Proposed solution: The State Department announces that Blackwater will continue to be paid for its contract for security, except now all Blackwater employees for the contract will be relocated to Bermuda and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands. Strict oversight and regular performance audits will be performed by the impartial subcomittee of nobody.
What do I win if I'm right?
8:05 AM, September 19, 2007
This news a few days old I know. But I like what Majikthise has to say: It will be interesting to see how this one plays out. Blackwater has a $300 million contract to provide security to the State Department alone. I doubt they're going anywhere.
It's delicious to think that in order to keep Blackwater, the U.S. will be forced to abandon the pretext that Iraq is an independent state. I don't know if "delicious" is the word I'd use, but I am interested in how the administration resolves its split personality disorder on Iraq. One the one hand, there's this pretense that Iraq is a sovereign nation, that we're helping them get on their feet and we'll "stand down as they stand up", etc. But then there's the reality of the permanent military bases, the largest embassy/fortress complex on the planet, the withdrawal that always gets pushed off another six months, etc. This Blackwater incident will be indicative of which reality is the more powerful.
posted by Zachary Drake at 5:54 AM on Sep 19, 2007
"Iraq bans Blackwater military contractor"
1 Comment -
Proposed solution: The State Department announces that Blackwater will continue to be paid for its contract for security, except now all Blackwater employees for the contract will be relocated to Bermuda and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands. Strict oversight and regular performance audits will be performed by the impartial subcomittee of nobody.
What do I win if I'm right?
8:05 AM, September 19, 2007