[News] In Afghanistan, the Pentagon Digs in

[Anti-Imperialist News]

Tom Dispatch

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175135/nick_turse_in_afghanistan_the_pentagon_digs_in
posted 2009-11-05 11:08:25


Tomgram: Nick Turse, In Afghanistan, the Pentagon Digs in

In our day, the American way of war, especially against lightly armed 
guerrillas, insurgents, and terrorists, has proved remarkably heavy. 
Elephantine might be the appropriate word. The Pentagon likes to talk 
about its "footprint" on the geopolitical landscape. In terms of the 
infrastructure it's built in Iraq and Afghanistan, perhaps "crater" 
would be a more reasonable image.

American wars are now gargantuan undertakings. The prospective 
withdrawal of significant numbers/most/all American forces from Iraq, 
for instance, will -- in terms of time and effort -- make the 2003 
invasion look like the vaunted "cakewalk" it was supposed to be. 
According to Pentagon estimates, more than 
<http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=8448762>1.5 million 
(yes, that is "million") pieces of U.S. equipment need to be removed 
from the country. Just stop and take that in for a second.

Of course, it's a less surprising figure when you realize that the 
Pentagon managed to build, furnish, and supply almost 300 bases, 
macro to micro, in Iraq alone in the war years. And some of those 
bases were -- and still are -- the size of small American towns with 
tens of thousands of troops, private contractors, and others, as well 
as massive perimeters, multiple bus routes, full-scale PX's, 
fast-food outlets, movie theaters, and the like.

In many ways, Iraq-style war has now become the gargantuan template 
for the Afghan War build-up that Nick Turse describes below. (His is 
the sort of summary picture of a less-than-adequately-covered 
situation that TomDispatch specializes in, based in part on 
investigative Internet reporting and the mining of Pentagon 
contracts, government and corporate websites, and military 
publications.) In fact, some percentage of those 1.5 million pieces 
of equipment will undoubtedly simply be sent Afghanistan-wards. As 
the Bush administration built the world's largest -- and 
<http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2009-10-23-embassy_N.htm>shoddiest 
-- embassy in Baghdad, our own 
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174789/the_mother_ship_lands_in_iraq>mother 
ship, mission control center for the region, and modern 
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174944>ziggurat, so now, the Obama 
administration is about to do the same (at approximately the same 
startling <http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0528/p90s01-wosc.html>cost) 
in Islamabad, Pakistan, as a monstrous mission control center for the 
Af/Pak theater of operations.

In Iraq, structures like 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020302994_pf.html>Balad 
Air Base or the ill-named 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Victory>Camp Victory just on the 
edge of Baghdad are so massive, so 
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174807/>permanent-looking -- so 
clearly built for long-term occupation -- that it's still hard to 
imagine how the Pentagon will abandon them to the Iraqis.

Now, as Turse reports, the U.S. military seems intent on beefing up 
another network of bases for another surging war, involving another 
heavy presence in another distant land -- and these bases, too, the 
Pentagon will undoubtedly be loath to turn over or evacuate. Every 
army carries a version of its society on its back into battle. We 
emphasize poundage. Like our culture, our wars are spendthrift and 
consumption-oriented. If continued, they will someday bust us. Tom



2014 or Bust

The Pentagon's Building Boom in Afghanistan Indicates a Long War Ahead
By Nick Turse

In recent weeks, President Obama has been contemplating the future of 
U.S. military operations in Afghanistan. He has also been 
<http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/ci_13628903>touting the effects of 
his policies at home, reporting that this year's Recovery Act not 
only saved jobs, but also was "the largest investment in 
infrastructure since [President Dwight] Eisenhower built the 
Interstate Highway System in the 1950s." At the same time, another 
much less publicized U.S.-taxpayer-funded infrastructure boom has 
been underway. This one in Afghanistan.

While Washington has put modest funding into civilian projects in 
Afghanistan this year -- ranging from small-scale 
<http://afghanistan.usaid.gov/en/Article.853.aspx>power plants to 
"public latrines" to a 
<http://afghanistan.usaid.gov//en/Article.734.aspx>meat market -- the 
real construction boom is military in nature. The Pentagon has been 
funneling stimulus-sized sums of money to defense contractors to 
markedly boost its military infrastructure in that country.

In fiscal year 2009, for example, the civilian U.S. Agency for 
International Development awarded $20 million in contracts for work 
in Afghanistan, while the U.S. Army alone awarded $2.2 billion -- 
$834 million of it for construction projects. In fact, 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/17/AR2009101701695.html>according 
to Walter Pincus of the Washington Post, the Pentagon has spent 
"roughly $2.7 billion on construction over the past three fiscal 
years" in that country and, "if its request is approved as part of 
the fiscal 2010 defense appropriations bill, it would spend another 
$1.3 billion on more than 100 projects at 40 sites across the 
country, according to a Senate report on the legislation."

Bogged Down at Bagram

Nowhere has the building boom been more apparent than Bagram Air 
Base, a key military site used by the Soviet Union during its 
occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. In its American incarnation, 
the base has significantly expanded from its old Soviet days and, in 
just the last two years, the population of the more than 5,000 acre 
compound has doubled to 20,000 troops, in addition to thousands of 
coalition forces and civilian contractors. To keep up with its 
exponential growth rate, more than $200 million in construction 
projects are planned or in-progress at this moment on just the Air 
Force section of the base. "Seven days a week, concrete trucks rumble 
along the dusty perimeter road of this air base as bulldozers and 
backhoes reshape the rocky earth," Chuck Crumbo of The State 
<http://www.thestate.com/local/story/989515.html>reported recently. 
"Hundreds of laborers slap mortar onto bricks as they build barracks 
and offices. Four concrete plants on the base have operated around 
the clock for 18 months to keep up with the construction needs."

The base already 
<http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/danger-room-in-afghanistan-have-it-your-way-at-bagram/>boasts 
fast food favorites Burger King, a combination Pizza Hut/Bojangles, 
and Popeyes as well as a day spa and shops selling jewelry, cell 
phones and, of course, Afghan rugs. In the near future, notes Pincus, 
"the military is planning to build a $30 million passenger terminal 
and adjacent cargo facility to handle the flow of troops, many of 
whom arrive at the base north of Kabul before moving on to other 
sites." In addition, 
<http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091101/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan_growing_bagram>according 
to the Associated Press, the base command is "acquiring more land 
next year on the east side to expand" even further.

To handle the influx of troops already being dispatched by the Obama 
administration (with more expected once the president decides on his 
long-term war plans) "new dormitories" are going up at Bagram, 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/challenges-dog-afghan-war//print/>according 
to David Axe of the Washington Times. The base's population will also 
increase in the near future, thanks to a project-in-progress recently 
profiled in The Freedom Builder, an Army Corps of Engineers 
publication: the MILCON Bagram Theatre Internment Facility (TIF) 
currently being built at a cost of $60 million by a team of more than 
1,000 Filipinos, Indians, Sri Lankans, and Afghans. When completed, 
it will consist of 19 buildings and 16 guard towers designed to hold 
more than 1,000 detainees on the sprawling base which has long been 
<http://tomdispatch.com/post/175042/karen_greenberg_the_missing_prison>notorious 
for the torture and even murder of prisoners within its confines.

While the United States officially insists that it is not setting up 
permanent bases in Afghanistan, the scale and permanency of the 
construction underway at Bagram seems to suggest, at the least, a 
very long stay. According to published reports, in fact, the new 
terminal facilities for the complex aren't even slated to be 
operational until 2011.

<http://www.amazon.com/dp/0805089195/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20>
[]
One of the private companies involved in hardening and building up 
Bagram's facilities is <http://www.contrack.com/>Contrack 
International, an international engineering and construction firm 
which, according to U.S. government records, received more than $120 
million in contracts in 2009 for work in Afghanistan. According to 
Contrack's website, it is, among other things, currently designing 
and constructing a new "entry control point" -- a fortified entrance 
-- as well as a new "ammunition supply point" facility at the base. 
It is also responsible for "the design and construction of taxiways 
and aprons; airfield lighting and navigation aid improvements; and 
new apron construction" for the base's massive and expanding air 
operations infrastructure. The building boom at Bagram (which has 
received at least a modest amount of attention in the American 
mainstream press) is, however, just a fraction of the story of the 
way the U.S. military -- and Contrack International -- are digging in 
throughout Afghanistan.

Rave Reviews for Kandahar

In March, according to Pentagon documents, Contrack was awarded a $23 
million contract for "the design and construction of [an] 
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance ramp, Kandahar 
Airfield, Afghanistan." Last year, in the Washington Post, Pincus 
reported that a planned expansion at the airfield, also once used by 
the Soviets and now a major U.S. and NATO base, was to accommodate 
aircraft working for a Task Force ODIN -- an Afghanistan-based 
version of the Army unit which used drones and helicopters to 
<http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/01/drone-copter-te/>target 
insurgents planting IEDs in Iraq. Today, Task Force ODIN-Afghanistan 
-- the acronym stands for "observe, detect, identify and neutralize," 
with a nod to the chief Norse god -- is up and running, and still 
<http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/ODIN101209.xml&headline=U.S.%20Army%20Enlisted%20Personnel%20Run%20Task%20Force%20ODIN&channel=awst>reportedly 
piloted out of "Bagram in one of two small, nondescript ground 
control stations." Whether ODIN aircraft are also operating out of 
Kandahar Airfield is -- like so much information about the U.S. 
military in Afghanistan -- unclear. Certainly, though, many more NATO 
and U.S. aircraft will be flying out of the base once Contrack, as it 
notes on its website, completes its "[d]esign and construction of 
replacement runways with asphalt and touch down areas with concrete 
pavement" and "rehabilitation of 6 existing taxiways," among other projects.

Contrack's Kandahar contract is set to be fulfilled by late December, 
but like Bagram, the base already gives every appearance of 
permanence. "It's one of the busiest single runways in the world," 
Captain Max Hanlin from the 2nd U.S. Army Division's 5th Stryker 
Brigade 
<http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i3tIXP9zQa372Lgd9OGQhrgVsCqw>told 
Agence France-Presse recently. Originally built to house 12,000 
troops, Kandahar Air Base now supports 30,000 or more NATO and U.S. 
personnel. Some do battle in the inhospitable terrain of the 
surrounding region, while others have never been outside the wire and 
wile away their time in the base's cafes and small shops (where 
troops reportedly can buy, among other items, belly dancer costumes), 
party in the "Dutch corner," play roller hockey in the base's central 
square, or dance the night away at a Saturday rave. "They are shaking 
glowsticks as if they have no concept of the mines and the war 
outside," said one U.S. officer, watching troops on the dance floor.

In recent days, U.S. forces 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/29/AR2009102900540_pf.html>announced 
a decrease in recreational perks and an imposition of more austere 
circumstances -- salsa and karaoke nights have already been cut at 
Kandahar -- prompting worries by NATO allies that their recreational 
facilities will be overrun by entertainment-starved U.S. troops.

A Mob of FOBs

It seems that no one outside the Pentagon knows just exactly how many 
U.S. camps, forward operating bases, combat outposts, patrol bases 
and other fortified sites the U.S. military is currently using or 
constructing in Afghanistan. And while the Americans have recently 
abandoned a few of their 
<http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ29Df04.html>installations, 
effectively ceding the northeastern province of Nuristan to Taliban 
forces, elsewhere a base-building boom has been underway.

In April, Contrack was awarded another $28 million contract for work 
on airfields -- to be performed at unspecified sites in Afghanistan. 
In June, Florida-based IAP Worldwide Services was awarded a $21 
million contract to enhance electrical power distribution at the U.S. 
Marines' still-growing Forward Operating Base (FOB) Leatherneck in 
Helmand Province, a Taliban stronghold. Scheduled for completion in 
June 2010, that project is only part of IAP's work, which has 
involved "almost two dozen power plants at U.S. Army bases in 
Afghanistan and Iraq" that, according to the company's promotional 
literature, its teams have "delivered, installed, operated and maintained."

FOB Dwyer, also in Helmand Province, is fast becoming a "hub" for air 
support in southern Afghanistan, 
<http://www.centaf.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123168015>according to 
Captain Vincent Rea of the Air Force's 809th Expeditionary Red Horse 
Squadron. To that end, Marine Corps and Air Force personnel are 
building runways and helipads to accommodate ever more fixed-wing and 
rotary aircraft on the base. The two services collaborated on the 
construction of a 4,300-foot airstrip capable of accommodating giant 
C-130 Hercules transport aircraft that increase the U.S. capability 
to support more troops on more bases in more remote areas.

"With the C-130s coming in more frequently, more Marines can travel 
at a given time and will definitely help Camp Dwyer and other FOBs 
and COPs (Combat Outposts) to build up," 
<http://www.iimefpublic.usmc.mil/__852571150047CCBC.nsf/rssNews/A3FB2D209A18E8B68525763C003FBFB4?OpenDocument>says 
Capt. Alexander Lugo-Velazquez of Marine Light/Attack Helicopter 
Squadron 169. In September, the Air Force reported the completion of 
the first phase of a six-phase construction project at FOB Dwyer 
which will eventually include additional fuel pits and taxiways, 
increased tarmac space, and the lengthening of the runway to 6,000 
feet. In October, according to government documents, the Army also 
began soliciting bids -- in the $10-$25 million range -- for 
construction of fuel storage and distribution facilities at FOB 
Dwyer. These, like the infrastructure upgrades at Bagram, are not 
scheduled to be completed until sometime in 2011.

In Helmand, as well as Farah, Kandahar, and Nimruz provinces, between 
June and September the Marine Expeditionary Brigade-Afghanistan alone 
<http://www.mnfwest.usmc.mil/public/InfolineMarines.nsf/ArticlesListingReadCurrent/B8B62C4E9F73ED118525762B0060FA3C?OpenDocument>established 
four new forward operating bases, "10 combat outposts, six patrol 
bases, and four ancillary operating positions, helicopter landing 
zones and an expeditionary airfield." In October, defense contractor 
AECOM Technology 
<http://pr.aecom.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=211994&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1343808&highlight=>signed 
a $78 million, 6-month extension contract with the Army to "provide 
general-support maintenance as well as the operation of maintenance 
facilities, living quarters and offices at two U.S. military bases as 
well as forward operating bases and satellite locations" in Afghanistan.

Defense contracting giant 
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/21843/the_reconstruction_of_new_oraq>Fluor 
has also been hard at work landing lucrative deals in Afghanistan. In 
March, the Army 
<http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/03/27/18864-army-segues-from-logcap-iii-to-iv/index.html>reported 
that, in accordance with President Obama's spring surge of troops, 
Regional Command East in Afghanistan had tasked Fluor to expand four 
existing forward operating bases and, if need be, build another eight 
new ones.

In Regional Command South, it was reported that "[e]mergency work to 
expand eight FOBs [wa]s underway after being competitively awarded to 
Fluor under LOGCAP IV." This is the current version of a military 
program first instituted by the Pentagon in 1985. It has been the key 
means by which military logistics and supply functions have been 
turned over to private contractors. (The previous version of the 
program, LOGCAP III, was awarded solely to Kellogg, Brown and Root 
Services or KBR, then a division of the oil services giant 
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175036/pratap_chatterjee_inheriting_halliburton_s_army>Halliburton, 
primarily in support of U.S. operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and 
Kuwait and was plagued by 
<http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-kbr-war-profiteers-feb21,0,3494273.story>scandals.) 


In Afghanistan, companies like Fluor are clearly digging in. Fluor, 
in fact, 
<http://www.fluor.com/projects/Pages/ProjectInfoPage.aspx?PrjID=16&updateMeta=0>describes 
itself as "co-located with the U.S. Army in Afghanistan, where the 
team coordinates, provides oversight, and implements Fluor's 
execution plan to provide the necessary resources and labor to 
accomplish this mission" of "providing multi-functional base life 
support and combat services support (CSS) to the U.S. and Coalition 
Forces in Afghanistan."

The company is "simultaneously constructing and managing the 
expansion of eight Forward Operating Bases[...] in Southern 
Afghanistan. This includes the construction of an FOB to accommodate 
17,000 to 20,000 U.S. Military personnel." Fluor, no doubt, expects 
to be "co-located with the U.S. Army in Afghanistan" for a long time. 
In July 2009, the defense giant was awarded a $1.5 billion contract 
for LOGCAP IV services in Afghanistan; in October, the Army 
<http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/10/02/28263-logcap-highlights-support-in-southwest-asia/>reported 
that the LOGCAP program was responsible for erecting 6,020 units of 
containerized housing known as relocatable buildings or RLBs in 
Regional Command South.

In July, under an existing LOGCAP IV contract, 
<http://dir.salon.com/news/feature/2002/06/26/bosnia/index.html>scandal-tainted 
defense contractor DynCorp International, along with partners 
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/21843/the_reconstruction_of_new_oraq>CH2M 
Hill and Taos Industries, 
<http://www.dyn-intl.com/news2009/news070809.aspx>received a one year 
$643.5 million order to "provide existing bases within the 
Afghanistan South AOR [area of responsibility] with operations and 
maintenance support, including but not limited to: facilities 
management, electrical power, water, sewage and waste management, 
laundry operations, food services and transportation motor pool 
operations," as well as "construction services for additional sites." 
With an eye to the future, the Pentagon has included four one-year 
options in the contract which, if taken up, would be worth an 
estimated $5.8 billion.

Just recently, the Australian military indicated it was also digging 
in for a long stay, 
<http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26245305-31477,00.html>announcing 
a $37 million upgrade of its main base near Tarin Kowt in Oruzgan 
province, to be completed by mid-2011. As at other NATO facilities, 
increasing numbers of U.S. troops have been operating out of Tarin 
Kowt recently and, in late September, the U.S.-based company Kandahar 
Constructors signed a $25 million deal with the Pentagon for runway 
upgrades there, also to be completed in 2011.

Speaking the Language of Occupation

In 2009 alone, after many billions of dollars had already gone into 
the construction, expansion, and maintenance of U.S. bases in 
Afghanistan, American taxpayers were called upon to pay for more than 
$1 billion in construction contracts -- and based on the evidence at 
hand, including those future options, this may prove just a drop in 
the proverbial bucket.

All of this has been happening without a clear plan laid out in 
Washington for the future of U.S. military operations in that 
country, without a legitimate national government in Kabul, and of 
course with no shortage of 
<http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/>infrastructural repairs 
needed at home. Americans curious to know much of anything about the 
Pentagon's Afghan building boom beyond Bagram would have found little 
on the nightly news or in major newspapers. It has essentially been 
carried out in the dark, far away, and with only the most modest 
reportorial interest.

Forget for a moment the "debates" in Washington over Afghan War 
policy and, if you just focus on the construction activity and the 
flow of money into Afghanistan, what you see is a war that, from the 
point of view of the Pentagon, isn't going to end any time soon. In 
fact, the U.S. military's building boom in that country suggests 
that, in the ninth year of the Afghan War, the Pentagon has plans for 
a far longer-term, if not near-permanent, garrisoning of the country, 
no matter what course Washington may decide upon. Alternatively, it 
suggests that the Pentagon is willing to waste taxpayer money (which 
might have shored up sagging infrastructure in the U.S. and created a 
plethora of jobs) on what will sooner or later be abandoned runways, 
landing zones and forward operating bases.

The building and fortifying of bases in Afghanistan isn't the only 
sign that the U.S. military is digging in for an even longer haul. 
Another key indicator can be found in a Pentagon contract awarded in 
late September to <http://www.sosiltd.com/default.htm>SOS 
International, Ltd., a privately owned "operations support company" 
that provides everything from "cultural advisory services" to 
"intelligence and counterintelligence analysis and training" to 
numerous federal agencies. That contract, primarily for linguistic 
services in support of military operations in Afghanistan, has an 
estimated completion date of September 2014.

Nick Turse is the associate editor of TomDispatch.com and the winner 
of a 2009 Ridenhour Prize for Reportorial Distinction as well as a 
James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism. His work has 
appeared in the Los Angeles Times, 
<http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081201/turse/single>the Nation, In 
These Times, and regularly at TomDispatch. Turse is currently a 
fellow at New York University's Center for the United States and the 
Cold War. A paperback edition of his book 
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/0805089195/ref=nosim/?tag=nationbooks08-20>The 
Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives (Metropolitan 
Books) was published earlier this year. His website is 
<http://www.nickturse.com/>NickTurse.com.

Copyright 2009 Nick Turse




Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20091105/6426954f/attachment.htm>