INDC in Iraq: Ghost soldiers
posted at 9:38 am on January 22, 2007 by Allahpundit
An important post with huge implications not just for the surge but for the Iraqi army’s capabilities across the country. If you thought phantom cops were a problem in New Orleans during Katrina, imagine ordering a company of soldiers into battle against Al Qaeda and finding out you’ve only really got a platoon.
A former MiTTer described how “ghost soldiers” result in both American and Iraqi deaths by compromising security operations in Fallujah.
“Let’s say there are 500 soldiers reported on staff; there will really be only 300, but someone up the line will report 500 and pocket the extra pay,” said the former MiTT member who insisted on anonymity. Having fewer actual soldiers available for patrols and other missions exposes both Iraqi and U.S. soldiers to more lethal attacks by insurgents, he said. The reduced manpower allows insurgents “freedom of movement” to both stage attacks and plant Improvised Explosive Devices, the number one killer of U.S. and Iraqi soldiers and police.
“There’s always some level of corruption going on, and that’s one thing, but when it’s getting people killed, it’s unacceptable,” he angrily explained.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It is so telling that we just accept that the people we are helping are so corrupt as to threaten their own existence. He does say the at this level it is “unacceptable” but that’s a pretty high bar.
bbz123 on January 22, 2007 at 9:48 AM
This kind of thing went on during the Hussein era too. As a couple of the officers at FOB Justice explained it to us, officers in the old Iraqi army used their positions to enrich themselves rather than manage a professional force and look after their troops the way our officers are trained to do. As a result, in the Iraqi military there’s no culture of management, no history of honesty and rampant corruption now as there was then. The quality of a given unit of the IA depends almost entirely on the quality of its top officer and his leadership and ability to promote competence among his subordinates. So all around the IA, there are units that just don’t function well because those units are led by corrupt or compromised officers. We could replace those bad officers, but with whom?
It’s one more layer of complexity and difficulty our troops are facing over there every single day, and one more reason that Iraq won’t be fixed quickly.
Bryan on January 22, 2007 at 9:49 AM
kill the bad guys. Stop talking, more action.
retired on January 22, 2007 at 9:58 AM
It should be unacceptable before people get killed. Looking the other way on corruption when it doesn’t hurt makes it harder to stop it when it does.
ot: What do businesses think of the troops?Outrage
Lord Nazh on January 22, 2007 at 9:59 AM
The Palestinians had a similar problem and one of the few sane people in Arafat’s government, Finance Minister Salam Fayyad, had the perfect solution to the problem: Direct deposit from a centralized payroll authority.
How far is the banking system from being able to support that on a wide scale?
Pablo on January 22, 2007 at 10:34 AM
When I saw the headline, I thought it was something similar to this
Needless to say, I’m kind of disappointed.
Krydor on January 22, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Agreed. IMHO it is going to require a generational change. The question is in this day and age of instant gratification are we going to have the patience.
.
GT on January 22, 2007 at 1:19 PM
Joe Stilwell had the same problem with the phantoms of Chiang-Kai-Peanut. He solved it with with a paybook system. Paybook had to match payroll in the flesh. It worked. Worked so well that it contributed materially to “Uncle Joe” being relieved. It would be easy enough to replicate the same thing in Iraq, even easier if “direct deposit” is used. Can the bellyaching and get to work.
Oilpatcher on January 22, 2007 at 7:47 PM
I’ve commented in the past, that banking has to be established as part of the infrastructure. For this reason, and keeping the Iraqi soldiers on the job.
oakpack on January 22, 2007 at 10:10 PM
Oh, come on people, get off your high horses. Western armies did this too… four hundred years ago! Oy. Sorry, I’m not that good at printed sarcasm. Still and all, this is the whole reason the West came up with the “Pass in Review” and muster ceremonies, so that the paymaster (whoever is actually PAYING the troops e.g. the king) could see that his officers are not feeding him a line of bull. Who knows, maybe we need to institute something of the same practice. Sure, it would be time consuming, but just think of rank after rank of uniformed Iraqi soldiers marching past the reviewing stand while the admin guys go over personnel records with a fine toothed comb in the background. You get a great video opportunity and you know that every ground-pounder on the records actually exists!
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go back to my birdwatching. I’m expecting to see a flying porcine specimen any minute…
Militant Bibliophile on January 22, 2007 at 11:14 PM
This is the main reason the amount of time needed to ‘complete’ the Iraq part of the War on Terror is so impossible to determine. O’Reilly keeps bringing up our own training as a kind of litmus test, saying ‘the US military can train troops in months, why can’t the Iraqi’s do this in 2 1/2 years?’ They should be able to, according to O’Reilly and many others.
BUT, OUR MILITARY HAS EXCEPTIONALLY QUALIFIED AND WELL TRAINED MANAGEMENT ALREADY IN PLACE. Not so in Iraq. They’re starting from scratch, or WORSE than scratch.
Thx Bryan, your trip is going to be invaluable to us all.
shooter on January 23, 2007 at 12:41 PM