Fields Resigns as Special IG for Afghanistan Reconstruction

 
The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), Arnold Fields, announced yesterday that he will resign from his post. That announcement comes less than a week after the firing by Fields of SIGAR’s two top deputies, John Brummet and Raymond DiNunzio.

POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian responded to the news of Fields’ resignation with the following statement:

This is an important step towards more aggressive oversight in Afghanistan. General Fields has served the country with distinction in the military, however, an Inspector General needs to be cut from a cloth where challenging authority comes easily. The Afghanistan watchdog is one of the most important and difficult jobs in the federal government. It is time for new leadership to better account for the billions being spent with little accountability.

POGO has been scrutinizing the performance of the SIGAR since late 2009. In December 2009, we echoed a request by a bi-partisan group of senators for a presidential review of SIGAR.

A subsequent peer review of SIGAR’s performance undertaken on behalf the Council of Inspectors General for Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), the group of Inspectors General (IGs) responsible for evaluating the performance of statutory IGs, identified serious problems with SIGAR’s operations.

The problems were severe enough that SIGAR’s law enforcement powers could have been stripped if they were not quickly fixed, which, according to SIGAR, “would effectively terminate the agency and all of the ongoing criminal investigations concerning Afghanistan Reconstruction funding.” That evaluation led to further calls for Fields’ ouster.

But perhaps the final straw was Fields’ decision to hire Joseph E. Schmitz, PLLC, for a sole-source contract to “independently monitor” the SIGAR’s efforts to correct the deficiencies documented by CIGIE.  Schmitz, the former Defense Department Inspector General, left the Pentagon amid allegations that he interfered with investigations and other misconduct.

An investigation into the allegations against Schmitz found he had not violated “any law, rule, or regulation,” or engaged in “gross mismanagement, gross waste of funds, or abuse of authority in connection with any of the matters under review.”

Nonetheless, the decision by Fields to give a sole-source contract to a former IG who himself left under heavy scrutiny left some observers with the impression that he lacked the necessary judgment for such a critical job.  

To be sure, Fields was presented with a difficult challenge when he became the first SIGAR in the summer of 2008. Setting up a watchdog office in a war zone where there had been a scarcity of oversight in the last few years is no easy task. But the importance of independent and aggressive oversight of reconstruction funds in Afghanistan is so paramount—U.S. taxpayers have provided at least $51 billion for Afghanistan reconstruction since 2002, according to the SIGAR, a figure that is expected to increase to $71 billion this year—that his performance should be held to the highest standard.  

Now that the top posts of SIGAR have been cleared out, we’ll be pressing the Obama administration to promptly appoint tough and aggressive new leadership.  

-- Jake Wiens 

Update: Be sure to let us know if you have any ideas for a tough and aggressive SIGAR candidate in the comment section.

Photo credit: SIGAR

See also:

• Podcast: "War Zone Watchdogs Part 2: No Cigar for SIGAR?"
• POGO Joins Bi-Partisan Group of Senators in Demanding Obama Oust the SIGAR
• POGO echoes today’s bipartisan request for a presidential review of SIGAR

Comments

[Jorge]

Interesting, but let's cut to the chase: how about just sending in some criminal investigators, e.g., FBI special agents? So much of what goes on in Afgh. contracting is, on its face, fraudulent (by the contractors) or criminally negligent (USG's technical oversight and contract administration). We could skip lots of the administrative phase of auditors. You don't need their work to make the criminal cases. As for the corrupt Afghani individuals and companies--they will be out of reach for the usual reasons.

[Vance Jochim]

The most obvious choice would be to MERGE SIGAR with SIGIR (Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction) and let the very effective head of SIGIR, Stuart Bowen, who Congress respects, run the combined operation, while broadening their authority to cover reconstruction AND foreign aid provided to any country in the lower half of the Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index. (See info on SIGIR at SIGIR.mil and Transparency.org is TI's site).

The next choice would be a the most respected existing PROFESSIONAL IG in the US (some are not very good), or a senior leader out of GAO (Maybe David Walker would come back for that?)

Or, choose the Senior General Auditor from a Fortune 500 contracting or manufacturing firm.

And if none of them want it, then I am the next choice!

Cheers,
Vance

[Jake Wiens]

Hey Vance, thank you for your comment. Do you have any nominees in mind for SIGAR?

Anyone else have ideas for a tough and aggressive SIGAR candidate?

[Vance Jochim]

I have been writing a blog on Corruption in Iraq (where I first met Arnie Fields) and Afghanistan, and have been critical of SIGAR. ( see http://webworks.typepad.com/corruption_in_iraq/ or the parent website at www.fiscalrangers.com ) In Iraq from 2004-2006, I was the Chief Auditor for the group that setup the Iraqi anti-corruption agency, and knew Arnie from his position in the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office. Later when he was appointed head of SIGAR, I sent him a plan of action for it, but it was ignored and he went with all GAO staff, and Arnie took forever to actually get audits up and running. I had told him he had little time because the separate SIGIR (for Iraq) had a good track record and had set expectations. Too bad. Arnie was a nice administrative type, but not the hard bitten prosecutor or internal auditor that is needed. The problems I now see are that President Obama will choose another person, and he has a bad track record of supporting IG's. Instead, he has fired a couple because they issued reports about problems caused by Obama supporters. But, since Congress is now Republican and approves budgets for SIGAR, they might set tougher standards. It is in everyone's interest to actually find, detect and prevent corruption, but they keep putting amateurs into the positions. Instead of an attorney or General, they need a hard bitten auditor from industry who understands NON FEDERAL contracts and construction who can deal with foreign systems. Or, they should appoint an existing IG with a hard results track record (not a CPA, but a CFE or Certified Internal Auditor).