Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

Credibility Adv. – I/L – Hurts US Credibility

Illegal PMC behavior means no Iraqi support

Singer 7 (Peter, http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2007/1002militarycontractors.aspx, date accessed: 6/25/2010) AJK
The formula for failure isn't hard to calculate. An Iraqi is driving in Baghdad, on his way to work. A convoy of black-tinted SUVs comes down the highway at him, driving in his lane, but in the wrong direction. They are honking their horns at the oncoming traffic and firing machine gun bursts into the road, in front of any vehicle that gets too close. The Iraqi veers to the side of the road. As the SUVs drive by, Western-looking men in sunglasses point machine guns at him. Over the course of the day, that Iraqi civilian might tell X people about how "the Americans almost killed me today, and all I was doing was trying to get to work." Y is the number of other people that convoy ran off the road on its run that day. Z is the number of convoys in Iraq that day. Multiply X times Y times Z times 365, and you have the mathematical equation of how to lose a counterinsurgency within a year.
Contractors are unaccountable and disrespectful- causes widespread perception of US troops as Foreign imperious jerks

Robichaud 7 (Carl, PROGRAM OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY, INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM at the carnegie institute, World Politics Review, 10/31/7) ET

In Afghanistan, problems with security contractors are hardly new. Their actions have attracted little media attention in the West but have sometimes outraged Afghans, as when, during the October 2004 Presidential campaign, one of President Karzai's DynCorps bodyguards slapped Afghanistan's minister of transport in the face. The action, a serious insult in Afghan culture, became for many Afghans as a symbol of foreign imperiousness. But while Afghans privately resent—and sometimes publicly denounce—security contractors, there has been no action against them. For years, several contractors have operated in Afghanistan with virtually no oversight or accountability. While foreign civilians operating in Afghanistan are generally subject to Afghan law and U.S. military personnel come under U.S. military jurisdiction, foreign security contractors fall into a legal gray area. Sometimes they are prosecuted in U.S. courts, as when a contractor working for the CIA in 2003 was convicted of misdemeanor assault for beating to death an Afghan detainee over the course of a two day interrogation (the lack of an autopsy prevented a murder charge). Other times there is no trial at all, as when a contractor with U.S. Protection and Investigations (USPI) was whisked out of the country after shooting and killing his interpreter in 2005.

Contractors lack of credibility makes them seem like the foreign enemy- spurs unrest towards the US forces

Mojumdar 9 (Aunohita, Freelance Journalist, Jul 7-9, Eurasia.Net) ET

A recent shootout in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar that left 10 people dead is helping to focus attention on the issue of private security companies, and the existing lack of accountability concerning their activities. The June 29 incident in Kandahar involved security contractors employed by coalition military forces. A group of the contractors attacked a local police station apparently in an attempt to free a colleague who had been taken into custody for supposedly forging documents. In addition to two senior police officers, eight civilians died in the armed confrontation. Hours after the shootout, Afghan President Hamid Karzai issued a statement asking the US-led coalition forces to hand over the private security contractors suspected of involvement in the killings. Later, 41 Afghan security contractors were placed under arrest. Representatives of coalition forces emphasized that no foreign troops and no "foreign nationals" were involved in the incident. A coalition spokesman went on to characterize the attack as "Afghan on Afghan." Nevertheless, the attack is prompting heightened scrutiny of the coalition practice of employing de-mobilized local militiamen to provide security. Up to 3,000 former Afghan militia fighters are directly employed by the US military in Operation Enduring Freedom, according to an estimate prepared by Swisspeace, a research outfit focusing on conflict resolution.

Credibility Adv. – I/L – Hurts US Credibility

Effects of PMC’s cause perception of immoral behavior and kill public support for the military

Kidwell 5 (Deborah C, Assistant Professor of Military History at the US Army Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, “Public War, Private Fight? The United States and Private Military Companies”, http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/kidwell.pdf AD: 6/24/10) jl

Moreover, a combat-heavy military may detract from the prestige of national military service, discourage some from a military service career, and impair public support for military operations. Policy makers and leaders must consider the possible consequences of the current trends in contractor support on the long-term health of the military services, although, at present, the facts to conduct such analyses are sketchy. Current bonuses include lump-sum payments of up to $15,000 for immediate deployment to the active combat areas of Iraq and Afghanistan.74 Rising bonuses indicate recruitment deficiencies in dangerous positions—possibly resulting in a downward spiral—with escalating bonuses necessary for what may become a less qualified applicant pool.75 Early in 2005, the military announced a more lucrative system of bonuses offered to many Special Forces troops to improve retention.76 The American public may well question the moral aspects of encouraging combat specific positions, which may result in a loss of support and confidence in military organizations. In addition, using American soldiers exclusively to provide combat “tooth” is a curious irony to historical precedent, where nations often hired foreign nationals for some of their most dangerous fighting. Officials must examine the long-term consequences—military readiness, morale, public attitudes, and other issues—before continuing on the present path of routine contractor support.

Contractors are funding the Taliban and warlords for protection- causes us to look like hypocrites

CNN 9 (CNN World, Dec 17-9) ET

"Serious allegations have been brought to [Congress'] attention that private security providers for U.S. transportation contractors in Afghanistan are regularly paying local warlords and the Taliban for security," said Rep. John Tierney, D-Massachusetts, who chairs the House National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee. "After a preliminary inquiry, it has been determined these reports warrant a full-scale ... investigation. If shown to be true, it would mean that the United States is unintentionally engaged in a vast protection racket and, as such, may be indirectly funding the very insurgents we are trying to fight."

Eight companies currently split the Afghan host nation trucking contract, which went into effect in May. The contract, according to Tierney's subcommittee, provides ground transportation in Afghanistan for more than 90 percent of supplies for U.S. troops, including food, fuel and ammunition. Most supplies are shipped overland via Pakistan to Bagram Airfield, the main U.S. base in Afghanistan. They are then distributed to hundreds of other smaller airfields and bases. In the Senate, an oversight subcommittee headed by Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, also is looking into how contractor money is being spent.mFederal auditors state that approximately $950 million in "questioned and unsupported costs" has been submitted by Pentagon contractors for work in Afghanistan, according to a report prepared for Congress. That amount represents 16 percent of the total contract dollars examined so far. The U.S. government has spent more than $23 billion on contracts in Afghanistan since 2002, the report states. There are currently 104,000 Pentagon contractors in Afghanistan -- a figure that could rise to 160,000 to support President Obama's planned troop increase, according to the report. Roughly 100,000 U.S. troops are slated to be in Afghanistan at the height of the coming surge.