In Darfur, Mia Farrow Says Blackwater Can Help Where Governments Have Failed

From a refugee camp in Darfur, actress Mia Farrow calls on Blackwater to help resolve the terrible humanitarian crisis in Sudan. Farrow (pictured in a file photo) says she's already been in touch with the company's chairman to talk about solutions.

ABC News reports, "Two unlikely allies met for breakfast last month in New York to discuss a possible collaboration: Mia Farrow, actress and passionate activist for Darfur refugees, and Erik Prince, founder and CEO of the government contractor, Blackwater Worldwide.

"Farrow told ABC News that Blackwater, despite its controversial history and allegations of murdering civilians in Iraq, might be able to help the 'hopelessly under-equipped' African Union forces deployed in Darfur with logistics and training.

"'Blackwater has a much better idea of what an effective peace-keeping mission would look like than western governments,' Farrow told ABC News from a refugee camp in near the Darfur border. Farrow said those governments have been unsuccessful in standing up to the Sudanese government and bringing peace to the region."

The rest of the article consists of commentary pooh-poohing the idea and trashing Blackwater. But Farrow is an important advocate given her cultural status and her leadership in the pro-Darfur movement.

Prince told the Wall Street Journal last month that he would provide the expertise, training and logistics to support a duly constituted African force in Darfur, and that he would do it at-cost, that is, as a charitable action.

Erik Prince Offers to Train African Force to Save Darfur

Blackwater CEO Erik Prince tells the Wall Street Journal that he is willing to train and equip an African force to save Darfur.

And he doesn't want to make a nickel doing it. He's offering to do it at cost.

This amazing news is tucked way down in William McGurn's "Main Street" column that ran in the WSJ on July 29. McGurn writes:

Mr. Prince says that the 9,000 or so African Union soldiers in Darfur, as part of the United Nations peacekeeping force, are a good start. But he says that to be effective they need better training, communications and equipment. That is more or less the same message from a report released yesterday by the Darfur Consortium, a coalition of 50 African-based and Africa-focused NGOs. "One year ago the U.N. Security Council stood unanimous and promised Darfurians the strongest and largest protection force ever," says a coalition spokesman. "Today that force is just over a third deployed, lacks even the most basic equipment and is unable to protect itself let alone civilians."

Mr. Prince has a remedy. He believes that with 250 or so professionals, Blackwater can transform about a thousand of the African Union soldiers into an elite and highly mobile force. This force would also be equipped with helicopters and the kind of small planes that missionaries use in this part of the world. It would be cheaper than the hundreds of millions we are spending to set up a larger AU/U.N. force. And he says he'd do it at cost.

Blackwater would not do the fighting. Its people would serve as advisers, mechanics and pilots. Aid workers and villagers would be equipped with satellite telephones that include Global Positioning Systems.

When they call in, the troops would respond.

"I'm so sick of hearing that nothing can be done," he says. "The Janjaweed is a truly unfettered bully. No one has stood up to them. If they were met by a mobile quick reaction force of African Union soldiers, the Janjaweed would quickly learn their habits were not sustainable." And to ensure accountability, he says, the U.S. could send 25 military officers to observe how Blackwater is doing and serve as liaisons.

Up until Blackwater's offer, all the other "Save Darfur" activity is just useless talk. McGurn notes, "That's the point: Strongly worded resolutions, sanctions and boycotts are generally what you do in place of decisive action. I understand that the whole idea of Blackwater helicopters flying over Darfur probably horrifies many of the same people frustrated by Mr. Bashir's ability to game the system. But it's at least worth wondering what that same Blackwater helo might look like to a defenseless Darfur mother and her daughters lying in fear of a Janjaweed attack."

Any takers?

Harvard scholar says Blackwater may have Darfur solution

A scholar at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government writes in the Boston Globe that Blackwater USA might have the solution to the human tragedy in Darfur.

The scholar, Rebecca Ulam Weiner, discusses the failure of the African Union, NATO and the United Nations to help bring an end to the Darfur horrors and other atrocities in Africa. She argues that private military companies are right for the job - but those she interviews say that world leaders don't have the political will.

"There's little question that companies like Blackwater could be more effective operationally than the African Union, which has been hampered by its peacekeepers' lack of command and control experience. Private military companies boast a roster of former special forces officers and law enforcement officers who are accustomed to volatile conflict and post-conflict areas like Sudan," Weiner says.

"Blackwater also subjects all of its personnel to an impressive array of extra training-whether they're training to work in Baghdad or the firm's North Carolina headquarters. They take classes in international humanitarian law, leadership, ethics, regional awareness, and ''customs and traditions.' They've recently approached Amnesty International about teaching human rights education classes. And the International Peace Operations Association [IPOA] boasts that its code of conduct was written by human rights lawyers.

"The industry also claims that it's far cheaper than its multilateral or military counterparts. ''We offer the ability to create a right-sized solution-which creates a cost savings right off the bat,' says Taylor. By contrast, [IPOA President Doug] Brooks notes, ''NATO is insanely expensive; it's not a cost-effective organization. Neither is the [African Union]. Private companies would be much, much cheaper. When we compared their costs to most UN operations, we came up with 10 to 20 percent of what the UN would normally charge.'"