Hired Guns

[seemslikeadream]

Hired Guns
What to do about military contractors run amok.
By Phillip Carter
Posted Friday, April 9, 2004, at 2:57 PM PT



Contractors: Life during wartime

The ambush and gruesome killing of four U.S. contractors in Fallujah, Iraq, has sparked some of the most intense combat since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime last spring. It has also brought the actions of private military contractors—hired by the U.S. government to provide extra manpower and firepower in Iraq—into sharp focus, with reports that they are fighting their own battles with their own weapons, helicopters, and intelligence networks.

Military contracting in wartime is nothing new. The military depends on a vast support network of civilians to feed, clothe, equip, and train the forces. Indeed, today's U.S. military couldn't function without civilian contractors to troubleshoot its high-tech equipment. What is new is the extent to which these contractors are conducting combat operations in Iraq; rather than the purely support functions they have performed during recent missions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. This shift raises a number of problems for the U.S. government, with which the Pentagon is only now beginning to wrestle—principally, how to control these contractors and ensure that their actions under fire further the national interest.

The first set of problems arises from the legal status of contractors. Armed contractors—like the four men ambushed in Fallujah last week—fall into an international legal gray zone. They aren't "noncombatants" (as unarmed contractors are) under the 4th Geneva Convention, because they carry weapons and act on behalf of the U.S. government. However, they're also not "lawful combatants" under the 3rd Geneva Convention, because they don't wear uniforms or answer to a military command hierarchy. These armed contractors don't even fit the legal definition of mercenaries, because that definition requires that they work for a foreign government in a war zone, in which their own country isn't part of the fight. Legally speaking, they actually fall into the same gray area as the unlawful combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2098571/#ContinueArticle

[seemslikeadream]

1. Private military contractors grossly misused

The 2001 federal disclosure forms show that 10 military contracting companies spent over $32 million on lobbying. In 2001, DynCorp, the largest of these firms, successfully lobbied to block a bill that would have required the government to justify private contracts on cost-saving grounds. In addition, since 1999, 17 of the nation's largest private military firms have spent over $12.4 million in congressional and presidential campaigns (motherjones.com).

The deaths of the private security guards killed in Fallujah, like the deaths and injuries of hundreds of regular armed forces personnel and thousands of Iraqis, is a terrible tragedy. However, their portrayal in the media hides the tragic consequences of our state-sponsored privatized military industry. Its secrecy, lack of accountability, and entirely selfish motives grossly misuse taxpayers' dollars and perpetuate countless human rights violations around the world.
http://studorgs.bowdoin.edu/orient/article.php?date=2004-04-09§ion=2&id=4

[mhr]

2. Hired Guns = Mercenaries Regardless Of Legal Shades Of Gray

eom

[havocmom]

3. So far, no evidence on any contractor, whether combatant or caterer

acting in the national interest at all. It is not in the national interest for us to invade Iraq. It is in the private contractor's (Halliburton, Betchel Brown and their ilk) that we be there. There is only national liability that has resulted from the dishonorable venture of invading Iraq without cause.

These people are criminals and it is wrong for military policy to be based on avenging their deaths. The blood of our troops being shed because of these corporate thugs is heinous. They were in a place they should not have been and the people of that nation took care of business. We would likely do the same to 'contractors' operating in my neighborhood.

We need to make it illegal for corporations to determine foreign policy.

[Frangible]

4. of course, there's a troop shortage

Until we get more troops (not like people are signing up in droves to go over there) this will only continue.

[seemslikeadream]

5. PMCs

[Tinoire]

6. Here's some more for your excellent post

(This is a repost- my apologies to those who've already read it)


<snip>

Business has been booming for Blackwater, which now owns, as its press release boasts, "the largest privately-owned firearms training facility in the nation." Jackson told the Guardian, "We have grown 300 percent over each of the past three years and we are small compared to the big ones. We have a very small niche market, we work towards putting out the cream of the crop, the best."

The practice of using mercenaries to fight wars is hardly new, but it is becoming increasingly popular in recent years. During the first Gulf War, one out of every 50 soldiers on the battlefield was a mercenary. The number had climbed up to one in ten during the Bosnian conflict. Currently there are thousands of Bosnian, Filipino and American soldiers under contract with private companies serving in Iraq. Their duties range from airport security to protecting Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority.

Apart from Chile, the other popular source for military recruits is South Africa. The United Nations recently reported that South Africa "is already among the top three suppliers of personnel for private military companies, along with the UK and the US." There are more than 1,500 South Africans in Iraq today, most of whom are former members of the South African Defense Force and South African Police.

According to the Cape Times, among the South African companies under contract with the Pentagon are Meteoric Tactical Solutions, which "is providing protection and is also training new Iraqi police and security units," and Erinys, a joint South African-British company, which "has received a multimillion-dollar contract to protect Iraq's oil industry," the Cape Times reported.

<snip>

It is also only a matter of time before U.S. soldiers grow unhappy with the presence of mercenaries in their midst. The high salaries and shorter terms of employment offered to mercenaries will inevitably make a serious dent on the military's budget. As Blackwater's Jackson acknowledged in the Guardian, "If they are going to outsource tasks that were once held by active-duty military and are now using private contractors, those guys are looking and asking, 'Where is the money?'"

<snip>

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18193


==============

In a brief but intense firefight, Thomas hit one of the attackers with a single shot from his M4 carbine at a distance he estimates was 100 to 110 yards.

He hit the man in the buttocks, a wound that typically is not fatal. But this round appeared to kill the assailant instantly.

“It entered his butt and completely destroyed everything in the lower left section of his stomach ... everything was torn apart,” Thomas said.

Thomas, a security consultant with a private company contracted by the government, recorded the first known enemy kill using a new — and controversial — bullet.

The bullet is so controversial that if Thomas, a former SEAL, had been on active duty, he would have been court-martialed for using it. The ammunition is “nonstandard” and hasn’t passed the military’s approval process.

<snip>

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2426405.php

You can watch a Streaming video of this blended-metal bullet technology taken at the 2003 Shoot-out at Blackwater on the manufacturer's site here:
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/


The ammo that Thomas used was a so-called “blended-metal-technology” round, manufactured by RBCD of San Antonio and distributed by LeMas Ltd. of Little Rock, Ark. For the past four years, RBCD has been featured during AFJ’s annual “Shoot-out at Blackwater” training center (August AFJ), where the ammo’s unique performance has impressed most of the special operators observing its effects. Designed to release maximum energy in soft tissue, the “armor-piercing limited penetration” ammo will bore through hard targets, such as steel and glass, but will not pass through a person or even several layers of drywall. ((watch the video to see what they mean by "will not pass through a person))

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/
====================


I've been in Falluja when the entire city has been under collective punishment, which occurs nearly everytime someone attacks a U.S. patrol there. People are enraged, and rightly so. So when one of those white, shiny SUV's with the big black antenna drives by with guys with crew cuts in them wearing body armor holding guns (yes, it is THAT obvious and easy to see), what do you think might happen to them?

The other reason I bring this up is because of this: Last night I'm going through customs at the airport in Amman, and I find myself standing in line behind five men with crewcuts and their 'handler', a little bit older fellow from Turkey (I saw his passport). The men were all in their late 20s, to late 30s I'd say, and from their discussion had all been in Iraq before.

They wouldn't tell me who they were working for, but when they were lugging huge plastic boxes with locks on them off the baggage belt, then went and hopped into their nice, white SUV, it was pretty much a no-brainer.

Blackwater Security Consulting won a $35.7 million contract to train over 10,000 soldiers from several states in the U.S. in the art of 'force protection,' according to Mother Jones magazine. They also hire mercenaries from South Africa and other countries as well, and the pay in Iraq is $1,000 per day. Wonder how that makes our soldiers feel, who make barely over that each month?

http://electroniciraq.net/news/1435.shtml

Blackwater signed a $35.7 million contract with the Pentagon to train more than 10,000 sailors from Virginia, Texas, and California each year in "force protection." Other contracts are so secret, says Blackwater president Gary Jackson, that he can't tell one federal agency about the business he's doing with another.

<snip>

In recent months, private military companies have also played a key role in preparing for a war with Iraq. They supply essential support to military bases throughout the Persian Gulf, from operating mess halls to furnishing security. They provide armed guards at a U.S. Army base in Qatar, and they use live ammunition to train soldiers at Camp Doha in Kuwait, where a contractor, whose company ran a computer system that tracks soldiers in the field, was killed by terrorists last January. They also maintain an array of weapons systems vital to an invasion of Iraq, including the B-2 bomber, F-117 stealth fighter, Apache helicopter, KC-10 refueling tanker, U-2 reconnaissance plane, and the unmanned Global Hawk reconnaissance unit. In an all-out war against Saddam Hussein, the military was expected to use as many as 20,000 private contractors in the Persian Gulf That would be 1 civilian for every 10 soldiers-a 10-fold increase over the first Gulf War.

Indeed, the Bush administration's push to privatize war is swiftly turning the military-industrial complex of old into something even more far-reaching: a complex of military industries that do everything but fire weapons. For-profit military companies now enjoy an estimated $100 billion in business worldwide each year, with much of the money going to Fortune 500 firms like Halliburton, DynCorp, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon. Secretary of the Army Thomas White, a former vice chairman of Enron, "has really put a mark on the wall for getting government employees out of certain functions in the military," says retired Colonel Tom Sweeney, professor of strategic logistics at the U.S. Army War College. "It allows you to focus your manpower on the battlefield kinds of missions."

<snip>

The use of private military companies, which gained considerable momentum under President Clinton, has escalated under the Bush administration. "There has been a dramatic increase in the military's reliance on contractor personnel to provide a wide range of support services for overseas operations," one Washington law firm advises its defense-company clients in a recent briefing paper. "In addition, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, resulted in a rapid expansion of U.S. military activity in many areas of the globe, and President Bush's ongoing war on terrorism will likely require even greater contractor support for military operations in the future."

<snip>

http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/article_05_05_03soldiers.html

===

The current business boom is in Iraq. Blackwater charges its clients $1,500 to $2,000 a day for each hired gun. Most security contractors, like Blackwater's teams, live a comfortable if exhausting existence in Baghdad, staying at the Sheraton or Palestine hotels, which are not plush but at least have running water. Locals often mistake the guards for special forces or CIA personnel, which makes active-duty military troops a bit edgy. "Those Blackwater guys," says an intelligence officer in Iraq, ]"they drive around wearing Oakley sunglasses and pointing their guns out of car windows. They have pointed their guns at me, and it pissed me off. Imagine what a guy in Fallujah thinks." Adds an Army officer who just returned from Baghdad, "They are a subculture."

<snip>

At the Pentagon, which has encouraged the outsourcing of security work, there are widespread misgivings about the use of hired guns. A Pentagon official says the outsourcing of security work means the government no longer has any real control over the training and capabilities of thousands of U.S. and foreign contractors who are packing weapons every bit as powerful as those belonging to the average G.I. "These firms are hiring anyone they can get. Sure, some of them are special forces, but some of them are good, and some are not. Some are too old for this work, and some are too young. But they are not on the U.S. payroll. And so they are not our responsibility."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040412-607775,00.html?
===========

Because the Geneva Convention expressly bans the use of mercenaries -- individual soldiers of fortune who fight solely for personal gain -- private military companies are careful to distance themselves from any associations with such hired guns. To emphasize their experience and professionalism, many firms maintain websites brimming with colorful PR material; the industry even funds an advocacy group, the International Peace Operations Association, which portrays military firms as more capable and accountable than the Pentagon. "These companies want to run a professional operation," says the group's director, Doug Brooks. "Their incentive is to make money. How do you make money? You make sure you don't screw up."

When the companies do screw up, however, their status as private entities often shields them -- and the government -- from public scrutiny. In 2001, an Alabama-based firm called Aviation Development Corp. that provided reconnaissance for the CIA in South America misidentified an errant plane as possibly belonging to cocaine traffickers. Based on the company's information, the Peruvian air force shot down the aircraft, killing a U.S. missionary and her seven-month-old daughter. Afterward, when members of Congress tried to investigate, the State Department and the CIA refused to provide any information, citing privacy concerns. "We can't talk about it," administration officials told Congress, according to a source familiar with the incident. "It's a private entity. Call the company."

The lack of oversight alarms some members of Congress. "Under a shroud of secrecy, the United States is carrying out military missions with people who don't have the same level of accountability," says Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), a leading congressional critic of privatized war. "We have individuals who are not obligated to follow orders or follow the Military Code of Conduct. Their main obligation is to their employer, not to their country."

Private military companies emphasize their patriotism and expertise, positioning themselves as a sort of corporate battalion staffed by ex-soldiers who remain eager to serve their country. Military Professional Resources Inc., one of the largest and most prestigious firms, boasts that it can call on 12,500 veterans with expertise in everything from nuclear operations to submarine attacks. MPRI deploys its private troops to run Army recruitment centers across the country, train soldiers to serve as key staff officers in the field, beef up security at U.S. military bases in Korea, and train foreign armies from Kuwait to South Africa. At the highest echelons, the Virginia-based firm is led by retired General Carl Vuono, who served as Army chief of staff during the Gulf War and the U.S. invasion of Panama. Assisting him are General Crosbie Saint, former commander of the U.S. Army in Europe; Lt. General Harry Soyster, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency; and General Ron Griffith, former Army vice chief of staff.

<snip>

The companies don't rely on informal networking alone, though. They also pour plenty of money into the political system -- especially into the re-election war chests of lawmakers who oversee their business. An analysis by Mother Jones shows that 17 of the nation's leading private military firms have invested more than $12.4 million in congressional and presidential campaigns since 1999.
<snip>

The firms also maintain platoons of Washington lobbyists to help keep government contracts headed their way. In 2001, according to the most recent federal disclosure forms, 10 private military companies spent more than $32 million on lobbying. DynCorp retained two lobbying firms that year to successfully block a bill that would have forced federal agencies to justify private contracts on cost-saving grounds. MPRI's parent company, L-3 Communications, had more than a dozen lobbyists working on its behalf, including Linda Daschle, wife of Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle. Last year L-3 won $1.7 billion in Defense Department contracts.
<snip>

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/05/ma_365_01.html



From a United Nations report to the General Assembly:

UNITED NATIONS

General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL

A/50/390
29 August 1995
ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH/FRENCH/
SPANISH

Fiftieth session
Item 106 of the provisional agenda*

RIGHT OF PEOPLES TO SELF-DETERMINATION

Use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights
and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to
self-determination


72. It is the Special Rapporteur’s belief — and this view is generally shared by the first meeting of experts — that one of the new forms of mercenary activity is that which takes place through private security companies that hire out military services, using mercenaries for that purpose. The fact that international legal texts do not refer to this modality has facilitated its rapid expansion. At the same time, the proliferation of mercenaries hired by companies and their participation in armed conflicts, illegal arms traffic, drug traffic and violations of human rights bespeak the need for regulation, control, prevention and oversight of such companies. The United Nations must accordingly assist States in establishing mechanisms to regulate those companies and in harmonizing their national legislation.

<snip>

76. Clearly, international rules refer to States, not enterprises. Consequently, such enterprises can claim that they are not responsible for unlawful acts with which States alone can be charged. Thus, if an enterprise hires mercenaries who commit human rights violations, the enterprise is not responsible and the violations go unpunished.

<snip>

88. The third point concerns payment which is, without any doubt, the defining factor of mercenary status and activity. Mercenaries, particularly those who are hired to participate in combat or to train those who are to make up battalions, columns or commando units are typically individuals who have been in the military or who have received military training, and above all who are former members of special commando or parachute units and have experience in the use of sophisticated weapons. The mere fact that it is a Government that recruits mercenaries, or hires companies that recruit mercenaries, either in its own defence or to provide reinforcements in armed conflicts, does not make such acts any less illegal or illegitimate. Governments are authorized to operate solely under the Constitution and the international treaties to which they are parties. This point of view should be taken into account in a broader legal definition of mercenaries.

http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/0/3430C18B2B4A42F9C1256AD800527046/$File/N0147130.doc?OpenElement

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1995/a-50-390.htm
=============

Report on mercenaries presented to human rights commission
United Nations press release HR/CN/764. 14 March, 1997

<snip>

The Special Rapporteur concludes in the document that mercenary activities are a form of violence used in the last 40 years to hamper the exercise the right to self-determination of peoples and to violate human rights. Mercenary activity has been increasing and has been observed in serious criminal activity, including terrorist attacks and drug and arms trafficking.

<snip>

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/003.html

=====================

Soldiers for Sale

By Adam Zagorin, Time magazine, Vol. 149, no. 21, 26 May 1997
The Cold War is over, but with demand for military muscle stronger than ever around the world, hired guns are going corporate.


<snip>

<snip> From the suburbs of Washington and Tel Aviv to London and Pretoria, a growing number of competitors are scrambling for contracts that run into millions of dollars, hawking their wares using everything from Websites to slick brochures.

For instance, contracts worth more than $170 million for training Saudi Arabia's national guard and air force have gone to Vinnell Corp. and a sister company, both partly owned by Washington's Carlyle merchant-banking group, whose chairman is former Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci. Military Professional Resources Inc., another capital-area firm, won the business to improve the fighting skills of troops in Bosnia and Croatia. "We offer expertise from the greatest fighting force on earth, the U.S. military," says former Army General Harry Soyster, a vice president at M.P.R.I. M.P.R.I. deploys nothing more lethal than flip charts and Magic Markers. Of course, the firm will gladly show clients how to point and shoot an arsenal of weaponry, ranging from rifles to main battle tanks.

The hard guys are currently employing the hard sell. At a recent arms show in Abu Dhabi, an Executive Outcomes booth quietly competed for business with mercenaries from Britain, France and the U.S. Topflight mercenaries and military consultants, many recruited from elite military units like the U.S. Special Forces, Britain's S.A.S. and Scots Guards and South Africa's 32 Battalion, can command anywhere from about $3,500 a month for enlisted men to $13,000 a month for officers or fighter pilots. That is far more than most of those involved could make wearing a regular-army uniform, and the package is usually topped off with free death-and-disability insurance.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/064.html
===

THE TOP HIRED GUNS

Here are some of the outfits that sell their men and arms to companies and governments around the world

EXECUTIVE OUTCOMES
A leader in its field, the firm is mainly staffed by apartheid-era, former South African military officers

VINNELL CORP.
Partly owned by a banking group whose chairman is a former U.S. Secretary of Defense, the Virginia-based firm trains Saudi Arabia's national guard

LEVDAN
The low-key Israeli firm trained troops and bodyguards for Congolese President Pascal Lissouba, who then purchased $10 million worth of Israeli weapons and military equipment

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/064.html


===========

Vinnell Corporation (Northrop Grumman)
12150 East Monument Drive
Suite 800
Fairfax, VA 22033
Phone: [phone]
http://www.vinnell.com Profile
Company Principals
Board of Directors
Contract History
Political Contributions


Background
Founded in the early 1930s, Vinnell worked on the Los Angeles highway system before it started to expand into military construction during World War II. During the Vietnam War, the company built bases in South Vietnam that it later had to blow up after the United States withdrew from the country. According to The Boston Herald, a Pentagon official called Vinnell "our own little mercenary army" in a 1975 interview with The Village Voice.

Vietnam almost led Vinnell to bankruptcy, but a 1975 contract worth $77 million to train the Saudi Arabian National Guard started a long and lucrative history of involvement in the Middle East.

<snip>

The Vinnell-Brown&Root joint venture had at least six contracts worth nearly $200 million from 1998 to 2002. In addition to the United States, Vinnell and VBR performed work in Egypt, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Northrop Grumman, the current parent company, had nearly 4,000 contracts worth close to $42.5 billion from 1990 through 2002.

Iraq contracts

Vinnell is responsible for training the New Iraqi Army (NIA). Work on the $48 million one-year contract began July 1, 2003, and is expected to be completed by June 30, 2004. The contract includes a feature called "Not-To-Exceed Cost Ceiling," meaning that Vinnell's total contract invoices for the first six months cannot exceed 50 percent of the contract estimate, or $24,037,221.

<snip>

<snip> Vinnell is using five subcontractors: Military Professional Resources Incorporated (MPRI), Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Eagle Group International Inc., Omega Training Group, and Worldwide Language Resources Inc. As opposed to Afghanistan, where coalition forces conducted much of the training, the decision to outsource military training in Iraq reportedly was made because U.S. troops are spread too thin.

<snip>

Government ties

Former Democratic congressman Vic Fazio is a senior partner in Clark & Weinstock, a consulting firm. During his time on Capitol Hill, he was a member of the Appropriations Committee, Budget and Ethics Committee and the Armed Services Committee. Fazio was part of the Democratic leadership from 1991 to 1998, rising to the party's third-ranking position as chair of the Democratic Caucus. Fazio has contributed more than $110,000 to mostly Democratic candidates since 1980.
<snip>

http://www.publicintegrity.org/wow/bio.aspx?act=pro&ddlC=64


===

ALTHOUGH the media repeatedly refers to the men killed in the recent attack in Iraq as 'civilian contractors' they were in fact mercenaries used as part of the US government's outsourcing of jobs too messy, too dull, or too questionable to be carried out by standard troops for whom the president and his aides might be held responsible. These firms include Blackwater, the one involved in the recent incident as well as Dyncorp and the Steele Foundation. The Steele Foundation, the third largest supplier of mercenaries, has 500 troops in Iraq and recently distinguished itself by - depending on who's telling the story - failing to protect Haitian president Aristide from kidnapping by the U.S. government or participating in the act.



=======

The US government is the major holdout to these international agreements:

(see references for 29 of the 38 listed)

1. Ottawa Treaty (the land-mine ban)
   
2. Treaty on the Rights of the Child (only holdouts are the U.S. and Somalia)
   
3. Protocol to enforce the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (vote was 178-1, the US the only holdout)
   
4. United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
   
5. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
   
6. Convention on Biological Diversity
   
7. International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
   
8. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)
   
9. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings
   
10. International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.
    
11. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees
    
12. Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes Against Humanity
    
13. Forced Labor Convention
    
14. Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention
    
15. Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention
    
16. Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age to Marriage and Registration of Marriages
    
17. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.
    
18. Convention on the International Right of Correction
    
19. International Criminal Court
    
20. Kyoto Accords (greenhouse gas reductions)
    
21. UN Convention on Biological Diversity (regulating genetic engineering)
    
22. UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
    Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (prohibiting programs like "Stars Wars")
    
23. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal
    
24. Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes
    
25. International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries
    
26. International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid
    
27. Convention concerning Minimum Age for Admission to Employment
    Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
    
28. Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers (prohibiting sale of arms to human rights violators & aggressors)
    
29. Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
    
30. Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, and Other Related Materials
    
31. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (bans toxic waste dumping, etc.)
    
32. UN Moon Treaty
    
33. Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
    
34. UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
    
35. Protocol to enforce the Convention Against Torture
    
36. United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime
    

http://www.vote.org/list.htm

=====

International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, 4 December 1989.

The States Parties to the present Convention,

Reaffirming the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Being aware of the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries for activities which violate principles of international law, such as those of sovereign equality, political independence, territorial integrity of States and self-determination of peoples,

Affirming that the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries should be considered as offences of grave concern to all States and that any person committing any of these-offences should be either prosecuted or extradited,

<snip / on on it goes for ye of legal minds & more morality which the US refused to sign in the last 25 years! >

http://www.ilrg.com/subject/lawofwar/15conv-mercenaries.html

[RapidCreek]

7. I'd say they are unlawful combatants

ooops I just read the rest of the article....it thinks so too.

RC