Leadership hopeful’s war-zone past
National’s dangerman is no ‘‘gun for hire’’, explains Stacey Kirk.
He’s the ‘‘dark horse’’ vying to be the next leader of the Opposition and Mark Mitchell is the only one dogged by questions over whether he’s killed a man.
It’s something he refuses to answer, but Mitchell has opened up with Stuff about his military contracting past - entering a war zone to rescue stray dogs and surviving a five-day seige exposed, under a hail of mortar shells, against a 2000-strong militia.
Yes, he fired back. No, he won’t talk about what might have happened after that.
‘‘That was a very personal experience that I shared with other people, that I respect a lot. And I think it’s just not something that any of us would expect to go out and discuss.’’
But it’s not something Mitchell is ashamed of.
‘‘It’s something that certainly, we’re all quietly proud of what was achieved during that time, in terms of we were there to start to try and rebuild the democracy and deliver regional and local elections.
‘‘And we stuck together and we held together fast, when we came under a serious threat with the Mahdi militia and the uprising that we experienced.’’
It was perhaps a foil for moments like those that prompted Mitchell to have his private contracting and security company embark on a mission that might seem foolhardy at best.
American soldier Peter Neesley died in Baghdad, on Christmas Day. During his tour, he had befriended a stray dog and her three pups and looked after them - feeding them, and building them a kennel outside the base.
Three of the pups died, but one, named Boris, survived.
‘‘Of course, when Peter died, there was no-one there to look after them. And he’d indicated back to his family in the States that when he finished his tour of duty - which he had about six months to go - he was going to try and find a way of taking Mama and Boris back to the States.
‘‘So the family felt like they wanted to get the dogs back because it gave them that very strong link back to Peter. They wanted to give them a better life.
‘‘The US military couldn’t send troops out to look for dogs. If the troops had been killed or injured, there would have been some serious questions asked.’’
Mitchell agreed to do the job, rounded up volunteers and spent two days outside the protection of the base in Baghdad to look for them. It was a success - Mama and Boris were vaccinated and taken to the United States, where Neesley’s family cared for them.
‘‘For us and the team, it was incredibly satisfying because it was very human. When you’re operating in these high-conflict war zones, actually it’s just nice to be able to do something very human,’’ said Mitchell.
He does not own his company anymore. When he sold it in 2010, it was turning over $130 million a year.
He rails against claims of ‘‘war for profit’’.
‘‘I completely reject the notion of war for profit. For countries like New Zealand, and our coalition partners, there’s a lot of analysis that goes on and decisions are tested and interrogated.
‘‘But when you decide to deploy troops, or you decide to participate in some kind of conflict, then there’s definitely costs associated for everyone. Just by the sheer nature of the operations that you’re trying to carry out,’’ he says.
‘‘This ridiculous ‘war for profit’ stuff is just these peaceniks that just have no real understanding of what’s actually out there in the real world and the type of threats that exist and what you need to do to go out there and address them.’’
The United Nations has issued reports that have found a growing number of private security and military companies were operating domestically and internationally without effective oversight or accountability.
By the same token, the UN’s reliance on private security companies has grown over the years and the UN has described it as justified.
A 2010 report found the amount spent on such firms by the UN went up from at least $60m in 2009 to $103m in 2010.
Activities were primarily under the UN Development Programme, UN peacekeeping operations and UN refugee activities that year.
Mitchell said oversight was needed, but defence contractors were nothing new.
‘‘Defence contractors have been around forever. We have very good defence contractors in New Zealand that support our defence forces, and governments will choose what they want to outsource, what they need to outsource and what they don’t.
‘‘The reality is that they outsource security and protection services as well.’’