Alarming Deficiency of Oversight and Management at U.S Embassy in Afghanistan

Earlier today POGO sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlining concerns about the State Department's management of security at the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan.  A new investigation has revealed an alarming deficiency in oversight and management by the State Department. 

We initiated the investigation after being contacted by whistleblowers expressing their frustrations about the worsening situation at the embassy.  Guards reported that personnel shortages, which have plagued the security efforts at the embassy in the past, led to sleep deprivation from 14 hour shifts and forcibly revoked leave.  When they weren't on duty, some guards—and even supervisors—turned to lewd hazing rituals.  Some of these antics occurred in the immediate vicinity of the supervisor's quarters on Camp Sullivan, the guards' base and some guards even reported retaliation against those that did not participate. 

As stated in the letter, "Beyond basic decency standards, the situation at Camp Sullivan is clearly in violation of AGNA's contract with the State Department, which specifies, "Each contractor employee or subcontractor employee is expected to adhere to standards of conduct that reflect credit on themselves, their employer, and the United States Government." More broadly, the behavior is evidence of a complete breakdown of discipline and the chain of command among guards and their leadership, itself a significant security issue."

Unfortunately the personnel shortages are old news.  In fact, the State Department formally advised AGNA that the contractor's deficiencies were endangering the performance of the contract in a July 2007 "cure notice."  The State Department further admonished AGNA with a "Show Cause" letter in September 2008, and in March 2009, informed AGNA that it had "grave concerns" after an inspection found 18 guards were absent from their post due to "supervisory personnel negligence." 

Yet in July of this year, after representatives from the State Department and from Wackenhut Services, Inc, (AGNA's parent company) testified that previously identified problems had been solved, the State Department renewed AGNA's contract for another year.  However, interviews from guards, an April 2009 memo from Guard Force Commander Werner Ilic, and Wackenhut's move last month to bring in guards from nuclear facilities in Tennessee "to deal with personnel shortages," suggest that under-staffing has been and continues to be a persistent problem.  Earlier this afternoon, Senator Claire McCaskill, whose Senate Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight heard the testimony from Wackenhut and State Department representatives, tweeted that the testimony “appears to be misleading at best.” The Department of State has simply been unable to hold its security contractor to account. 

Unfortunately, personnel shortages and lewd conduct aren't the only problems with this contractor.  Communication difficulties between the English-speaking ex-pats and non-English speaking contract workers—who comprise almost two thirds of the guard force—jeopardize the execution of intricate operations.  Guards have reported resorting to pantomime in order to communicate critical instructions.

Beyond that, one Afghan national working as a food service employee described a particularly harrowing encounter with a guard force supervisor.  He alleges the supervisor grabbed his face and began verbally abusing him—hardly a diplomatic gesture coming from someone supervising the protection of American diplomats.

Clearly something is wrong here.  A contractor has demonstrated a continued inability to meet performance standards and a government agency has failed to hold the contractor accountable.  As a result, the safety and security of the 1,000 employees working and living at the embassy has been compromised.  We felt this was an urgent issue and worked on the investigation around the clock in the last few weeks, so we'll be sure to keep you updated as the story develops.  In the meantime, take a look at all the details in our letter.

-- Bryan Rahija

Comments

[gregg]

Is it any wonder that ordinary Afghanis consider us to be diseased? I'd rather loose the Gitmo detainees in the US than this pack of trailer trash... apologies to mobile home communities all over.

Can't we just drop them on the Pacific Gyre with the rest of the trash?

[Bryan Rahija]

Thank you all for the comments. Andrew brings up a great point--$189 million may sound like a huge sum to pay, but in fact, some folks complained that this contract a lowball offer. As a result, the contractor could not afford a robustly trained guard force (i.e., a guard force without language barriers).

Unfortunately, the problems with hiring low-cost labor may not be confined to ArmorGroup in Afghanistan. Back when we brought up the case of Rocky Baragona, the Lieutenant killed in traffic accident in Iraq, one commenter said,

"Many transport companies in Kuwait still continue to search the world for the cheapest possible people to drive their trucks so that their profits can be maximised."

(seen here: http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2009/05/update-court-dismisses-dominic-rocky-baragona-lawsuit.html)

The key here is oversight, oversight, oversight. It would be easy to blame the contractors and move on, but without a concerted commitment to oversight at the federal level, we cannot expect incidents like this to disappear.

[Andrew]

You get what you pay for. In this case, the US Government is getting a sweetheart deal and the contractor is losing over $1 million per month honoring a low-ball agreement originally made by a competitor. Far from holding the contractor accountable, State is shaving pennies at the expense of decent physical security. This is why criticisms were followed by a contract renewal -- when you have a contract that you can use to compel free services, you don't surrender that contract lightly.

http://mccaskill.senate.gov/pdf/061009/BrinkleyTestimony.pdf

"An irony of the current situation is that WSI submitted a proposal for the Kabul Embassy Contract – and was not selected for award because WSI’s price was substantially higher than the price offered by AGNA. Now, WSI has come to own AGNA, and WSI is incurring huge losses as a result of AGNA’s unreasonably low price."

"We feel we can safely say that adequate guard services for the Kabul Embassy cannot be provided for the Contract price. AGNA proved that it could not provide adequate services for the price. In our year on the Contract, I have become convinced that we cannot provide the services required by the Contract for the Contract price."

"The Contract is structured such that the contractor bears the risk of any costs incurred above the Contract price. The Government pays a fixed price for day-to-day guard services . . . that is calculated by multiplying fixed hourly labor rates by a fixed number of hours . . . The Government also pays a fixed monthly rate for operation, maintenance, repair, food services, medical services, vehicles and ammunition."

"WSI’s costs of providing the services required under the Contract are exceeding the Contract price by approximately $1 million per month – $12 million per year with no profit."

"Each continuing year of the Contract is awarded by means of the State Department exercising an option for that year. The option is the Government’s – not WSI’s. If the State Department exercises an option, AGNA must perform."

Is there corruption here? Yes. Someone at State decided to take the lowest bid and to hell with the consequences not only for embassy security, but for the reputation of our nation overseas.

As an aside, I would point out to Jon Nugent that Y-12 at Oakridge is NOT a "nuclear power plant."

[Clara Coen]

I have been reading about the behavior of the guards at the embassy in Kabul. it is appalling:I do not know how long this contractor has been operating in Afghanistan,nor how much we pay for it.I makes me furious that my tax money is being wasted to pay these awfully incompetent and irresponsible people, while many in congress are telling us that we cannot afford health care coverage for all Americans..I am also incensed by the lack of sensitivity by these so called professionals to the mores and culture of the host country. This company should not receive one penny more of our money..

[Jon Nugent]

Part of the problem with this program is the lack of qualified guards that are on the contract. To bring in guards from a nuclear power plant to guard a US Embassy is ridiculous. They is a plethora of qualified guards in the contracting world that are much better suited for this program. Lack of qualified recruiters and bad management will cause another witch hunt that will affect all of us contractors that are qualified and do the right thing.

[Mark E. Smith]

If David Rockefeller has decided that the U.S. Embassy in Kabul is not mission-crucial to Exxon-Mobil profits from the Afghan oil pipeline, Hillary would not have the power and authority to increase embassy security even if your letter was brought to her attention and she wanted to do so. National interests are always secondary to multinational profits.