Afghan Police Training: “An Unbelievably Incompetent Story”

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Dayton Mitchell.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Handing out Sen. Claire McCaskill’s prepared remarks Thursday afternoon as a hearing of her subcommittee on contracting oversight was about to get underway, the Missouri Democrat’s press secretary warned reporters that her boss might go “off the cuff.” Sure enough, after striding into the room and calling the session to order, McCaskill didn’t bother consulting her notes. She stared straight ahead at the witnesses before her and launched into a freestyle assault on police training efforts in Afghanistan. “It is an unbelievably incompetent story of contracting,” she said. “For 8 years we have been supposedly training the police in Afghanistan. And here’s what we’ve done. We’ve flushed six billion dollars. Six billion dollars!”

If only she were exaggerating. Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, who has been in charge of training Afghanistan’s security forces since November, informed Obama recently just how dire the situation is, according to a recent story co-published by Newsweek and ProPublica. “It’s inconceivable, but in fact for eight years we weren’t training the police,” he told the president. “We just never trained them before. All we did was give them a uniform.” 

Gordon Heddell, the Pentagon’s Inspector General, delivered a similar assessment to McCaskill’s committee. “Just about everything that could go wrong here has gone wrong,” he said, adding, “we have to start at the very beginning.”

For this startling failure, which directly threatens the Obama administration’s Afghanistan strategy and the president’s timetable for beginning the withdrawal of troops, there’s plenty of blame to go around. There’s DynCorp, the Virginia-based contractor that has been paid more than $1.2 billion since 2003 to train the Afghan police and whose services have been found sorely wanting by government audits. There’s the State Department, which was originally responsible for overseeing the police training contracts—a responsibility it failed to meet, at times having only three contracting officers on the ground. And then there’s the Pentagon, which eventually took control of the program, running it through an obscure military office and an existing contract vehicle that was only open to bids from five pre-selected contractors. DynCorp wasn’t one of them. The company lodged a protest, it won, and now the Afghan police training contract remains in limbo. This is bad news for the Obama adminstration and coalition forces, but it’s eve worsen for members of the Afghan police, who are dying in record rates.

As it stands, DynCorp’s contract has been extended until July while the Pentagon figures out its next move. David Sedney, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia, told the committee that his agency will hold a “full and open competition” for the training contract but he said the Pentagon had yet to fully formulate a plan to move the bidding process forward. (“That’s unacceptable,” McCaskill shot back.)

Heddell lamented any delay in installing a new contractor. “If we have to wait for a new contract, we’re not going to do very much… It needs to be fixed right now.” He added, “I’d hate to think we have to get a new contractor on board to start training police officials to survive.”

UPDATE: DynCorp weighs in on the hearing in a statement. Here’s part of it:

We offer a full and expanding set of services and programs to the United States Government around the world. We don’t make the policy, and we don’t set the strategy. We provide the people to help the United States Government execute foreign policy and national security objectives. We earn the privilege to do this work by winning head to head competitions with other contractors. One of the key criteria for winning work is past performance and our ability to consistently win new work is directly related to performing well on the contracts we already have. We welcome competitions and believe that the taxpayer receives best value through these head to head competitions.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate