The United States has spent $6 billion to $10 billion for private security guards and related services in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, according to a congressional report released Tuesday.
That spending, calculated by the Congressional Budget Office, represents about 10 percent of the government's total costs of contracting in Iraq, which the budget office said will total about $100 billion through 2008.
The report also estimated that a total of 30,000 private security guards are employed in Iraq, working for the U.S. government as well as other clients, a higher figure than previous estimates.
The budget office's report also estimated that a total of 190,000 people work for all U.S. contractors in Iraq, including the companies performing nonsecurity functions.
That means contractors outnumber U.S. military personnel in Iraq. Several contracting experts said the new budget office report represented one of the first public efforts by the government to put a total price tag on the Bush administration's unparalleled reliance on contractors during the Iraq war.
"According to rough historical data, the ratio of about one contractor employee for every member of the U.S. armed forces in the Iraq theater is at least 2.5 times higher than that ratio during any other major U.S. conflict," the budget office report concluded.
The U.S. government's dependence on private armed security contractors to guard U.S. diplomats and others in the Iraqi war zone has been the subject of continual debate. The report includes a new analysis concluding the costs of hiring private security contractors is about the same as using the U.S. military for security.
The report analyzed a 2004 State Department contract with Blackwater, which provides security for U.S. personnel in Baghdad. The report said that in 2008 dollars, the Blackwater security guards were billed to the State Department at $1,325 a day per guard; the company also submitted charges for equipment and other costs.
The report found that although military pay of $140 to $190 a day per guard were much lower than those charged by Blackwater, there were many other costs of deploying, training and equipping U.S. soldiers that would add to the expenses of relying on U.S. troops for protection.
In addition, the Army would have to rotate troops and would need to have more units on standby in the United States ready to deploy to replace others on security duty. In peacetime, the government could end its contract with Blackwater, but would still have the Army units on its payroll, the report determined.
TBO.Com