Army is Worried by Rising Stress of Return Tours to Iraq War

April 6, 2008 – Washington, DC — Army leaders are expressing increased alarm about the mental health of soldiers who would be sent back to the front again and again under plans that call for troop numbers to be sustained at high levels in Iraq for this year and beyond.

Among combat troops sent to Iraq for the third or fourth time, more than one in four show signs of anxiety, depression or acute stress, according to an official Army survey of soldiers’ mental health.

The stress of long and multiple deployments to Iraq is just one of the concerns being voiced by senior military officers in Washington as Gen. David H. Petraeus, the senior Iraq commander, prepares to tell Congress this week that he is not ready to endorse any drawdowns beyond those already scheduled through July.

President Bush has signaled that he will endorse General Petraeus’s recommendation, a decision that will leave close to 140,000 American troops in Iraq at least through the summer. But in a meeting with Mr. Bush late last month in advance of General Petraeus’s testimony, the Joint Chiefs of Staff expressed deep concern about stress on the force, senior Defense Department and military officials said.

Among the 513,000 active-duty soldiers who have served in Iraq since the invasion of 2003, more than 197,000 have deployed more than once, and more than 53,000 have deployed three or more times, according to a separate set of statistics provided this week by Army personnel officers. The percentage of troops sent back to Iraq for repeat deployments would have to increase in the months ahead.

The Army study of mental health showed that 27 percent of noncommissioned officers — a critically important group — on their third or fourth tour exhibited symptoms commonly referred to as post-traumatic stress disorders. That figure is far higher than the roughly 12 percent who exhibit those symptoms after one tour and the 18.5 percent who develop the disorders after a second deployment, according to the study, which was conducted by the Army surgeon general’s Mental Health Advisory Team.

The Army and the rest of the service chiefs have endorsed General Petraeus’s recommendations for continued high troop levels in Iraq. But Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, and their top deputies also have warned that the war in Iraq should not be permitted to inflict an unacceptable toll on the military as a whole. “Our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it,” Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army vice chief of staff, said in stark comments delivered to Congress last week. “Lengthy and repeated deployments with insufficient recovery time have placed incredible stress on our soldiers and our families, testing the resolve of our all-volunteer force like never before.”

Beyond the Army, members of the Joint Chiefs have also told the president that the continued troop commitment to Iraq means that there is a significant level of risk should another crisis erupt elsewhere in the world. Any mission could be carried out successfully, the chiefs believe, but the operation would be slower, longer and costlier in lives and equipment than if the armed forces were not so strained.

Under the drawdown already planned, the departure of five combat brigades from Iraq by July should allow the Army to announce that tours will be shortened to 12 months from 15 by the end of summer.

Even so, senior officers warn that time at home must be increased from the current 12 months between combat tours. Otherwise, they say, the ground forces risk an unacceptable level of retirements of sergeants — the key leaders of the small-unit operations — and of experienced captains, who represent the future of the Army’s officer corps.

The mental health study conducted by the Army was carried out in Iraq last October and November, and does not represent a purely scientific sampling of deployed troops, because that is difficult to accomplish in a combat environment, the authors of the study have said. Instead, the study was based on 2,295 anonymous surveys and additional interviews from members of frontline units in combat brigades, and not from those assigned primarily to safer operating bases. Since the study was distributed last month, it has become a central topic of high-level internal discussions within the Army, and its findings have been accepted by Army leaders, senior Pentagon and military officials say.

The survey found that the proportion of soldiers serving in Iraq who had encountered mental health problems was about the same as found in previous studies — about 18 percent of deployed soldiers. But in analyzing the effect of the war on those with previous duty in Iraq, the study found that “soldiers on multiple deployments report low morale, more mental health problems and more stress-related work problems.”

By the time they are on their third or fourth deployments, soldiers “are at particular risk of reporting mental health problems,” the study found.

The range of symptoms reported by soldiers varies widely, from sleeplessness and anxiety to more severe depression and stress. To assist soldiers facing problems, the Army has begun to hire more civilian mental health professionals while directing Army counselors to spend more time with frontline units.

Senior officers at the Pentagon have tried to avoid shrill warnings about the health of the force, cognizant that such comments might embolden potential adversaries, and they continue to hope that troop levels in Iraq can be reduced next year. Still, none deny the level of stress on the force from current deployments.

Admiral Mullen spoke broadly to those concerns last week, saying at a Pentagon news conference that the military would have already assigned forces to missions elsewhere in the world were it not for what he called “the pressure that’s on our forces right now.”

He added that the military would “continue to be there until, should conditions allow, we start to be able to reduce our force levels in Iraq.”

One example of the pressure has come in Afghanistan, where the Pentagon has been unable to meet all of the commanders’ requests for more forces, in particular for several thousand military trainers.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told reporters on Friday that he expected that the United States would be able to add significantly to its deployments in Afghanistan in 2009. But to do that — and to increase time at home for soldiers between deployments — probably would require further reductions in troop levels in Iraq, Pentagon planners said.

Members of the Joint Chiefs also acknowledge that the deployments to Iraq, with the emphasis on counterinsurgency warfare, have left the ground forces no time to train for the full range of missions required to defend American interests.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Army is Worried by Rising Stress of Return Tours to Iraq War

Apr. 6, VCS in the News: Investigators Review VA Credit Charges

I’m very concerned about frivolous, wasteful spending at the VA,” said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense. “With hundreds of thousands of veterans homeless, VA employees don’t need to be staying at ritzy-glitzy high-priced hotels, possibly gambling with taxpayers’ money.” 

April 6, 2008, Washington, DC — Veterans Affairs employees last year racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars in government credit-card bills at casino and luxury hotels, movie theaters and high-end retailers such as Sharper Image and Franklin Covey — and government auditors are investigating, citing past spending abuses.

All told, VA staff charged $2.6 billion to their government credit cards.

The Associated Press, through a Freedom of Information request, obtained the VA list of 3.1 million purchases made in the 2007 budget year. The list offers a detailed look into the everyday spending at the government’s second largest department.

By and large, it reveals few outward signs of questionable spending, with hundreds of purchases at prosthetic, orthopedic and other medical supply stores.

But there are multiple charges that have caught the eye of government investigators.

At least 13 purchases totaling $8,471 were charged at Sharper Image, a specialty store featuring high-tech electronics and gizmos such as robotic barking dogs. In addition, 19 charges worth $1,999.56 were made at Franklin Covey, which sells leather totes and planners geared toward corporate executives.

Government reports in 2004 said these two companies, by virtue of the types of products they market, would “more likely be selling unauthorized or personal use items” to federal employees.

Many of the 14,000 VA employees with credit cards, who work at headquarters in Washington and at medical centers around the nation, also spent tens of thousands of dollars at Wyndham hotels in places such as San Diego, Orlando, Fla., and on the riverfront in Little Rock, Ark. One-time charges ranged up to $8,000.

On at least six occasions, employees based at VA headquarters made credit card charges at Las Vegas casino hotels totaling $26,198.

VA spokesman Matt Smith the department was reviewing these and other purchases as part of its routine oversight of employee spending. He noted that many of the purchases at Sharper Image and other stores included clocks for low-vision veterans, humidifiers, air purifiers, alarm devices and basic planner products.

Smith said all the casino hotel expenditures in 2007 were for conferences and related expenses. He said the spending was justified because Las Vegas is a place where “VA is building a new medical center and an increasing number of veterans are calling home.”

“The Department of Veterans Affairs, like many public and private groups, hosts conferences and meetings in Las Vegas due to the ease of participant travel, the capacity of the facilities, and the overall cost associated with hosting a conference,” he said.

According to VA policy, purchase cards may be used at hotels to rent conference rooms or obtain audiovisual equipment or other items for VA meetings. They should not be used to reserve lodging. Auditors long have urged the VA to adopt policies to encourage use of free conference rooms. Auditors previously faulted the agency for booking rooms at expensive casino hotels without evidence it first had sought free space.

In the coming weeks, auditors at the Government Accountability Office and the VA inspector general’s office are to issue reports on purchase card use and spending controls at the VA and other agencies. The reports are expected to show lingering problems at the VA, which auditors cited in 2004 for lax spending controls that wasted up to $1.1 million.

The list of charges provided to the AP gives the vendor, amount purchased, location and employee name; in most cases it does not indicate the specific item purchased. Requests by the AP for lists of the additional data in a timely manner were repeatedly declined on privacy and proprietary grounds.

The VA list shows that some credit-card holders took a modest route. VA employees in locations such as Portland, Ore., Gainesville, Fla., and Sheridan, Wyo., had charges for Motel 6 and Travelodge inns. One VA headquarters employee appears to have passed up casino hotels by booking at a Holiday Inn Express in Las Vegas for $787.75.

“For government travel and other spending, you have to be mindful of the appearances you’re creating,” said Steve Ellis, vice president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. “If you’re staying at a hotel at a strip in Vegas, you better have a pretty good reason for why a taxpayer should be funding the stay.”

“It’s not like the VA hasn’t gotten into trouble for credit card abuses in the past,” he added. “I find it hard to justify any government purchase from Sharper Image — unless you get something really goofy, it’s going to be cheaper elsewhere.”

Penalties for misuse of government credit cards range from suspension of the credit card to a reprimand and disciplinary action. Employees may be criminally prosecuted for fraud. More serious cases in recent years involved purchases of computers, televisions, DVD players and other items that were then sold to friends or kept for personal use.

“It’s all being looked at,” said Belinda Finn, the VA’s assistant inspector general for auditing, in a telephone interview. Pointing to Sharper Image purchases in particular, Finn said many of the VA expenses identified by the AP raised serious “red flags.”

“For a lot of the transactions on purchase cards, to be effective you really need to keep a close watch,” she said. “It’s really the first-level supervisors who know what’s going on the most.”

Congressional leaders said the expenditures were troubling.

Rep. Harry Mitchell, chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs subcommittee on oversight, said he would question VA officials about the purchases at a hearing set for July. Mitchell, D-Ariz., said he feared there may be “a growing culture of wasteful spending at the VA.”

He noted that former VA Secretary Jim Nicholson had awarded more than $3.8 million in bonus payments to senior officials despite their roles in crafting a flawed budget that fell $1 billion short.

“It seems irresponsible that while our veterans are waiting months for doctor’s appointments, the VA is spending thousands of dollars at Las Vegas casino hotels and high-end retail shops instead of seeking out more affordable or cost-free alternatives,” Mitchell said.

Sen. Daniel Akaka, who heads the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, said he planned to closely review the upcoming audit reports to see if spending controls needed to be tightened.

“I remain concerned that the federal government may end up paying more than necessary when employees purchase items one-by-one,” said Akaka, D-Hawaii. “While I am confident that the vast majority of these charges are appropriate and legal, I urge VA to aggressively investigate allegations of fraud.”

Over the years, lawmakers and watchdog groups have pointed to the potential abuse of government purchase cards, particularly at large agencies such as Defense, Homeland Security and VA, where card spending for goods ranging from defibrillators and prosthetics to Starbucks coffee has climbed from $1.7 billion in 2003 to $2.6 billion today.

In the past, purchase cards have been improperly used to pay for prostitutes, gambling activity and even breast implants.

After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the GAO estimated that 45 percent of Homeland Security purchase card spending during a six-month period was improper and included iPods, designer rain jackets and beer-making equipment. The credit-card bills are directly payable by Uncle Sam.

In 2004, the GAO faulted the VA for at least $300,000 in questionable charges, citing 3,348 movie gift certificates totaling over $30,000 that lacked documentation. Echoing similar concerns by the department’s inspector general, investigators urged greater use of volume discounts and flagged several high-end retailers as questionable vendors that would require detailed paperwork to justify.

Among the other areas investigators say raise “red flags”:

_Movie expenses. VA employees in 2007 made 68 charges totaling roughly $21,000 at Regal Cinemas. In light of previous questionable purchases of movie tickets, investigators say they will review the transactions case by case to see if the 2007 purchases are supported by the proper paperwork.

_Charges of $227.50 for harbor cruises in Baltimore and seven expenses totaling more than $6,603 at various Macy’s locations. Such vendors were cited by the GAO in 2004 as questionable by virtue of the goods they typically provided and would need full documentation by VA employees to justify.

In response, the VA said it often pays for movies or harbor cruises as part of outpatient recreational therapy it provides for patients with schizophrenia and other problems. The VA did not immediately say whether all the required paperwork was submitted.

“I’m very concerned about frivolous, wasteful spending at the VA,” said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense. “With hundreds of thousands of veterans homeless, VA employees don’t need to be staying at ritzy-glitzy high-priced hotels, possibly gambling with taxpayers’ money.”

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Apr. 6, VCS in the News: Investigators Review VA Credit Charges

Vision-Impaired Vets Seek Federal Funding

April 7, 2009 – Washington, DC — It took nearly 10 months before doctors thought to give Glenn Minney an MRI after he lost his vision as a result of a blast wound suffered at Haditha Dam, Iraq.

Minney and other blind veterans hope it won’t take that long to get $5 million of federal money to keep other veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan from suffering a similar fate.

In federal funding, $5 million isn’t much. That’s why U.S. Rep. David Hobson, R-Springfield, is mystified that a line in last year’s Defense Authorization bill creating a resource center for blind veterans was taken out right before the bill passed. Hobson and his staff are studying how to secure the funding.

Minney, of Frankfort, was injured in April 2005, when he was standing on Haditha Dam as it took a mortar round. At first he felt fine. But the next day, his eyes were scratchy and red. His eyesight gradually got worse, but at first doctors couldn’t find anything, so they treated him — twice — for pinkeye.

Then he started to lose his sight. They shipped him to Germany, then to Washington D.C. At first they told him he was healing. But by September, he had lost his sight.

One day, Minney was told that he had to lay flat and face down for one to three months. The next day, he was told to report for duty.

Then there was inevitable confusion over whether he should be treated by Veterans Affairs Medical Centers or under active duty care.

Meanwhile, no one could figure out why Minney had lost his sight. That finally changed in February 2006, when he received an MRI at Camp Lejeune. That’s when they discovered he had a loss of brain tissue in the occipital lobe, which works the eyes, as well as the parietal lobe.

Minney is by no means the only Iraq war veteran whose war injuries include devastating eye injuries. Tom Zampieri of the Blinded Veterans Association said 1,162 evacuated from Iraq or Afghanistan between March 19, 2003, and Sept. 17, 2007, had sustained direct eye trauma. That doesn’t count people like Minney, who’ve lost sight because of traumatic brain injury.

Zampieri cites the case of a 32-year-old veteran who lost his sight and, finding that his friends no longer visited him and he couldn’t drive, committed suicide.

“When you have eye trauma, there are no pills that are going to fix that,” he said.

Zampieri hopes that this year, he’ll be successful in securing the $5 million in federal funds, which would create a “Military Eye Trauma Center of Excellence” that could become a resource for doctors. To Minney, $5 million is a small price for the government to pay.

“I never said it was too costly,” he said. “So why should these agencies say the same thing to me?”

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Vision-Impaired Vets Seek Federal Funding

Apr. 7, VCS Editorial: High Praise for Public Service Performed by Professors Stiglitz and Bilmes

April 7, 2008 – Columbia University Professor Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Prize in economics, and his colleague, Harvard University Professor Linda Bilmes, deserve our gratitude for informing Americans about the human and financial costs of the Iraq War in their new book, “The Three Trillion Dollar War.”

Their outstanding book, with dozens of pages of detailed footnotes and sources, is the epitome of public service in a time of war.

The facts are clear and overwhelming: The Bush Administration has failed our military service members and our veterans who fought in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  The tip of the iceberg was the outrageous and unconscionable Walter Reed Army Medical Center scandal.

The situation for veterans and their families worsened when Americans learned that suicidal Iraq War veterans were improperly turned away from emergency medical care.

The statistics pried from the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) by Veterans for Common Sense (VCS) using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) during the past two years provides strong and convincing evidence that the Bush Administration intentionally concealed the staggering and growing human and financial costs of the two wars from the public, from Congress, and from journalists.

For example, VCS obtained official DoD documents confirming 73,000 battlefield casualties from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  In another example, VCS obtained official VA documents confirming 300,000 Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans already treated at VA hospitals, including 120,000 for mental health conditions.

Using the documents VCS obtained under FOIA, and combining it with publicly available cost information, Professors Stiglitz and Bilmes conservatively estimate more than 700,000 total walking wounded casualties costing U.S. taxpayers up to $700 billion over the next 40 years.  The total cost of the Iraq War alone is $3 trillion, and most likely higher.  The longer the wars last, then the higher the number of battlefield casualties and unexpected veteran patients flooding into VA.

Veterans for Common Sense salutes Professors Stiglitz and Bilmes for performing an enormous public service on behalf of all 300 million Americans by fully documenting the human and financial costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

VCS wants our veterans to know about VA, for our veterans to want to use VA, and for VA to be ready, willing, and able to assist veterans with prompt and high-quality healthcare and benefits when they arrive – They earned it. 

With the reliable and salient information from the book, “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” the public and Congress can make better policies for our service members and veterans in an effort to prevent more Walter Reed Army Medical Center scandals and to prevent more suicides.

We ask, when will we learn the lessons from the past and see these headlines in the news: “VA Announces Plan to End Waiting for Healthcare and Claims for All Veterans,” “VA Scaps 26-Page Claim Form, Allows Veterans to Hire Attorneys to Streamline Claims,” “Veterans Applaud VA and Military Effort to Examine All Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans for TBI and PTSD,” and “Number of Homeless Veterans Drops to Nearly Zero.”

Never again will our Nation abandon or neglect our veterans, as happened to many veterans after the Vietnam War and Gulf War.  Yes, America, in the next few years we can do it right for all veterans and the newest generation of veterans.  And thanks goes to Professors Bilmes and Stiglitz for shining so many bright academic, media, and legislative spot lights on this issue. 

Paul Sullivan
Executive Director
Veterans for Common Sense
Post Office Box 15514
Washington, DC 20003
(202) 558-4553 
www.VeteransForCommonSense.org

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Apr. 7, VCS Editorial: High Praise for Public Service Performed by Professors Stiglitz and Bilmes

Hidden Wounds of War

April 4, 2008 – At the five-year anniversary of the war in Iraq, the federal government remains unprepared to address one of the most pressing needs of the men and women who have served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

The Departments of Defense (DoD) and Veterans Affairs (VA) have an obligation to provide our soldiers and veterans the best care anywhere but are falling short of the mark on screening and treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Some 1.6 million Americans have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 31,000 have been wounded in action and many more have sustained noncombat injuries or illness. TBI has been called the “signature injury” of this war, and the improvised explosive device (IED) is the leading cause of fatalities and brain injuries among U.S. servicemembers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

These powerful devices inflict severe damage and blast shock waves through the body, including sudden and violent impact to the skull causing damage to brain tissue. The resulting TBI can be fatal, or require immediate hospitalization.

But more often the result of exposure is a less obvious concussion. Current estimates are that 10 percent to 20 percent of all U.S. military personnel in Iraq suffer concussion. Army studies show less than half of those exposed to IED blasts receive any evaluation.

Concussion or “mild” TBI may or may not involve a loss of consciousness. Its mildest form may result only in cognitive and functional symptoms rather than visible, easily recognized injuries. TBI symptoms may not appear until days or weeks following the injury. Confusion, a stunned stare, slowness in following instructions or distractibility are common but subtle changes in consciousness after exposure to TBI.

In the environment of war, such symptoms can go unnoticed and unreported. Experience from sports and other noncombat injuries has shown that if an injured individual sustains a second concussion before resolving symptoms from a previous injury, a “second impact syndrome” can occur with dire, even life-threatening consequences. Repeated concussions cause cumulative damage and slow recovery.

The bad news is that there is no current consensus among specialists in this field on how many concussions in an individual would be “too many.” The good news is that simple computerized screening tools are available to identify those with concussions and mild TBI, to prevent more serious and persistent problems.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Hidden Wounds of War

Iraq War Undermining Afghan Efforts

April 3, 2008 – Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, says, “What immediately comes to mind is additional forces for Afghanistan.”

“I’ve said that Afghanistan is an economy-of-force campaign. And there are force requirements there that we can’t currently meet,” the top US commander said.

In his NATO speech in Bucharest, US President George W. Bush pressed White House allies to send more troops to Afghanistan.

Washington has recently dispatched 3,500 additional Marines to the war-hit country, increasing the number of the US forces to some 30,000.

Despite the US plan to send more troops to Afghanistan, battlefield commanders still say they lack sufficient forces to fight Taliban.

NATO’s unwillingness to reinforce military forces in Afghanistan has poured cold water on the US ambitions in Afghanistan in fight against Taliban in the chaotic south.

France and Germany have recently on a joint venture sent 5,000 troops to Afghanistan in safe areas, dashing the US dreams to replace the US troops in the volatile south.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Iraq War Undermining Afghan Efforts

General William Odom Tells Senate Rapid Withdrawal is Only Solution

April 2, 2008 – TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE ON IRAQ

Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. It is an honor to appear before you again. The last occasion was in January 2007, when the topic was the troop surge. Today you are asking if it has worked. Last year I rejected the claim that it was a new strategy. Rather, I said, it is a new tactic used to achieve the same old strategic aim, political stability. And I foresaw no serious prospects for success.

I see no reason to change my judgment now. The surge is prolonging instability, not creating the conditions for unity as the president claims.

Last year, General Petraeus wisely declined to promise a military solution to this political problem, saying that he could lower the level of violence, allowing a limited time for the Iraqi leaders to strike a political deal. Violence has been temporarily reduced but today there is credible evidence that the political situation is far more fragmented. And currently we see violence surge in Baghdad and Basra. In fact, it has also remained sporadic and significant in
several other parts of Iraq over the past year, notwithstanding the notable drop in Baghdad and Anbar Province.

More disturbing, Prime Minister Maliki has initiated military action and then dragged in US forces to help his own troops destroy his Shiite competitors. This is a political setback, not a political
solution. Such is the result of the surge tactic.

No less disturbing has been the steady violence in the Mosul area, and the tensions in Kirkuk between Kurds, Arabs, and Turkomen. A showdown over control of the oil fields there surely awaits us. And the idea that some kind of a federal solution can cut this Gordian knot strikes me as a wild fantasy, wholly out of touch with Kurdish realities.

Also disturbing is Turkey’s military incursion to destroy Kurdish PKK groups in the border region. That confronted the US government with a choice: either to support its NATO ally, or to make good on its commitment to Kurdish leaders to insure their security. It chose the former, and that makes it clear to the Kurds that the United States will sacrifice their security to its larger interests in Turkey.

Turning to the apparent success in Anbar province and a few other Sunni areas, this is not the positive situation it is purported to be. Certainly violence has declined as local Sunni shieks have begun to cooperate with US forces. But the surge tactic cannot be given full credit. The decline started earlier on Sunni initiative. What are their motives? First, anger at al Qaeda operatives and second, their financial plight.

Their break with al Qaeda should give us little comfort. The
Sunnis welcomed anyone who would help them kill Americans,
including al Qaeda. The concern we hear the president and his aides
express about a residual base left for al Qaeda if we withdraw is utter
nonsense. The Sunnis will soon destroy al Qaeda if we leave Iraq.
The Kurds do not allow them in their region, and the Shiites,
like the Iranians, detest al Qaeda. To understand why, one need only
take note of the al Qaeda public diplomacy campaign over the past
year or so on internet blogs. They implore the United States to bomb
and invade Iran and destroy this apostate Shiite regime.
As an aside, it gives me pause to learn that our vice president
and some members of the Senate are aligned with al Qaeda on
spreading the war to Iran.

Let me emphasize that our new Sunni friends insist on being
paid for their loyalty. I have heard, for example, a rough estimate that
the cost in one area of about 100 square kilometers is $250,000 per
day. And periodically they threaten to defect unless their fees are
increased. You might want to find out the total costs for these deals
forecasted for the next several years, because they are not small and
they do not promise to end. Remember, we do not own these people.
We merely rent them. And they can break the lease at any moment.
At the same time, this deal protects them to some degree from the
government’s troops and police, hardly a sign of political
reconciliation.

Now let us consider the implications of the proliferating deals
with the Sunni strongmen. They are far from unified among
themselves. Some remain with al Qaeda. Many who break and join
our forces are beholden to no one. Thus the decline in violence
reflects a dispersion of power to dozens of local strong men who
distrust the government and occasionally fight among themselves.
Thus the basic military situation is far worse because of the
proliferation of armed groups under local military chiefs who follow a
proliferating number of political bosses.

This can hardly be called greater military stability, much less
progress toward political consolidation, and to call it fragility that
needs more time to become success is to ignore its implications. At
the same time, Prime Minister Maliki’s military actions in Basra and
Baghdad, indicate even wider political and military fragmentation. We
are witnessing is more accurately described as the road to the
Balkanization of Iraq, that is, political fragmentation. We are being
asked by the president to believe that this shift of so much power and
finance to so many local chieftains is the road to political
centralization. He describes the process as building the state from
the bottom up.

I challenge you to press the administration’s witnesses this week to explain this absurdity. Ask them to name a single historical
case where power has been aggregated successfully from local
strong men to a central government except through bloody violence
leading to a single winner, most often a dictator. That is the history of
feudal Europe’s transformation to the age of absolute monarchy. It is
the story of the American colonization of the west and our Civil War.
It took England 800 years to subdue clan rule on what is now the English-Scottish border. And it is the source of violence in Bosnia and Kosovo.

How can our leaders celebrate this diffusion of power as
effective state building? More accurately described, it has placed the
United States astride several civil wars. And it allows all sides to
consolidate, rearm, and refill their financial coffers at the US expense.

To sum up, we face a deteriorating political situation with an
over extended army. When the administration’s witnesses appear
before you, you should make them clarify how long the army and
marines can sustain this band-aid strategy.

The only sensible strategy is to withdraw rapidly but in good order. Only that step can break the paralysis now gripping US
strategy in the region. The next step is to choose a new aim, regional
stability, not a meaningless victory in Iraq. And progress toward that
goal requires revising our policy toward Iran. If the president merely
renounced his threat of regime change by force, that could prompt
Iran to lessen its support to Taliban groups in Afghanistan. Iran
detests the Taliban and supports them only because they will kill
more Americans in Afghanistan as retaliation in event of a US attack
on Iran. Iran’s policy toward Iraq would also have to change radically as we withdraw. It cannot want instability there. Iraqi Shiites are Arabs, and they know that Persians look down on them. Cooperation between them has its limits.

No quick reconciliation between the US and Iran is likely, but
US steps to make Iran feel more secure make it far more conceivable
than a policy calculated to increase its insecurity. The president’s
policy has reinforced Iran’s determination to acquire nuclear
weapons, the very thing he purports to be trying to prevent.

Withdrawal from Iraq does not mean withdrawal from the
region. It must include a realignment and reassertion of US forces
and diplomacy that give us a better chance to achieve our aim.

A number of reasons are given for not withdrawing soon and completely. I have refuted them repeatedly before but they have more lives than a cat. Let try again me explain why they don’t make
sense.

First, it is insisted that we must leave behind military training
element with no combat forces to secure them. This makes no sense
at all. The idea that US military trainers left alone in Iraq can be safe
and effective is flatly rejected by several NCOs and junior officers I
have heard describe their personal experiences. Moreover, training foreign forces before they have a consolidated political authority to command their loyalty is a windmill tilt. Finally, Iraq is not short on military skills.

Second, it is insisted that chaos will follow our withdrawal. We
heard that argument as the “domino theory” in Vietnam. Even so, the
path to political stability will be bloody regardless of whether we
withdraw or not. The idea that the United States has a moral
responsibility to prevent this ignores that reality. We are certainly to
blame for it, but we do not have the physical means to prevent it.
American leaders who insist that it is in our power to do so are
misleading both the public and themselves if they believe it.
The real moral question is whether to risk the lives of more
Americans. Unlike preventing chaos, we have the physical means to
stop sending more troops where many will be killed or wounded. That
is the moral responsibility to our country which no American leaders
seems willing to assume.

Third, nay sayers insist that our withdrawal will create regional instability. This confuses cause with effect. Our forces in Iraq and our threat to change Iran’s regime are making the region unstable. Those who link instability with a US withdrawal have it exactly backwards. Our ostrich strategy of keeping our heads buried in the sands of Iraq has done nothing but advance our enemies’ interest.

I implore you to reject these fallacious excuses for prolonging the commitment of US forces to war in Iraq.

Thanks for this opportunity to testify today.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on General William Odom Tells Senate Rapid Withdrawal is Only Solution

Government Plans to Cut Army War Tours

April 4, 2008 – Washington, DC — The Bush administration plans to announce next week that U.S. soldiers’ combat tours will be reduced from 15 months to 12 months in Iraq and Afghanistan beginning later this summer, The Associated Press has learned.

The decision, expected to get final, formal approval in the days ahead, comes as Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, prepares to deliver a progress report to Congress next week on the improved security situation there. He is also expected to make recommendations for future troop levels.

A senior administration official said Friday that plans are to deploy soldiers for 12 months, then give them 12 months rest time at home. Exactly which units would be affected is not yet clear. The official spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of the announcement.

The move to shorter deployments has been pushed by Gen. George Casey, Army chief of staff, as a way to reduce the strain on troops battered by long and repeated tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. But that goal has been hindered by the ongoing security demands in Iraq.

Officials have been publicly tightlipped in recent days about the move to reduce the tours. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday he expected a decision by President Bush “fairly soon” on the Army’s proposal. But he also cautioned that cutting troops’ time on the battlefront will impose limits on what the military can do in the future.

“So I think the bottom line is, we’re all still looking at that. But I think we’ll have a better idea of what we think we can do, what we ought to do, in the fairly near future,” Gates told reporters Friday.

What the future holds for troops in Iraq will become clearer when Petraeus goes before congressional committees Tuesday.

Petraeus is expected to lay out his proposal for a pause in troop cuts after July when the last of the five additional brigades ordered to Iraq last year have come home. And he will likely tell lawmakers how many more troops could be withdrawn this year, as long as conditions in Iraq remained stable.

His presentation will include statistics reflecting the reduction in violence over the past seven months, but it will also note the latest spike in fighting in Basra, as Iraqi security forces took on Shiite militias, and the attacks that stretched out into Baghdad.

Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, are expected to tout political advancements by the Iraqis, although they will note that much more needs to be done.

Officials said Friday that the Army proposal to reduce tours is on track. Top military leaders made it clear to Bush in a closed-door meeting late last month that they are worried about the war’s growing strain on troops and their families.

Gates made the decision to extend deployments to 15 months last year, because that was the only way the Army could provide enough troops for the Bush-ordered military buildup aimed at quelling the violence in Baghdad.

Ever since, Gates, Casey and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have said they want to go back to 12 months tours as soon as possible.

There are now 158,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, including 18 combat brigades — down from a peak of 20 brigades for much of the past year. By the end of July, military leaders have said those numbers would fall to 140,000 troops, including 15 combat brigades.

Casey has said he could reduce combat tours if the demands on the Army were cut back to a total of 15 brigades in the war zone. At the end of July there would be 13 in Iraq — along with two Marine units — and two Army brigades in Afghanistan.

In a related move Friday, Democrats signaled that they don’t see much hope in ending the Iraq war this year so long as Bush insists U.S. troops remain committed there in large numbers.

Still, party leaders wrote to Bush on Friday to tell him it’s not too late to change course and plead with him not to leave the war for the next president to handle.

“We are deeply concerned that you and the congressional Republican leadership are intent on staying the current course throughout your administration and then handing the Iraq war off to future presidents,” the Democrats wrote.

Others said they hope to see continued efforts to force troop withdrawals, but they acknowledged they were unlikely to succeed.

“I expect most of our troops to still be there” come the end of the year, said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

“Until there’s either a big enough majority in the Senate or a change in the president’s (approach), I don’t see a significant improvement situation improvement in Iraq,” Levin said in a conference call with reporters.

Sen. Joe Biden, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, predicted in the same conference call that the situation in Iraq will grow considerably worse by September “because the administration seems to have no political game plan.”

Since Democrats lack a veto-proof majority, they have repeatedly failed to force Bush to accept any anti-war legislation, including one measure supported by many Republicans that would have required that troops spend more time at home between combat tours.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Government Plans to Cut Army War Tours

The Politics of Bullets

April 3, 2008- Five years after the fall of Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, the new Iraqi political system created by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in 2003 and then revised by the United Nations in 2004, is still trapped within the boundaries of sectarianism, ethnicity and lack of security. Iraqis themselves who had been subject to all forms of oppression and atrocities by the old regime have become victims to new dictators brought in by the occupying forces.

The first of them was Paul Bremer, the American governor of occupied Iraq who took over after Saddam, and who, for the first time in Iraq, established a political system based on ethnic and sectarian quota representation. Five years on, Iraq is in political chaos with no hope in sight that the country can soon become a real democracy as the American leadership promised before invading Iraq. During his term in Iraq, Paul Bremer enjoyed the right to veto decisions by the Governing Council that he himself appointed. Bremer also used an army of advisers in all Iraqi departments, who were the real ministers and decision-makers in the Iraqi administration.

The fierce political confrontation that erupted between Bremer and the UN Special Representative of the secretary-general in Iraq, the late Sergio de Mello, that ended in the death of de Mello in the Canal Hotel explosion in August 2003, left Bremer as the sole political master in Iraq. It will be recorded in the history of Iraq that the American governor, Paul Bremer, was the one who established sectarianism in Iraqi politics, laid down the foundations of a quota political system, and promoted either directly or by proxy the surge of violence in Iraq by permitting armed militias to cross the borders from Iran into Iraq and by turning a blind eye to the formation and arming of other militias inside Iraq.

US policy towards Iraq in the last 25 years swung from one extreme to the other. During the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war, the US supported Iraq militarily, financially and diplomatically, and pushed its allies in the Arab world to back the Iraqi dictator. The war ended in a no-win situation and cost the Iraqis dearly.

In 1990 US policy towards Iraq went swiftly to the opposite extreme — total siege and isolation of the war-ravaged country. As the US and its allies were preparing for a military push to eject Saddam’s forces from Kuwait, the US State Department started a dialogue with Iraqi opposition leaders in exile. The idea was to prepare a political alternative for the ailing regime.

However, in March 1991 an opportunity to remove the Iraqi leader was wasted when the US and Saudi Arabia agreed to allow him to use his air force against the popular uprising in Iraq.

The US State Department was meanwhile busy in forging close ties with Iraqi “liberals”, encouraging them to mobilise other political opposition forces against Saddam. The creation of a new political group called the Free Iraq Council in early 1991 by Saad Salih Jabr, Sadiq Al-Attia and Hazem Al-Shaalan was a landmark action as many Iraqi opposition figures joined the new group that seemed to have the backing of the US, UK and Saudi Arabia.

The Free Iraq Council was not the only active political group against Saddam at the time. Other political forces also established their own political forums in exile. Arab nationalists, Baathists loyal to Syria, other breakaway factions, communists and Kurds found refuge in Damascus. Islamic factions found support in Tehran, while the so-called democrats carried out their activities in European capitals such as London, Vienna, Stockholm and Geneva.

Between 1990 and 1998 the Iraqi opposition was seen as a political mix, composed of four main political currents in addition to the main parties representing Iraqi Kurds, Arab nationalists, liberals, social democrats, communists and religious groups. Tehran was of course the main political base for the religious current, but there were also a number of religious groups that set up shop in London such as Al-Khoie Foundation, headed by Majeed Al-Khoie, and Ahlul Bait Foundation, headed by Mohamed Bahr Al-Uloum.

After the 1991 war, Iran developed better relations with the Arab world. New offices were opened in Damascus for the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iran (SCIRI) and the Daawa Party with the help of the Syrian government.

As Iraqi opposition groups were busy gathering support for their future plans in Iraq, meetings and conferences were held, mainly in London and Vienna, to bring all Iraqi political opposition groups closer to a harmonised vision for post-Saddam Iraq. Ayad Allawi, Saad Salih Jabr, Ahmed Chalabi, Salah Omar Al-Ali, Mohamed Baqir Al-Hakim, Muwaffaq Al-Rubaie and many other political figures helped bring these groups together.

There was a broad agreement that the new Iraq should be democratic, pluralistic and at peace with its neighbours. The idea to establish a federal region for the Kurds was floated by Kurdish leaders (Talbani, Barzani, Fouad Maasoum and Mahmoud Othman), discussed thoroughly in London, Vienna, Geneva and Stockholm, and was broadly accepted. But there was no mention at all of a political quota system in Iraq that would give the Iraqi Shia 60 per cent of the seats in any future governing bodies, including the parliament and government.

In 1998 when the US Congress passed “Free Iraq Act”, only SCIRI and the Daawa Party supported by Tehran demanded a quota representation that would give them a decisive role in shaping the future of Iraq. From that time onward political representation on a quota basis was promoted by the American administration and supported by thinktank groups such as the American Enterprise Institute. Political opposition leaders from now on would be classified as Shia, Sunni and Kurd not as liberal, nationalist, social democrat and religious, a fine piece of political deception engineered by the US administration.

The fall of Saddam in April 2003 and the destruction of all Iraqi state entities resulted in an overall vacuum of power in Iraq. The Badr Brigade, the armed wing of SCIRI, was allowed by the Americans to cross the border from Iran into Iraq even before the fall of Saddam. Hizbullah of Iraq was helped by Iran to take up a strong position in the south, moving north and west from Al-Ahwar. The Muslim Ulama Association declared jihad. Muqtada Al-Sadr also declared jihad and started forming the Mahdi Army. Altogether there was an explosion in the number of militia organisations, with altercations daily taking place in the streets of Baghdad, Basra, Mosul and other Iraqi cities.

The trend to militarise Iraqi political and religious groups was essential for self- defence in the state of chaos that resulted from the occupation and Bremer’s decision to dismantle Iraqi institutions. That trend was helped by the fact that tons of ammunitions and arms were available everywhere in Iraq in deserted army camps and in locations known to the locals or to Baath party officials who then sold them on the market.

Within a few months after the occupation, all political parties and religious groups in Iraq had acquired their own military capabilities. Gangs and armed groups with no connection to political factions also appeared in the streets of Baghdad and many Iraqi cities, small towns and the countryside. Endless supply lines of men, arms, ammunitions and funds flowed through the borders from Iran providing armed militia with a secure lifeline enabling them to spread their influence.

These militia groups have become the powerhouse for violence and instability in Iraq. No political progress or reconstruction can be achieved without disarming these groups and eliminating their influence. The rivalry between political parties, especially the Shia ones, provides leaders of these parties with the justification to use arms in order to settle political differences and gain influence in the country.

The ongoing wave of violence in southern provinces and in Baghdad between the Iraqi government and American troops on one hand, and the Mahdi Army on the other, is one ugly feature of this political rivalry. The recent battle that started quietly in February and escalated to an almost all-out war reveals the deep political rift between two Shia political forces — the Mahdi Army fighting for the integrity of Iraq and its Arab identity and the alliance of SCIRI and the Daawa Party supported by Iran and US troops, that want a federal region in the south of Iraq parallel to the federal region of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Nuri Al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister, who is exercising his authority as the high commander of the Iraqi Armed Forces, has targeted his opponents, telling them to “surrender or die”. Muqtada Al-Sadr, perhaps realising his strategic disadvantage in the fight, is calling for a political solution in order to spare the blood of his own people. The political landscape of occupied Iraq has been reduced to bullets in this tragic showdown.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on The Politics of Bullets

Another KBR Rape Case

April 3, 2008 – Houston, TX — It was an early January morning in 2008 when 42-year-old Lisa Smith*, a paramedic for a defense contractor in southern Iraq, woke up to find her entire room shaking. The shipping container that served as her living quarters was reverberating from nearby rocket attacks, and she was jolted awake to discover an awful reality. “Right then my whole life was turned upside down,” she says.

What follows is the story she told me in a lengthy, painful on-the-record interview, conducted in a lawyer’s office in Houston, Texas, while she was back from Iraq on a brief leave.

That dawn, naked, covered in blood and feces, bleeding from her anus, she found a US soldier she did not know lying naked in the bed next to her: his gun lay on the floor beside the bed, she could not rouse him and all she could remember of the night before was screaming and screaming as the soldier anally penetrated her while a colleague who worked for defense contractor KBR held her hand–but instead of helping her, as she had hoped, he jammed his penis in her mouth.

Over the next few weeks Smith would be told to keep quiet about the incident by a KBR supervisor. The camp’s military liaison officer also told her not to speak about what had happened, she says. And she would follow these instructions. “Because then, all of a sudden, if you’ve done exactly what you’ve been instructed not to do–tell somebody–then you’re in danger,” Smith says.

As a brand-new arrival at Camp Harper, she had not yet forged many connections and was working in a red zone under regular rocket fire alongside the very men who had participated in the attack. (At one point, as the sole medical provider, she was even forced to treat one of her alleged assailants for a minor injury.) She waited two and a half weeks, until she returned to a much larger facility, to report the incident. “It’s very easy for bad things to happen down there and not have it be even slightly suspicious.”

Over the next month and a half, she says, she faced a series of hurdles. She would be discouraged from reporting the incident by several KBR employees, she says. She would be confused by the lack of any written medical protocol for sexual assault (as the only medical person on site, she treated herself with doxycycline). She would wander through a tangled maze of interviews with KBR and Army investigators about the incident without any clear explanation of her rights. She would be asked to sign several documents agreeing not to publicly discuss the incident, she says. She describes having her computer–which she saw as her lifeline, her main access to the outside world–confiscated by KBR staff as “evidence” within hours of receiving her first e-mail from a stateside lawyer she had reached out to for help.

And eventually she would find herself temporarily assigned to sleeping quarters between two Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) officials, who, she says, assured her that it was for her own safety, since her alleged assailants were at the same camp for questioning; they roamed freely. When she wanted to move about the camp to get meals etc., she was escorted.

Smith felt very alone. But she was not.

In fact, a growing number of women employees working for US defense contractors in the Middle East are coming forward with complaints of violence directed at them. As the Iraq War drags on, and as stories of US security contractors who seem to operate with impunity continue to emerge (like Blackwater and its deadly attack against Iraqi civilians on September 16, 2007), a rash of new sexual assault and sexual harassment complaints are being lodged against overseas contractors–by their own employees. Todd Kelly, a lawyer in Houston, says his firm alone has fifteen clients with sexual assault, sexual harassment and retaliation complaints (for reporting assault and/or harassment) against Halliburton and its former subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root LLC (KBR), as well as Cayman Island-based Service Employees International Inc., a KBR shell company. (While Smith is technically an SEII employee, she is supervised by KBR staff as a KBR employee.)

Jamie Leigh Jones, whose story made the news in December–when she alleged that her 2005 gang rape by Halliburton/KBR co-workers in Iraq was being covered up by the company and the US government–also initially believed hers was an isolated incident. But today, Jones reports that she has formed a nonprofit to support the many other women with similar stories. Currently, she has forty US contractor employees in her database who have contacted her alleging a variety of sexual assault or sexual harassment incidents–and claim that Halliburton, KBR and SEII have either failed to help them or outright obstructed them.

Most of these complaints never see the light of day, thanks to the fine print in employee contracts that compels employees into binding arbitration instead of allowing their complaints to be tried in a public courtroom. Criminal prosecutions are practically nonexistent, as the US Justice Department has turned a blind eye to these cases.

Jones’s case was the subject of a House Judiciary hearing in December. Right now, Jones’s lawyers are awaiting a decision on whether she will get her day in court or be forced to submit to binding arbitration, which KBR is insisting on. Likewise, the company is pressuring Lisa Smith into pursuing her claims against the company through its Dispute Resolution Program based on the contract she signed before she went to Iraq. Critics argue that the company’s arbitration system allows it to minimize bad publicity and lets assailants off the hook.

Smith, who retained a lawyer only two weeks ago, is weighing her options.

KBR attorney Celia Ballí, responding to a letter from Smith’s lawyer, wrote in a letter dated March 17, “The Company takes Ms. Smith’s allegations very seriously and has and will continue to cooperate with the proper law enforcement authorities in the investigation of her allegations to the extent possible.” Ballí noted that the matter has been turned over to the CID and said that Smith has been “afforded with counseling and referral services through the Company’s Employee Assistance Program.” Ballí wrote in the letter that there are “inaccuracies” in the description Smith has put forward regarding her treatment after the alleged sexual assault. “Therefore, the Company requests that you fully investigate all the facts alleged by Ms. [Smith] as the Company intends to pursue all available remedies should false statements be publicized.”

Such “investigation” may prove difficult for her attorney. In the next sentence, the company says it is “not in a position to release any personnel or investigative records regarding Ms. [Smith’s] allegations at this time.” In response to a request for comment on this story, a company spokesperson wrote in an e-mail that Smith’s “allegations are currently under investigation by the appropriate law enforcement authorities. Therefore, KBR cannot comment on the specifics of the allegations or investigation.” The spokesperson added, “Any allegation of sexual harassment or assault is taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.” It remains unclear, however, what law enforcement investigation is examining the KBR employee’s role in the alleged assault, since Army CID is charged with investigating only cases that involve US military personnel.

For her part, Smith can’t quite call herself a victim yet. In the course of several conversations over several days, she never once says the word “victim” out loud. Let alone “rape.” Let alone “gang rape.”

She simply describes what happened, moving through the course of events as if this had happened to someone else, as if the recitation of details were an act of contrition she was compelled to perform.

Like many rape survivors, she feels guilty. In this case, Smith confesses that she broke company policy the evening of the incident by having a drink (alcohol is expressly forbidden). She had landed at Camp Harper only a week earlier, when she returned from a stateside R&R with her family. Since arriving in Iraq six months earlier, she had been at a larger facility, Camp Cedar. But her new posting at Camp Harper put her in a smaller outpost of sixty people: part US military, part KBR employees, part SEII workers. When some KBR colleagues invited her to join them for a drink after work, she did.

Smith says she had only one drink–and she asked someone to hold it after a few sips while she went outside for a smoke. Smith’s attorney, Daniel Ross, speculates that someone slipped the date-rape drug Rohypnol in her drink.

Smith’s memory of the evening is fuzzy, and the only thing she remembers clearly about the events surrounding her assault is the aforementioned moment of oral and anal penetration. She also remembers screaming.

The morning after the incident, Smith says, she was called into the office of her supervisor, who was Camp Harper’s KBR manager; he appeared to know–at least in part–what had happened. She would later learn from an Army investigator that her supervisor had been in the room where the drinking and alleged rape had taken place at least twice that evening. Smith, who appears to have blacked out, has no direct knowledge of his participation–or indeed of who else among the crowd initially gathered in the room may have been involved. “He was one of the people involved in saying, ‘Don’t say anything,'” Smith says of her conversation with the KBR camp manager the morning following the incident. “Then he said, ‘This will never happen again.'”

Smith offered to pack up and go home. But he sent her back to work. First, though, he responded to Smith’s plea to get the soldier she still had not been able to rouse out of her bed by contacting the military’s Special Forces liaison at Camp Harper. The liaison, whom Smith knew only by his nickname, DJ, was direct. “He told me not to speak of this to anyone and that he would take care of it,” Smith says.

Smith sat tight for a few days but then contacted a friend at Camp Cedar, where her permanent assignment was, and asked if the Employee Assistance person for KBR was back from her R&R yet. She was not. Smith was worried about even discussing the incident, since she knew that none of her conversations were confidential. “Camp Harper has only three phones,” she says. “One is in the camp manager’s office. One is in the Operations Office. And one is in a hallway.” She wavered. A few days later, when she knew that the Employee Assistance person for KBR would be back, Smith called her on the phone. The Employee Assistance woman was a friend of hers and, without getting too specific about the details of the incident, Smith sought her advice. “We had worked other situations together in the past, and I talked to her and she was like, ‘I don’t know if I’d report that. You know what happens when you report things.’ And I did. I’d seen it.”

Despite Smith’s silence, rumors were circulating at the camp. Two and a half weeks after the incident, she was questioned by someone from the KBR Employee Relations office, who appeared to be investigating a series of improprieties at the camp, Smith says. Fearful, she denied knowledge of any wrongdoing at the camp.

When Smith returned to her original posting at Camp Cedar, a larger facility with a human resources person and more friends she could approach for advice, she recontacted the man from Employee Relations who had been investigating “improprieties” and told him her story.

This set the wheels in motion for a series of interviews, most of which concluded with Smith being asked to sign a nondisclosure statement by representatives of the company, she says.

Eventually, shortly before she was slated to return to the United States for R&R, one of the investigators for KBR suggested that Smith get tested for STDs, hepatitis, HIV, etc. and took her to the nearby military Combat Support Hospital. “The doctor took me into her office, and we talked a long time before she did an exam,” Smith says. “We talked about the assault and the details and she was actually very, very kind and encouraged me to report it to the military. She tried convincing me that it wasn’t my fault [for having a drink]. She was just a really kind lady–and that was the first time I had given any of the whole details of all that had happened.”

In fact, military protocol compelled the doctor to report the incident; Smith was immediately contacted by the Army Criminal Investigation Division and questioned.

A few days later, shortly after contacting an attorney in the United States to advise her on her rights, the attorney sent her a draft letter he was sending to KBR on her behalf, notifying the company that he was representing her and briefly summarizing her accusations. KBR came to her office within hours, she alleges, and confiscated her computer as “evidence,” effectively limiting her access to the outside world. The CID did not respond to requests for comment.

Many victims of sexual assault find themselves without meaningful recourse when they work for US defense contractors that are powerful companies on foreign soil. “It’s one big battle over where to fight the battle,” said Smith’s attorney Ross, who is considering if and how and against whom to file charges on behalf of his client.

Take Jamie Leigh Jones’s case, for example.

Since Jones alleged she was gang raped in 2005, while KBR was still a Halliburton subsidiary, her case is covered by an extralegal Halliburton dispute-resolution program implemented under then-CEO Dick Cheney in 1997. The program has all the hallmarks of the Cheney White House’s penchant for secrecy. While Halliburton declared the program’s aim was to reduce costly and lengthy litigation (and limit possible damage awards in the process), in practice it meant that employees like Jones signed away their constitutional right to a jury trial–and agreed to have any disputes heard in a private arbitration hearing without hope of appeal. (While two lower courts declared the tactic illegal, in 2001, the Texas Supreme Court overturned those rulings.)

Accordingly, Jones faces two major roadblocks in the fight for justice. The first is the battle to have the perpetrators prosecuted in criminal court–which, because of Order 17, may be nearly impossible. According to the order, imposed by Paul Bremer, US defense contractors in Iraq cannot be prosecuted in the Iraqi criminal justice system. While they can technically be tried in US federal court, the Justice Department has shown no interest in prosecuting her case. In fact, for more than two years now, the DOJ has brought no criminal charges in the matter. Representative Ted Poe, a Texas Republican who has taken up Jones’s cause, reports that federal agencies refuse to discuss the status of the investigation; meanwhile, in December, the DOJ refused to send a representative to the related Congressional hearing on the matter.

Even more appalling, the Justice Department, which can and should prosecute most of these cases, has declined to do so. “There is no rational explanation for this,” says Scott Horton, a lecturer at Columbia Law School who specializes in the law of armed conflict. Prosecutorial jurisdiction for crimes like the alleged rape of Jones is easily established under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act and the Patriot Act’s special maritime and territorial jurisdiction provisions. But somebody has to want to prosecute the cases.

Horton wonders what the 200 Justice Department employees and contractors stationed in Iraq do all day, noting that there has not been a single completed criminal conviction against a US contractor implicated in a violent crime anywhere in Iraq since the invasion.

“We have a complete process in place for solving military criminal violations when soldiers commit crimes, but for the 180,000 employees of private contractors over there, there is nothing,” says Horton. “It’s like Texas west of the Pecos in 1890 over there!” It’s just common sense that you’re going to have some violent crimes when you throw this many people together, he says. “Think about it. You have 180,000 people over there, you’re going to have a few crimes. I don’t know how anybody could fairly view this as a partisan issue. Crimes happen when you bring people together anywhere, and in a war setting, without adult supervision, crimes are going to increase. That is just a fact. And if you eliminate law enforcement, the crimes are going to get worse because people will quickly learn they can get away with it.”

Things don’t look a whole lot rosier when it comes to seeking relief in the civil courts.

For example, KBR is fighting tooth and nail to make sure Jones’s case stays in private arbitration, as per her contract. And given that in February, a federal district court ruled that Tracy Barker–another KBR employee who says she was sexually assaulted–couldn’t present her case in open court, prospects for the civil suit Jones brought last May look dim.

And that’s particularly troubling, according to Jones’s attorney Todd Kelly, because the clandestine nature of arbitration allows corporate malfeasance to go unchecked. Trials serve a purpose above and beyond pronouncing verdicts. “It’s like the Enron trial here in Houston,” he says. “Where every day in the Houston Chronicle there was a story exposing what egregious things go unchecked in the corporate culture. The United States got to peek into the corporate underwear drawer and saw it was not as pretty as it looked from the outside.” Kelly argues that Halliburton and KBR ought to be similarly exposed to public scrutiny via jury trials. These civil remedies arranged in a secretive manner have repercussions beyond the dollar figures. “It allows for future rapes to occur,” he says, arguing that these defense contractors have been able to quietly settle and compel victims to remain silent: the public remains oblivious to the crimes, no one is punished and a hostile and violent workplace continues unchecked.

In the future, the sole recourse for victims like Jones may be through Congress. Last October the House overwhelmingly passed legislation that requires the FBI to investigate allegations of wrongdoing and permits all US contractors to be tried under American jurisdiction. The Senate has yet to vote on the legislation.

For her part, Jones intends to persevere. “Part of the reason I’m going forward with this case is to change the system,” she says. “Who knows how many of us rape victims are out there?”

Smith, who is now back in the United States on two weeks R&R, is uncertain what the future holds for her. “I don’t think I’ve been able to make any decisions or plans or goals yet,” she says. First of all, there is the fact that she arrived home from Iraq to learn that her husband had been rushed to the hospital earlier that day after a partial stroke. She needs her job with SEII because she is the one who gets health insurance–vital not only for the two teenage daughters still living at home but for her husband, with his health problems. She worries, “Human Resources made me sign statements saying that I’m supposed to be back in Dubai on April 7 at 10 p.m., and if I’m not there I will not be reimbursed my $1,600 airfare or for my two weeks’ vacation.”

And indeed, the March 17 letter her attorney received from KBR attorney Celia Ballí says that Smith can be placed on medical leave “pending resolution of the investigations related to this matter” but warns, “However, per Company policy, [her] leave will be unpaid.” She is welcome to apply for workers’ comp, the lawyer states.

Can she return to her old job as a paramedic in Lena, Illinois?

“Yes, my license is in good standing, and I’ve never had a problem,” she says. “But it means a difference of about $6,000 a month in salary and no health insurance. My biggest reason for working for KBR in the first place was so I could get insurance for my husband and girls…” Smith’s sentence trails off. She begins a new one. Stops midway. She tries again to organize her thoughts. “I’ve been trying to figure out how I’m going to go back to work. How am I going to make myself do this?” she says, manifesting the confused indecisiveness and sense of a “foreshortened future” that are hallmarks of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Has she seen a rape crisis counselor?

Not yet, Smith says. “Someone from KBR Employee Assistance gave me a flier to call someone in Houston,” she says, but it turned out to be for general financial or emotional problems during deployment. They referred her to a website. “I’m 9,000 miles away in Iraq and the website says, ‘Please put in your zip code and we’ll refer you to a rape crisis counselor in your zip code area.'”

Smith, who says she cannot sleep, appears exhausted. She tells her story without affect, little inflection and tamped emotion. She only tears up twice, most visibly when speaking about one of her sons, a 22-year-old US soldier who served in the Middle East recently. While she was in the process of debating whether–and how–to go about reporting her assault, she contacted him to see what his feelings were on the matter. “I didn’t want him upset with his mom,” she says, explaining that she was very loyal to the mission in Iraq and that he was similarly loyal to his service. “I was assaulted by somebody who was wearing the same uniform as him, and I just didn’t want him to think bad of me. My children are pretty much my world.” Smith’s eyes fill with tears, and she pauses to collect herself. “I didn’t want him to be upset because I was calling out somebody who was wearing his same uniform. They’re supposed to be proud of what they do. And I’m proud of my sons. And in my mind, I live that war every day. I can make all sorts of excuses under the sun for bad behavior.”

Her son advised her to make the formal complaint.

“He was like, ‘Of course you’re going to talk to CID, Mom. Of course you are.'” Smith smiles. “He doesn’t think people should be allowed to wear his uniform and act like that. He’s been in the war too and says it’s no excuse. They’re better trained than that. That’s what my son thought. And he’s not angry at his mom.”

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Another KBR Rape Case