VZCZCXRO8794
OO RUEHDBU RUEHIK RUEHPOD RUEHPW RUEHYG
DE RUEHBUL #0918/01 1040322
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 140322Z APR 09
FM AMEMBASSY KABUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8365
INFO RUCNAFG/AFGHANISTAN COLLECTIVE
RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 6749

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KABUL 000918 
 
DEPT FOR SRAP, SCA/FO, SCA/RA, SCA/A, AND L 
DEPT PASS AID/ANE 
CENTCOM FOR CSTC-A 
GENEVA FOR PSA 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958 N/A 
TAGS: PGOV ASEC EIND EAID AF
SUBJECT: Afghan Parliament Takes up Regulation of Private Security 
Companies 
 
REF: (a) Kabul 00463 (b) Kabul 00106 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: The Afghan Parliament has begun consideration of 
legislation to regulate private security companies (PSCs).  This 
parliamentary action comes two months after a Cabinet decision 
imposing interim rules on PSC operations and, if enacted, would 
supersede them.  The legislation is similar to the Cabinet rules, 
including a problematic personnel cap and exorbitant and 
discriminatory fee structure.  PSCs are unpopular in Afghanistan for 
a variety of reasons, ranging from resentment of "foreign 
mercenaries" to concern that such firms could constitute private 
armies and threaten the regime.  As mark-up proceeds, there is a 
risk that the bill could become more restrictive of PSC operations, 
which would make it complicated for the USG to contract the 
necessary PSC protection for operations and facilities in 
Afghanistan.  Embassy Kabul is engaging Afghan leadership to 
influence both the regulatory and legislative processes.  The 
Minister of the Interior, who leads the process for the Afghan 
government, has expressed willingness to seek compromises on the 
most problematic aspects of PSC rules.  Parliament is more of a wild 
card, however, and could prove more difficult to engage.  We will 
attempt to engage the powerful and respected Interior Minister Atmar 
and work through him as the best vehicle for influencing Parliament. 
 End Summary. 
 
PARLIAMENT TAKES UP BILL ON PRIVATE SECURITY COMPANIES; PERSONNEL 
CAP AND FEES PROBLEMATIC 
 
¶2. (SBU) The Internal Security Committee of the Wolesi Jirga (the 
lower house of Parliament) has begun mark-up on a bill to regulate 
private security companies (PSCs) in Afghanistan.  This 
parliamentary action comes two months after the Cabinet imposed its 
own regulations on the industry (ref a).  The bill, originally 
introduced last year by the Ministry of the Interior (MoI), had been 
lying inactive for several months, prompting the Cabinet to 
promulgate its own rules as an interim measure.  (Note: The impetus 
for parliamentary consideration after months of inaction could have 
come from the visit last week of the UN Working Group on 
Mercenaries.  The group was here on a fact-finding mission in 
preparation for a report to the UN Human Rights Council in the 
fall.) 
 
¶3. (SBU) The bill's provisions are similar to those issued by the 
Cabinet, including procedures on PSC vetting, registration and 
oversight; the scope of PSC organization and operation; and fees. 
The original version contained the same cap of 500 "men under arms" 
per PSC as the regulations.  (The MoI, the government lead on the 
issue, is the author of both.)  However, the Internal Security 
Committee has reportedly amended the bill to lower the cap to 
100-300 men.  The committee has also made the fee structure more 
discriminatory: it has doubled the annual licensing fee for 
non-Afghan PSCs from USD 120,000, as contained in both the 
regulations and the original draft legislation, to USD 240,000.  The 
fee for Afghan companies remains USD 60,000. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Most PSCs in Afghanistan are foreign.  While there are 
Afghan PSCs, most are generally smaller and less well-trained; many 
of them are not registered.  Afghans tend to see PSCs as foreign 
mercenaries, unaccountable and dangerous.  For a politician, 
limiting the numbers of armed personnel for PSCs and spiking the 
fees for foreign companies is easy and politically expedient.  Some 
Afghan politicians also have connections to local PSCs and may want 
to give them an edge over the foreign competition. 
 
PARLIAMENTARY ENTRY COMPLICATES THE ISSUE; EMBASSY CONTINUING TO 
WORK FOR A PSC CODE WE CAN LIVE WITH 
 
¶5. (SBU) The sudden entry of Parliament into the PSC regulatory game 
could complicate USG efforts to secure a rational operational 
environment for PSCs, which remains essential to the U.S. mission in 
Afghanistan.  It is unclear at this point whether parliamentary 
interest in this bill will remain high and how quickly the bill will 
proceed through both houses.  Parliamentary action is often 
scheduled with no advance notice, and further attempts to limit PSC 
operations and raise their costs of doing business are possible. 
The Embassy will try to engage directly with key Members of 
Parliament and will work with Minister Atmar to shape a bill 
favorable to our interests.  Atmar is widely respected in Parliament 
and his views will have great sway. 
 
¶6. (SBU) The Embassy has been working closely with the MoI to secure 
"flexibilities," as per Interior Minister Atmar, on the 500-man 
limit of personnel under arms.  Minister Atmar conceded that the 
 
KABUL 00000918  002 OF 002 
 
 
limitation is not workable and has committed to finding a mechanism 
for exceptions for the operations of the USG and other donors 
providing key support for Afghan reconstruction (Ref B).  The MoI 
has thus accepted the principle that the USG/military needs to 
continue contracting with PSCs with more than 500 armed staff, but 
we have yet to agree on the details of an exemption process.  The 
Embassy has also underscored - and MoI officials have agreed -- that 
any exemptions from the cap must also apply to other international 
donors and coalition partners, whose assistance programs are a vital 
component of reconstruction efforts.  MoI has committed to 
equalizing the fees as between foreign and Afghan PSCs; we continue 
to press for fees that are reasonable, linked to the provision of 
actual services, and consistent with bilateral agreements.  We have 
also stressed GIRoA responsibility to ensure that any law passed by 
Parliament is consistent with the arrangement eventually worked out 
with the U.S. Embassy. 
 
RICCIARDONE