Petraeus issues guidance for Afghan contracting

saltwn · #1 (**permalink**) 09-13-2010, 07:31 AM

Quote:

KABUL, Afghanistan — The NATO command has issued new guidelines for awarding billions of dollars worth of international contracts in Afghanistan, saying that without proper oversight the money could end up in the hands of insurgents and criminals, deepen corruption and undermine efforts to win the loyalty of the Afghan people at a critical juncture in the war.

Quote:

The guidance, issued last week by Gen. David Petraeus and obtained Sunday by The Associated Press, was issued in response to concern that the military's own contracting procedures could be, in some cases, running counter to efforts on the battlefield.

Quote:

"With proper oversight, contracting can spur economic development and support the Afghan government and NATO's campaign objectives," Petraeus wrote in a two-page memorandum. "If, however, we spend large quantities of international contracting funds quickly and with insufficient oversight, it is likely that some of those funds will unintentionally fuel corruption, finance insurgent organizations, strengthen criminal patronage networks and undermine our efforts in Afghanistan."

Quote:

Private contractors, both Afghans and foreigners, provide a range of services to U.S. and NATO forces, including transportation, security, running dining facilities and sanitation at military bases, training and construction.

Quote:

President Hamid Karzai has long criticized the international contracting process, saying that war-weary Afghans have not reaped the full benefits because so much of the money goes to high-priced contractors, subcontractors and powerbrokers.

Afghans also complain that too many contracts are awarded to the same contractors.

Quote:

"Contracts with a broader range of Afghan companies will help break monopolies and weaken patronage networks that breed resentment" among the Afghan people, Petraeus wrote. "In situations where there is no alternative to powerbrokers with links to criminal networks, it may be preferable to forgo the project."

An in-yer-face, can-do kind a guy.

MORE at THE STATE (South Carolina news)

mlurp · #2 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 12:08 PM

I heard on the news earlier that some of these contractors were aiding the Taliban with their earnings.
One had his home raided while a Taliban meeting was in progress.

DOD is adjusting it's approach to these contracts and for now the commanders in their area are to check each group of contactors in their battle
AO's..

Seeems we can't trust anyone in thi8s War but NATO and a majority of the Afghan Army, and I would worry there to.

cnredd · #3 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 12:13 PM

How does the military have lax sight over contractors in the first place?...I would think that would never happen...

mlurp · #4 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

How does the military have lax sight over contractors in the first place?...I would think that would never happen...

Some Senate Commitee is what I heard was looking into what you point out.

It appears we are just tossing so much money out there and hoping it paves the way...

I have not looked for any other news on it yet. But hope and poke isn't any way to fight a war today.

alan · #5 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 12:58 PM

The tangled web has many parts to it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/wo...4minerals.html

mlurp · #6 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat

The tangled web has many parts to it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/wo...4minerals.html

Goood find Pat. In the Afghanistan Thread in the Military Topic area I had mentioned this but not in as much detail...

And it might be why some in the Pakinstan Intel Community play both sides, as Pakinstan does want some say in Afghan when we leave.

And possible the reason Afghan's President want to work with some of the lessor Taliban..

For sure greed has a part to play in it's development.

How ever this plays out I doubt America will get much from it in the end..

alan · #7 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlurp

Goood find Pat. In the Afghanistan Thread in the Military Topic area I had mentioned this but not in as much detail...

And it might be why some in the Pakinstan Intel Community play both sides, as Pakinstan does want some say in Afghan when we leave.

And possible the reason Afghan's President want to work with some of the lessor Taliban..

For sure greed has a part to play in it's development.

How ever this plays out I doubt America will get much from it in the end..

We all know the war in Iraq was about oil

the progressives tell us so.
Obviously, the war in Afghanistan is about minerals (more

).

mlurp · #8 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat

We all know the war in Iraq was about oil

the progressives tell us so.
Obviously, the war in Afghanistan is about minerals (more

).

Which doesn't change a thing I said. I have my doubts that we will get a thing out of this in the short time we have left if the POTUS keeps to the deadline.

And if Iraq doesn't get it's act together we might not get much oil from them either.

The enemy wants to harm us in many ways. One is thru the economy.

saltwn · #9 (**permalink**) 10-09-2010, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat

We all know the war in Iraq was about oil

the progressives tell us so.
Obviously, the war in Afghanistan is about minerals (more

).

Maybe closer to the truth than we might imagine...

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlurp

Which doesn't change a thing I said. I have my doubts that we will get a thing out of this in the short time we have left if the POTUS keeps to the deadline.

And if Iraq doesn't get it's act together we might not get much oil from them either.

The enemy wants to harm us in many ways. One is through the economy.

I hope we at least disable Pakistan's part in all this.
But when the dust settles and the Saudis and others of that Cartel speak to the new leaders in Iraq, maybe he will understand how the cookie crumbles , i.e., Saddam once bucking the "system".

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following User Says Thank You to mlurp For This Useful Post:
saltwn

The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:
saltwn