Wargame Articles

Security Contracts: A Black Game from Iraq by John Curry

The game

Each player represents a different security company.

Each secretly player tenders a quote of between £2 and 20 m for one contract. Bidding for such work consumes all available resources precluding them going for multiple major contracts at short notice. They do so by writing it on a piece of paper in front of them. The bids are all revealed at the same time.

The contracts are issued to whoever put in the lowest bid for that particular contract. This means some contracts will have no one bidding for them and another one may have all the players competing for it.

If there is a tie between two tenders, they simply rebid with only those players involved in the tie allowed to rebid. (these bids may be lower, higher or the same. There is no reason why you cannot raise your quote when short listing for a contract).

If they bid is successful, the player decides the amount they will spend on security between £1 and £10 m. This is the percentage change of preventing any attack.

The chance of an attack depends on the risk assigned to the type of contract:
Low risk 20%
Medium risk 40%
High risk 70%
Extreme risk 90%
Roll to see if there is an attack, then roll against the amount spent on security to see if the attack succeeds.

If the attack fails, then the security prevented the attack. If not, then the player receives no income from the contract (it was all spent clearing up the bodies, insurance claims etc…)

The game is run for a number of rounds, until the lessons are clear. Tendering pushes quotes to be cut and savings are made through reduced spending on security. Companies consist largely of Special forces, paratroopers and marines. Therefore they tend to gravitate towards the most exciting (bloody dangerous) contracts there are. Boring, routine stuff like guarding an oil well is seen as beneath many companies dignity.

Nick Dragge won the game due his extensive experience with a well known cut throat computer company (that I cannot remember the name of…) Tom Mouat won the award for spending least on security and Phil Steele the award for being unlucky.

Reflections

An interesting (= tragic for those involved) of the security contract war is the $3.3 billion war on Cocaine in Columbia. In order to save 2% to raise the profit margin from 38% to 40% the private security company bought single engine Cesna aircraft to fly over jungles and mountains in order to spray the Cocaine fields. Of course the rebels/ drugs gangs use AA. Using twin engined aircraft would have cut the risk by 95%.

Inevitably, several planes were shot down/ had engine failure and three Americans are still hostages of the 18,000 rebels army (drug gang?).

The company that employed them, closed and reopened with the interesting name CIAO. By sheer coincidence this meant they would not owe any pay to those taken hostage (as they were sacked for failing to take up their jobs with the new company. The issue of their inability to report to work was not the companies responsibility).

The West is now creating private mercenary armies under the legitimacy of being security companies. My personal predication is that within a decade, a few of the biggest companies will be able to deploy regimental (3,000) to divisional (15,000) combat/ support units. Of course, many would dispute this trend.

Students of history might recall some dangers of having such private armies jased in their countries.

Iraq Contracts (hypothetical)

January Low risk, oil pipeline protection

Febrwary Low risk, oil pipeline protection Medium risk oil well protection
Low risk close protection of banker
Medium risk close protection, foreign bank + £2m bonus on completion

March Low risk, oil pipelkne protectmon
Training police medium risk
Medium risk Protect International Red Cross HQ

April Low risk, oil pipeline protection
Medium risk oil well protection
Very high risk: hostage rescue
High risk Clear unexploded MLRS ordinance from oil well

May Low risk, oil pipeline protection
Very high risk: hostage rescue

Postscript to the Security Contracts Game

The Iraq Government stopped pa{ing Global Risks and Olive Security as the contracts were signed by the previous provisional government, not them. Britain and America tried to persuade the Iraq government to carry on. Global Risk went on stréke by getting the Gurkas and Fijian guards from Baghdad Airport (no!pay, no protection).

The British/ South African firm, Erinys has its contract cancellef for protecting the oil pipelines. As each contract is cancelled American troops have to step in to cover each new security gap. It would be completely ridiculous if the Iraq government saved money by not employing the contractors only to have the American government then step in to hire them instead of using American troops…