Good rebuttal, Vince.

Here is what I don't understand...if the DOD does not have apportioned forces for Africa, but African nations want to have US assistance, what other option besides use of contractors is there? I really think that "contractor" is bandied about too broadly. There is a huge difference between technical experts hired to assist what the military calls "security force assistance" on the one side, labor type work that is done for transportation, construction, and other similar logistic and engineering functions on another side, and the "gun-for-hire" security/protection roles (the one people get all freaky about) on a third. And, if I am not mistaken, a lot of the ACOTA/AFRICAP work is under State Dept not Defense Dept auspices. Correct? The incessant whining from various media outlets within and without the Continent is starting to get tiresome. Let AFRICOM help figure out the right way to go. More importantly, give their model a chance to work. Geez...it's only a couple of years along.

Noel, I'm not sure your article shows any evidence of contractors "moving in" to Africa with the creation of U.S. Africa command. Rather, your article summarizes a lot of long-existing, well-established Department of State contractor relationships. For example, the Department of State-funded AFrican Contingency Operations and Training Assistance (ACOTA) program has been in existence since 2004 and has trained approximately 100,000 peacekeepers. General Ward, commander of U.S. Africa Command, is on the record testifying to U.S. Congress that it is his intent, over the next several years, to reduce the numbers of contractors already existing when U.S. Africa Command was set up. For example, in Liberia, a contractor-led mission to train the New Liberian Army has been taken over by a new military-led mission of several dozen uniformed personnel mentoring the Liberian forces. Respectfully, Vince Crawley U.S. Afica Command Public Affairs http://www.africom.mil