
Civilian contractors exceed military personnel in Afghanistan, based on a new report by the Congressional Research Service. This presents a number of challenges for the U.S. because contractors are not subject to the same strict rules of engagement and reporting requirements as their military colleagues. Jim Glanz’s article in the New York Times today points out this is mainly because the military has lost some of its logistics capability, but this does not explain why sensitive operations would be contracted out by either the Department of Defense or the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Rick Barton questions the use of contracts: first, do they bring the same commitment and willingness to take risks as uniformed military and diplomatic services; second, is the use of contractors cost effective to the American taxpayer. The answers to these questions are unclear, but it has become increasingly apparent that greater clarity is needed in order to justify the use of contractors at such high levels in Afghanistan and Iraq.