From day one of the war in Iraq, the United States has had tens of thousands of heavily-armed military contractors present in Iraq, moving about the countryside unchecked, beholden to no law, no court, answerable to no external control.
That may be about to change, Brookings Institution Senior Fellow P.W. Singer notes in a Defense Tech exclusive. Five words, slipped into a Pentagon budget bill, could make all the difference. With them, "contractors 'get out of jail free' cards may have been torn to shreds," he writes. They're now subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the same set of laws that governs soldiers. But here's the catch: embedded reporters are now under those regulations, too.The one sentence section (number 552 of a total 3510 sections) states that "Paragraph (10) of section 802(a) of title 10, United States Code (article 2(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), was amended by striking `war' and inserting `declared war or a contingency operation'."
The addition of those five little words to the massive US legal code wouldn't normally matter for much. But with this change, contractors' 'suddenly become accountable. In the past, contractors only fell under UCMJ guidelines if Congress declared war. (This has not happened since WW II.) As a result, whenever military officers came across episodes of suspected contractor crimes in missions like Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, or Afghanistan, they had no mechanism for redress. In the absence of a formal declaration of war, civilians -- even those working for the US armed forces, carrying out military missions in a conflict zone -- fell outside UCMJ jurisdiction. Usually, all that happened was the local officer in charge (OIC) could request to the employing firm that the individual be demoted or fired. In supported cases, where the officer suspected a felony might have been committed, the officer might be able to report them on to civilian authorities.
If I were to speculate on who slipped in the change, my money would be on Lindsey Graham. He is a former JAG officer and he was one of the Republicans that the president sort-of hosed on the torture bill. All the pieces fit - he knows military law, he has expressed misgivings in the past about contractor abuses, and he had access, sitting on both the Armed Services and Budget committees. I hope that Senator Graham, or whoever did the revision, steps forward and receives the thanks that is due for such a noble action.
