
WikiLeaks: Texas Company Helped Pimp Little Boys To Stoned Afghan Cops
US Embassy Cable – June 24, 2009
Sex Slave Whistleblowers Vindicated
Afghanistan Backs Off Threat to Ban Private Security Firms
Whistleblower (2010) – Wikipedia – Movie about Dyncorp in Bosnia

Intrigue. Corruption. Geopolitics. Petty condemnations. From the perspective of a political scientist, there is a lot to like about the most recent Wikileaks fiasco which saw Australian activist Julian Assange publish thousands of the U.S. government’s secret and confidential documents.But these are not the Afghanistan equivalent of the Pentagon Papers, not based on what we’ve seen so far anyway. Rather they show an uncensored and frank discussion of geopolitics, often from the perspective of foreign nations. If Assange’s mission is to end the war in Afghanistan as he’s publicly stated, he’s clearly failed. So far, he’s succeeded in doing little more than annoying various heads of state.

It should be noted that these files only include confidential and secret documents; there are no top secret files which is (officially) the highest level of sensitivity. You won’t find discussions of covert CIA operations, toppled governments, or conspiracies. Still, there’s still a lot of interesting content.

I’ll leave it to others to discuss the ethical and practical implications of the leaks. My interest, and I suspect yours as well, is in the gossip driven “nitty gritty” that shapes government politics and the world. Generally, the content is anything but light hearted; much of it is disturbing and grim.

I’ve compiled a short list of the most interesting parts of the leak both from my own readings and from published news reports, but much of this you won’t see reported anywhere else. In general, this information requires some background knowledge, but I’ve chosen to keep my commentary to a minimum, least this become my dissertation. All of the indented comments are direct quotes from U.S. government employees who wrote the cables released by Wikileaks.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton orders diplomats to spy and collect information from other nations
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/04/09STATE37561.html

This is the most crypic of all of the cables, but it is very likely the most damning. It has already resulted in calls for the Secretary of State to resign! In the cable, the secretary calls for diplomats to collect:

Biographic and biometric data, including health, opinions toward the US, training history, ethnicity (tribal and/or clan), and language skills of key and emerging political, military, intelligence, opposition, ethnic, religious, and business leaders. Data should include email addresses, telephone and fax numbers, fingerprints, facial images, DNA, and iris scans.

(Related Article: Wikileaks Fallout: Should Hillary Clinton Resign?)

Russia Considered “Virtual Mafia State”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/247712

Grinda stated that he considers Belarus, Chechnya and Russia to be virtual “mafia states” and said that Ukraine is going to be one. For each of those countries, he alleged, one cannot differentiate between the activities of the government and OC [organized crime] groups.

As an example, he cited Kalashov, whom he said worked for Russian military intelligence to sell weapons to the Kurds to destabilize Turkey. Grinda claimed that the GOR takes the relationship with OC leaders even further by granting them the privileges of politics, in order to grant them immunity from racketeering charges.

Yemeni government agrees to cover up U.S. involvement in the country.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/01/10SANAA4.html

Saleh did not have any objection, however, to General Petraeus’ proposal to move away from the use of cruise missiles and instead have U.S. fixed-wing bombers circle outside Yemeni territory, “out of sight,” and engage AQAP targets when actionable intelligence became available. Saleh lamented the use of cruise missiles that are “not very accurate” and welcomed the use of aircraft-deployed precision-guided bombs instead. “We’ll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours,” Saleh said, prompting Deputy Prime Minister Alimi to joke that he had just “lied” by telling Parliament that the bombs in Arhab, Abyan, and Shebwa were American-made but deployed by the ROYG.

Saudi King recommends GPS tracking devices be implanted in Gitmo detainees.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/03/09RIYADH447.html#par10

“I’ve just thought of something,” the King added, and proposed implanting detainees with an electronic chip containing information about them and allowing their movements to be tracked with Bluetooth. This was done with horses and falcons, the King said. [White House Counter Terrorism adviser John] Brennan replied, “horses don’t have good lawyers,” and that such a proposal would face legal hurdles in the U.S., but agreed that keeping track of detainees was an extremely important issue that he would review with appropriate officials when he returned to the United States.

Saudi Arabia complains about the TSA and increased security measures.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/01/10RIYADH118.html

Saudi officials strenuously – and under instruction – complained about the continued negative effect of the recent Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) regulations that call for extra security screening for Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Foreign Minister will raise these concerns with the Secretary in London on January 27. They noted that the Saudi public is increasingly upset by this, and does not understand why they were put in the same group with Cuba, which has prompted some Saudis to question how special their relationship with the United States really is.

Saudi Foreign Minister: Iran destined to get the bomb
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10KUWAIT88.html

…many in Kuwait hoped a silent, targeted strike would take out the troublesome reactor and leave the region more relaxed. He suggested that now, however, Iran might have multiple reactors and was so intent on achieving its nuclear goal that no matter what the West did, Iran would get the bomb, and any attempt to disrupt it militarily or through tough sanctions would go badly for the West. He offered his analysis that “Iran is very different from Iraq; if the “Murshid” orders his people to do something (like revenge attacks across the Gulf, striking American interests as well as Arab), they will do it, to a person.”

Kuwait: Ideology in Iran is more pervasive than religion, seeks to spread its influence to moderate countries.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10KUWAIT142.html

Interior Minister Shaykh Jaber suggested Iran is intent upon exporting its revolution and can only be deterred by force from achieving its nuclear ambitions; he characterized Iran as the “beating heart” of Islamic extremism, adding that even Palestinians now aspire to be Shi’a because they have bought Iranian “stories” about Shi’a being more prepared to “fight to the end” and stand up to Israel. Now Iran is trying to infiltrate Egypt, exploiting poverty there.

Peace deal to create Palistine within reach, Kerry urges Israel cede Golan Heights, East Jerusalem
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10DOHA70.html

According to the Amir, Hamas will accept the 1967 border with Israel, but will not say it publicly so as to lose popular Palestinian support.

For the Israelis, the Senator continued, Israel’s character as a Jewish state is not open for negotiation. The non-militarization of an eventual Palestinian state and its borders can nonetheless be resolved through negotiation.

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, charges that the U.S. doesn’t understand or value geopolitical positioning in the east.
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2008/10/08BISHKEK1095.html

Prince Andrew reached out to the Ambassador with cordiality and respect, evidently valuing her insights. However, he reacted with almost neuralgic patriotism whenever any comparison between the United States and United Kingdom came up. For example, one British businessman noted that despite the “overwhelming might of the American economy compared to ours” the amount of American and British investment in Kyrgyzstan was similar. Snapped the Duke: “No surprise there. The Americans don’t understand geography. Never have. In the U.K., we have the best geography teachers in the world!”

Russia Agrees to limit arms deals to Iran in mixed play
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/02/09MOSCOW405.html

Russian officials appear to have stepped back, at least temporarily, from announcing a delivery of the S-300’s, but pressure will remain within the military and security services to move forward as much for financial reasons as for political or foreign policy considerations. The prospect of more constructive U.S.-Russian relations may have tempered the GOR response, but we will continue to be told that Russia retains its “right” to proceed with an arms sale that does not violate national or international regimes. For better or for worse, the delivery of S-300’s have become a barometer of our bilateral relations.

(Related Article: Russia agrees to scrap arms deal with Iran in exchange for Israeli technology)

Chinese Ambassador: Russia unstable, needs foreign policy stability to concentrate on domestic affairs
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/06/09ASTANA982.html

[Chinese Ambassador] Guoping said that Russia is experiencing “severe difficulty” now because of the global financial crisis. He suggested that the government of Russia is eager to improve relations with the United States now because Moscow is concerned that the economic downturn will begin to affect the political stability of the country, “even the stability of the Kremlin.” Guoping said that Russia does not want or need any foreign policy problems right now; “they need to focus on their domestic, economic affairs.” Guoping also said that Russia would like more support from the United States for its insistence on a privileged sphere of influence in Central Asia, in exchange for greater cooperation in Afghanistan. “Russia is convinced that they must dominate Central Asia and the Caucasus. They believe they have vital, strategic, historical interests in the region,” Guoping said. When pressed by the Ambassador to express his own opinion, Guoping said, “I personally do not agree that Russia should be granted a special sphere of influence in the region, but that is their view.”

Guoping said that Russia owns and controls most of Central Asia’s pipelines, “but it cannot prevent the ultimate diversification of export routes.” He said that Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan are close to Russia, but they nevertheless understand that they must seek and develop alternatives. He predicted that [China] will soon “break the Russian monopoly” on the export of hydrocarbons from the region and said the oil and gas pipelines to China now under construction will be “very important” in that regard.

Chinese Ambassador: Russia will attempt to overthrow Georgian government
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/06/09ASTANA982.html

On Georgia, Guoping said he expects Russia to use military force to overthrow Georgian President Saakashvili. He did not elaborate or offer any specifics, but merely observed that Russia has already established military bases in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and is likely to remain there for the foreseeable future. Guoping worked in Georgia for four years and understands well the history and culture of its people. He observed that South Ossetia has strong cultural ties to Russia, but said it is likely that the Ossetians will ultimately press for greater independence from Russian influence.

China Ministry of Foreign Affairs “scared to death” of Nancy Pelosi
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/06/09ASTANA982.html

Without openly acknowledging or discussing the twentieth anniversary of the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square protests, [Chinese Ambassador] Guoping said the government was prepared, and also fearful, for the Speaker to raise human rights and democracy issues during her visit. “She had the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) scared to death on the eve of her visit,” Guoping said, half-jokingly.

Chinese prepared to support reunified Korea under Seoul control
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10SEOUL272.html

Chun argued that, in the event of a North Korean collapse, China would clearly “not welcome” any U.S. military presence north of the DMZ. XXXXXXXXXXXX Chun XXXXXXXXXXXX said the PRC would be comfortable with a reunified Korea controlled by Seoul and anchored to the United States in a “benign alliance” — as long as Korea was not hostile towards China. Tremendous trade and labor-export opportunities for Chinese companies, Chun said, would also help salve PRC concerns about living with a reunified Korea. Chundismissed the prospect of a possible PRC military intervention in the event of a DPRK collapse, noting that China’s strategic economic interests now lie with the United States, Japan, and South Korea — not North Korea. Moreover, Chun argued, bare-knuckle PRC military intervention in a DPRK internal crisis could “strengthen the centrifugal forces in China’s minority areas.” …and Japan

The only obvious omission from this list I think I should mention is the accusation that the U.S. has made diplomatic and financial incentives to allies willing to hold Gitmo detainees. While the accusation is covered extensively in other media (they all copy the same quotes from each other), I was not able to independently verify it from the cables provided by Wikileaks. It is certainly a plausible scenario. If you can provide this missing information, please email me.

(Update 12/2/10: Fixed last quote and link; added section on Russian mafia)

There’s a debate going on right now as to whether or not these leaks will have a significant impact on America’s relations with other nations in both the short and long term. I suspect at the very least, it will strain tensions for a little while, especially in the Middle East where the local governments have been exposed as being more closely allied with the United States than they’d prefer to let on (ie. Yemen).

While almost everyone supports net neutrality in a philosophical sense, there’s a valid debate about whether the FCC should be the one to impose new rules forcing internet service providers to comply. Critics warn that while internet service providers shouldn’t be allowed to effectively censor internet content, giving the government the power to regulate internet traffic is equally dangerous and could lead to it’s own abuses in the future.

Politico reports that House Republican and current Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Joe Barton is threatening the FCC not to proceed on imposing any net neutrality rules which would require internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast to treat all web traffic equally.

Barton and other Republicans vying to replace him as the committee chairman have openly warned FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski against instituting new rules.

“After two years of inaction, the Energy and Commerce Committee will be quite active in fulfilling the oversight responsibilities our Founding Fathers expected.” Barton warned. “The FCC will be prominently featured and Chairman Genachowski will soon be a familiar face on Capitol Hill.”

He added, “I hope that the only turkey cooking next week will be in our kitchens on Thanksgiving and not at the FCC.”

Republicans argue that the power to regulate the industry rest solely with Congress and that any additional regulations will hurt an expanding industry. (See The Washington Post for an in-depth analysis as to whether or not that is actually true)

It should come as no surprise to the more cynical among us that all of the potential future Republican chairmen including Barton have received large campaign donations from companies like Comcast, Verizon and political action committees that represent internet companies.

Contributions from individual companies and PACs, source: OpenSecrets.org

Other Republicans have similar donations. Political action committees or PACs also collect money from corporations and individuals to distribute among candidates. Barton recieved contributions from them as well. This election cycle, Barton recieved $10,000, the maximum contribution for two years.

Contributions from this PAC in 2010, source: CampaignMoney.com

Comcast, Verizon, Quest, ATT and other internet service providers all saw minor stock increases after Republicans won elections earlier this month.

If the FCC does not move forward instituting net neutratlity rules this December, there will probably be no additional movement on the issue in the near future.

Further Reading:
Business Week: AT&T, Comcast May Fend Off Web Rules Under Republicans
Politico: Republicans to FCC: Back off net neutrality

As a nation, we have always had a strong sense that privacy rights are a fundamental part of living in a free society, and although there is no explicit right to privacy in the constitution, it is certainly implicit, with numerous amendments being focused on exactly how far your right to privacy extends.

Throughout most of the last century, we have continually expanded these rights as technological advancements have required it. Photography, film, print, the internet: all examples of technological frontiers which have forced us to reexamine our commitments to individual privacy and until recently, we have almost always chosen to protect an individual’s right to control their identity. We’ve worked hard to protect these rights until now.

What is the most fundamental right a citizen has? It’s simple: It’s the right to live in the country in which they have citizenship. So basically, if you are a citizen of the United States you cannot be denied reentry in to the country. You might say that the second most important right a citizen has is to move about freely within their country. And yet, we have continually placed barriers restricting free travel in the United States, most recently and egregiously in the form of “naked” body scanners.

Government agents (and intellectually bankrupt reporters) describe the picture as a “silhouette” of a passenger’s body. If you’ve never seen the pictures, you might be a bit surprised at how much they really show. They don’t leave much to the imagination.

The airways are publicly owned, like radio waves. The government simply regulates it. I don’t seem to remember giving up my right not to be strip searched while traveling in my own country. Strip searches are only legal in cases where there is a reasonable suspicion that a person is carrying a weapon. Have we surrendered all due process rights in pursuit of an enemy that since 9-11, has had virtually no success?

You may have heard that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is in the process of stepping up the aggressiveness of it’s “pat down” procedures which are an alternative to the scanners. Don’t be fooled though. They’re trying to make the “opt out” option as uncomfortable as possible so you’ll be more willing to use the scanners. In addition to being an affront to a person’s right to privacy, the scanners also unload a questionable amount of radiation.

UPDATE: 3-15-11, TSA To Retest Body Scanners, Emitting 10x Higher Radiation Than Expected, TSA said last November, “You would have to go through scanners more than 1,000 times in one year to even meet the maximum recommended level — and even pilots don’t do that.”

UPDATE: 5-20-11, Scientists in Open Letter To America: There were no conclusive tests done on radiation exposure from the machines.  Test that were done were not done with the actual machines used in airports, but rather were conducted with spare parts.  Furthermore, there was no peer review on the findings. Even the names of the researchers who conducted the tests at Rapidscan have been kept secret.  We don’t even know if the study was conducted by real scientists.

Don’t fly often? Well don’t think the government will limit the use of these machines here. After all, aren’t all government buildings at risk? Museums? Schools? Where does it end? The government’s successful implementation of these scanners here will crack a door open to where they can be used virtually anywhere else.

We’re talking about one of our most fundamental rights being taken away right in front of us and most Americans don’t even understand the severity of the issue.

Further Reading:
Drudge Report Headline: The Terrorist Have Won!
Senate To Hold Meeting
Washington Post Readers Tell Their Stories, TSA Shows Complete Disrespect for the Disabled

Just a few quick thoughts on President Bush’s recent book tour.

It’s pretty clear that Bush generally doesn’t enjoy the kind of public forum that he’s forced to be in right now while promoting his new book. I suspect that this is probably the last time we will ever get to see him comment on his administration’s successes and failures. So whatever revelations we gleam from these interviews will probably be the last ones we’ll get for a long time.

We probably won’t see any more big interviews, unless Hanukkah comes early for Stewart. Still, assessing what we’ve seen so far has been interesting. I’ve watched the interviews with Sean Hannity, Oprah, Matt Lauer and Bill O’Reilly. Unless you find the opinions of Kanye West to be of special interest, you’ll probably agree that Lauer and Hannity were the most tame. Oprah was a little tougher, visibly putting Bush on edge as the interview progressed. There is also an interview with Rush Limbaugh which I haven’t heard yet. From what I’ve seen so far though, the most probing interview of this tour, and probably the most probing interview with Bush in recent memory, is the O’Reilly interview.

Say what you will about the guy, he knows how to interrogate. Oprah and Lauer asked all the right questions, but O’Reilly insisted, and phrased his questions in a way that encouraged Bush to give the viewer a little bit more information, enough to infer what he was really thinking. I think the subtleties make that interview the one most worth watching.

Bill O’Reilly (Fox News)
Oprah
Matt Lauer (NBC)
Sean Hannity (Fox News)
Rush Limbaugh

Further Reading:
How to Interpret the Bush Legacy

After two years of near silence, former President George W. Bush has emerged from self imposed exile to promote his new book Decision Points, which many say paints a picture of a compassionate, moderate and overall much more likeable figure than many commentators remember from just two years ago.

Liberal commentator Maureen Dowd of the New York Times admitted that while Bush’s book was “utterly selective,” it provided an image of a “president we all wished him to be: compassionate, bipartisan, funny, charming, instinctive, independent, able to admit and learn from mistakes — and a good dad.”

While Dowd admits she isn’t ready to push for a constitutional amendment to put Bush back in office, her conciliatory attitude is common and natural. The presidency isn’t just a political leadership position; it’s also a position that emanates national pride. We want to believe in the president’s character because it means we also believe in ourselves.

You want him to be your dad.  Admit it.

Bush taken outside of the partisan context, comes across as a generally likable guy. John Kerry could have initiated world peace, solved the energy crisis and put a man on the sun, it doesn’t mean anyone wants to drink a beer with him.

So clearly the restoration of the Bush legacy is in full force and it’s probably going to succeed to some degree. Historians will be especially forgiving if Iraq becomes a strong ally in the region and the entire experience becomes a net positive for the United States. But is that truly fair? Should we judge a president simply on the final result, or should we assess what he knew at the time and make judgments based on those decisions?

Consider the propaganda campaign during the run up to the Iraq War.

Senator Hilary Clinton said Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and voted to authorize the Iraq War. Her husband and former President Bill Clinton agreed. John Kerry who would run against Bush two years later agreed and voted to support the war as well.

A number of other prominent Democrats said Saddam certainly had an active arsenal of weapons. Minority speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi said, “Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There’s no question about that.” Senator Joseph Biden–“we know he continues to attempt to gain access to additional capability, including nuclear ability.” The senator went on to say that Saddam might be able to develop nuclear weapons in less than two years.

In addition, The Director of the CIA, George Tenet called the case against Hussein a “slam dunk.” Bush later awarded Tenet the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the country’s highest civilian honor.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

The bottom line is that Americans are not stupid. We had good reason to buy in to the big lie that had been perpetrated by almost every side. There were anti-war politicians and protesters, but few directly addressed the quality of the intelligence gathering.

Americans can be forgiven for their ignorance. How many of us could withstand the suggestive power of a lie that big? But Bush should have been above it all; he should have surveyed the situation and been able to make a clear decision about the validity of the intelligence.

I suspect that the culture in the White House at the time contributed to the president’s decision to go to war, but a true leader should be able to sniff out an ideological plot or manipulation before it escalates in to an unnecessary conflict.

In 20 or 30 years, historians may consider President Bush a good president, perhaps even a great one, but it will be based not on a rational decision backed up by a steady hand, but by the capability of our military to fix a horrible quagmire. Bush shouldn’t get credit for their sacrifice.