Asia Times - Asia's most trusted news source

Front Page

David Isenberg responds

In regard to Jonathan Garratt's disappointment (letter, Nov 4) about my article Protecting Iraq's precarious pipelines (Sep 23), my response is as follows.

I am sympathetic to his sensitivity and touchiness on the subject. It is absolutely true that there has been much sensationalistic and inaccurate coverage of security contractors in Iraq. Unfortunately, this has caused him to see errors where none exist and to perceive imaginary slights and distortions. It may not be quite at the level of the performance of the US intelligence community re "WMD" (weapons of mass destruction) in Iraq, but he is still mostly wrong. Here is why.

First, I used the wrong word in referring to Sean Cleary. As Cleary helped found Erinys, I should have written "founded", not headed. I apologize for my error on that point.

Second, I did not cast any doubt regarding the experience of Erinys and its staff. As Mr Garratt himself notes, my article references a 2003 article in Newsday which notes that the July 25, 2003, Coalition Provisional Authority solicitation for bids provided no details on what would be required to provide security for Iraqi infrastructure, though the CPA did ask bidders to submit a list of five contracts of the same or similar type to demonstrate previous experience. According to the Newsday article, Erinys had never handled a job as large and complicated as this one and its partner firm, Nour, had never worked in the security area. Nothing Mr Garratt wrote contradicts those words. If he has a problem with the Newsday article, then of course he should take it up with Newsday. Incidentally, although he says that article is "inaccurate", he does not say how.

To say that Erinys "directors and senior managers had relevant operational experience within the oil industry" is meaningless. It is akin to saying that because once upon a time I served in the US Navy I am qualified to compete in the Americas Cup. If he wants, Mr Garratt could settle the question easily enough by providing the CVs (curricula vitae) of its directors and senior managers that show their relevant operational experience in the oil industry. I assume from the word "relevant" these people will have previously operated in an active war zone where insurgents are steadily attacking oil infrastructure.

Furthermore, I specifically noted that although competitors questioned Erinys' qualifications, it seemed to be doing its job well enough for the CPA to extend its contract.

Third, Mr Garratt writes that I am wrong to state that Erinys employs soldiers. At best he is playing semantic word games. One of Erinys' own employees is retired British army Major-General John Holmes, something noted on Erinys' own website, and the subject of a press release it put out on March 30 announcing that he had been made a member of the Erinys International board of directors. According to the release, "Prior to his appointment as a director of Erinys International he had provided consultancy services to Erinys." I had the pleasure of speaking with General Holmes in the Netherlands earlier in the year when we both spoke at a seminar and he told me of his periodic trips to Iraq to meet with other expatriates who help to manage the Erinys workforce. He is a fine, intelligent, charming man. But if he is not a soldier, albeit a retired one, such a person does not exist.

Another of the expatriates who worked for Erinys was James Wilshire, who was killed last November. Wilshire retired from the US Marine Corps in 2000 after 20 years of service. Similarly, Francois Styrdom, who was hired by an Erinys subcontractor, Security Applications Systems International, and was killed in January had previously served in the South African military.

Furthermore, when Mr Garratt writes, "We do not employ 'soldiers'," he is simply wrong. As is well known - just Google Kurds and Erinys - a majority of Erinys' workforce are Kurdish peshmerga (which means "ready to die" in Kurdish), the name for the Kurdish fighters in northern Iraq who battled Iraqi forces for decades. Perhaps Mr Garratt means they don't employ any former regular Iraqi military soldiers. He may be right, though it is hard to believe that a workforce that has been over 14,000 didn't employ a few. Still, to say that peshmerga are not soldiers is just absurd.

The other possibility is that Mr Garratt means that Erinys employees should not be viewed as soldiers but rather as guards. I am sympathetic to that viewpoint. I remember from General Holmes' presentation in the Netherlands that he was quite clear on the distinction. And I preserved that distinction in my article. I wrote that Erinys obtained its contract in 2003 to supply and train "guards", not soldiers.

Fourth, I was wrong to write, "Most of the guards come from the former Iraqi army." I should have written that most of them come from the Kurdish forces.

Fifth, I wrote, "Erinys had been negotiating a six-month extension to its contract, which is due to expire December 31." I did not write that these negotiations had succeeded. In fact, I specifically noted that some Iraqi officials expressed misgivings about doing so in light of continuing attacks on the pipelines. In fairness though, the job may be beyond anyone's capability, as the attacks this week, when insurgents sabotaged a northern pipeline that exports crude oil from the Kirkuk area to Ceyhan, a port in Turkey, demonstrate. The explosion forced a shutdown of the pipeline.

And insofar as "misgivings" by Iraqi officials are concerned, I would suggest that Mr Garratt take a deep breath. Misgivings are like opinions; everybody has them. It doesn't mean they are right or influential. The fact that Erinys' contract was extended, as Mr Garratt himself notes, shows that misgivings can be both voiced and ignored.

Sixth, re "organizational errors" - that Erinys did not have a regional HQ (headquarters) in Mosul - the Power Point presentation (Slide No 5) given by General Holmes at the conference in the Netherlands I cited above cites Erinys Regional Operations in Mosul, Kirkuk, Baghdad and Basrah. Perhaps Mr Garratt bases his criticism on the word "HQ". It sounds like hairsplitting at its worst to me.

Seventh, contrary to what Mr Garratt wrote, I never wrote that Task Force Shield had "operational control" over the Oil Protection Force (a term I never used). I wrote, "Oil-security forces are working under Task Force Shield." I assumed, perhaps erroneously, that Mr Garratt understands that such terms as "operational control" have very specific meanings. Military and security forces commonly fight ferocious turf battles over who has operational control over what and whom.

It is true, however, that Task Force Shield is overseen by the Multi National Force-Iraq (MNF-I) and not the Corps of Engineers Gulf Regional Division (GRD).

Eighth, I appreciate Mr Garratt's correction on the Erinys subcontract. I was incorrect not to note that it was a subcontract, instead of a prime contract.

Ninth, in regard to casualties suffered, Mr Garratt sees the glass as half-empty while I see it as half-full. I wrote, "Thus far it has had about 21 employees killed and 26 wounded from enemy action." I had previously stated that its force had peaked at about 14,000. Mr Garratt uses a higher figure of 15,350 international and Iraqi employees. Either way, the number of those killed and wounded is vanishingly small. Statistically, it is in effect zero. I credit people with being able to do the math as well as I can, most likely better. They are able to figure out for themselves what an astonishingly low figure that is, especially given the dangerous conditions in Iraq. I agree that the total numbers are low. How Mr Garratt can think "The list of fatalities gives the misleading impression by innuendo that Erinys has lost a larger number of international employees than is the case" is simply inexplicable. Everyone else, myself included, can only think it reflects positively on Erinys' professionalism.

Insofar as fact-checking is concerned, Mr Garratt might want to turn to his own organization first before criticizing anyone else. Between July 27 and September 29, I sent 14 e-mails to an Erinys official in an effort to find out the casualties its personnel had suffered. I had originally been told that it would try and get these figures for me. I was finally told by Erinys, "I am afraid that we will have to accept failure. Only one of our three regions has responded with names and full details."

Finally, in writing this article I drew on an extensive study I wrote, A fistful of contractors: The case for a pragmatic assessment of private military companies in Iraq that was published on September 27. I invite readers to read it for themselves to find out more about Erinys and the scores of other security contractors in Iraq. They can then decide for themselves about my accuracy and objectivity. - David Isenberg

Nov 6, 2004

No material from Asia Times Online may be republished in any form without written permission.

Privacy and Legal Policies