Published on Thursday, August
25, 2016
Over half of 1.4 million guns
U.S. shipped into Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11 are unaccounted for in DoD's
own records, watchdog discovers
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/08/25/pentagon-has-no-idea-where-hundreds-thousands-guns-went-iraq-and-afghanistan
The U.S. government has
shipped over 1.4 million guns to Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11, according a
new analysis by the U.K.-based watchdog Action on Armed Violence (AOAV), but
the Pentagon is only able to account for fewer than half of them.
AOAV released its analysis
of publicly available data on U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) contracts on
Wednesday, and added that when requested to provide its own accounting for the
small arms provided to the war-torn nations, "the DoD data shows that over
700,000 small arms were sent from the U.S. to Iraq and Afghanistan within these
periods. However, this amount only accounts for 48 percent of the total small
arms supplied by the U.S. government that can be found in open source
government reports."
AOAV also noted that the total
number of small weapons the U.S. provided to Iraq and Afghanistan is likely to
be far higher than even the group's count, as the Pentagon kept such shoddy
records of the planeloads of weapons it dispatched to those countries—if it kept
any records at all.
"Since the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks," observed
C.J. Chivers in the New York Times Magazine, "the United States has handed
out a vast but persistently uncountable quantity of military firearms to its
many battlefield partners in Afghanistan and Iraq. Today the Pentagon has only
a partial idea of how many weapons it issued, much less where these weapons
are. Meanwhile, the effectively bottomless abundance of black-market weapons
from American sources is one reason Iraq will not recover from its
post-invasion woes anytime soon."
"This failure
shows the lack of accountability, transparency and joined up data that
exists at the very heart of the U.S. government's weapon procurement and
distribution systems," AOAV wrote.
Chivers added:
All together, the sheer size
of the expenditures, the sustained confusion about totals and the multiple
pressures eroding the stock combine to create a portrait of the Pentagon's
bungling the already-awkward role it chose for itself—that of state-building
arms dealer, a role that routinely led to missions in clear opposition to each
other. While fighting two rapidly evolving wars, the American military tried to
create and bolster new democracies, governments and political classes; recruit,
train and equip security and intelligence forces on short schedule and at
outsize scale; repair and secure transportation infrastructure; encourage the
spread or restoration of the legal industry and public services; and leave
behind something more palatable and sturdy than rule by thugs.
Any one of these efforts would
be difficult on its own. But the United States was trying all these things at
once while buying and flying into both countries a prodigious quantity of light
military weapons and handing them out to local people and outfits it barely
knew. The recipients were often manifestly corrupt and sometimes had close ties
to the same militias and insurgents who were trying to drive out the United
States and make sure its entire nation-building project did not stand. It
should not have been a surprise that American units in disaffected provinces
and neighborhoods, and their partners, could encounter gunfire at every turn.
Today, "no one knows
where many of the weapons are, until they turn up on social media or announce
themselves in combat or crime with the crack of incoming fire, a reminder of
tens of billions of dollars gone into nations where violence and terrorism continue
apace," Chivers wrote.
"What to do?" the Times
reporter wondered. "If past is precedent, given enough time one of the
United States' solutions will be, once again, to ship in more guns."
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
Share This Article
No comments:
Post a Comment