US 'to scrap' contractor immunity

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:22 am

from link

The US has agreed to scrap immunity for foreign security guards in Iraq, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari says.

[align=center]
Iraqi critics say security firms act with little concern for civilian life[/align]

The US embassy in Baghdad has not confirmed the announcement, which comes as the US and Iraq are negotiating a controversial security pact.

Foreign firms employing thousands of guards won huge contracts in Iraq after the 2003 US-led invasion, but were not subject to Iraqi or US military law.

Iraqi frustration became fury last year when guards killed 17 people in a day.

Correspondents say a deal on scrapping contractors' immunity brings the two countries closer to signing the long-term security pact.

The pact is meant to establish ground rules for a continuing US troop presence in Iraq after the UN mandate for foreign forces stationed there expires in December 2008.

'Trigger-happy'

The firm involved in the 2007 killings - Blackwater, one of the biggest security contractors in Iraq and which protects US diplomats - says its guards were acting in self-defence.

Eyewitnesses say guards of a US diplomatic convoy started shooting without provocation.

The incident brought to the fore a long-standing Iraqi complaint that the guards were little more than trigger-happy mercenaries.

In addition to the immunity question, there are also discussions about the number of permanent US military bases in Iraq, immunity for the US military and its rights to detain and imprison Iraqi citizens.

luke · Post by **luke** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:02 am

be interesting to see how this develops ... i think the first line says it all 'The US embassy in Baghdad has not confirmed the announcement' ... whats the bet they never do!

Post by **faceless** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:45 am

Surely it must break some international law that these bastards were immune?

luke · Post by **luke** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:06 pm

whens breaking international law worried the american government?!

Post by **faceless** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:10 pm

sadly you're right - but as long as they're doing it in order to protect the prosperity of American oil and defence companies then we should just accept that it's absolutely necessary!

major.tom · Post by **major.tom** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 2:54 pm

There are a couple points I find interesting about the article:
- no mention of ending the effective immunity of soldiers from any prosecution
- this is all part of a negotiation over permanent military bases and the U.S.'s "rights to detain and imprison Iraqi citizens"

(The final paragraph, as Chomsky says, is often the most interesting part of any article.)

So the U.S. (unofficially) makes a concession to something that most people would take as read -- the application of the rule of law -- in exchange for huge concessions by their victims.