Spying on the People, By the People, For the People?

Walter Pincus of The Washington Post reports: Contracts worth $1 billion would set record. The Defense Intelligence Agency is preparing to pay private contractors up to $1 billion to conduct core intelligence tasks of analysis and collection over the next five years, an amount that would set a record in the outsourcing of such functions by the Pentagon's top spying agency. The proposed contracts, outlined in a recent early notice of the DIA's plans, reflect a continuing expansion of the Defense Department's intelligence-related work and fit a well-established pattern of Bush administration transfers of government work to private contractors. Since 2000, the value of federal contracts signed by all agencies each year has more than doubled to reach $412 billion, with the largest growth at the Defense Department, according to a congressional tally in June. Outsourcing particularly accelerated among intelligence agencies after the 2001 terrorist attacks caught many of them unprepared to meet new demands with their existing workforce. The DIA did not specify exactly what it wants the contractors to do but said it is seeking teams to fulfill "operational and mission requirements" that include intelligence "Gathering and Collection, Analysis, Utilization, and Strategy and Support." It holds out the possibility that five or more contractors may be hired and promised more details on Aug. 27. The DIA's action comes a few months after CIA Director Michael V. Hayden, acting under pressure from Congress, announced a program to cut the agency's hiring of outside contractors by at least 10 percent. The CIA's effort was partly provoked by managers' frustration that officials with security clearances were frequently resigning to earn higher pay with government contractors while performing the same work - a phenomenon that led lawmakers to complain that intelligence contract work was wasting money. "Mind-blowing," was the reaction of Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, when she learned of the DIA proposal. In a telephone interview, she described it as "definitely something to be concerned about." In its notice, published on a procurement Web site, the DIA said that "the total price of all work to be performed under the contract(s) will exceed $1 billion," adding that the tally "is only an estimate and there is no guarantee that any orders will be placed."

Shameful Aussie Corporate War Profiteering

Corporate war profiteering is nothing new, but our "coalition of the willing" partners have dipped their beaks too, according to Corporate Watch:

"United Nations sanctions against Saddam Hussein may have failed to end his regime but they succeeded in enriching both the Iraqi dictator and corporations able to manipulate the scandal-ridden world body's Oil-for-Food program. Among the profiteers was the Australian Wheat Board, a former state-owned monopoly, which funneled $A290 million (U.S. $208,887,000) into Saddam's coffers even as the “Coalition of the Willing” was preparing for invasion.

The Oil-for-Food program (OFF)--intended to punish and isolate Saddam while supplying food and medicine to ordinary Iraqis--accomplished neither objective. The Bush administration added that failure, and revelations of endemic corruption within the program, to his shifting case for war, after the danger of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction evaporated as a legitimating cause.

But while U.S. French, Russian, and African politicians, businessmen and companies benefited from Saddam's profiteering, the program's worst corruptor was the Australian Wheat Board (AWB), the largest importer of food into Iraq under Oil-for-Food.

The growing scandal has rocked Australia over the past few weeks as government hearings exposed a pattern of outright fraud by the AWB. Ironically, the same Australian wheat company officials who benefited before the war were appointed by the Americans after the invasion to help run the ministry of agriculture, where they profited handsomely once again.

"The AWB is not the Australian government, nor is it a nonprofit organization made up of hardworking Aussie farmers," Mr. Tracy said. "It is a vast independent multinational corporation that uses its monopoly control of Australian export wheat supplies to compete unfairly against American farmers."

Australia, the United States and Canada are the three most powerful wheat producing countries in the world. The three countries, steadfast allies on other fronts, fight bitterly over access to wheat markets.

Mr Howard's government privatized its monopoly wheat export agency in 1999. The Australian Wheat Board, listed on the Australian Stock Exchange under the ticker AWB, continues to be the only exporter of Australian wheat. Its executives are some of the most powerfully connected men in the country.


REAPING THE HARVEST

It was clear from the outset that the invasion of Iraq would bring its own opportunities for profiteering, but Australia had already been profiteering in Iraq for years.

Even as George Bush, Australian Prime Minister John Howard and British Prime Minister Tony Blair prepared their three peoples for war, AWB funneled $A290 million (U.S. $208,887,000) worth of bribes into Saddam Hussein's coffers. The graft, which continued until just months before the invasion, bought Australia access to the Iraqi wheat market and functioned to exclude the United States, Australia's most virile rival in the global wheat industry."

This is a good time to vote for your "favorite" Corporate Hall of Shame Member. The good folks at Corporate Accountability International run this poll annually. Corporate Accountability International, formerly Infact, is a membership organization that protects people by waging and winning campaigns challenging irresponsible and dangerous corporate actions around the world. For over 25 years, we've forced corporations -- like Nestlé, General Electric and Philip Morris/Altria -- to stop abusive actions. For more information visit www.stopcorporateabuse.org.