However, a central government stronger than any in decades was in place to deal with a public health emergency so deadly it possessed the ability to undermine national security. The existence of such an unprecedented degree of security (for Sierra Leone) can be traced to the timely employment of private military companies (PMCs) during the nation’s civil war two decades ago.

The modern PMC can be defined as an entity that offers services aimed at addressing security concerns through a variety of security engagements. From a legal perspective, a PMC is a corporate entity, while a mercenary group is not. Security needs — combined with the proliferation of PMCs post-Cold War — makes PMCs an inevitability in weak states such as Sierra Leone during its Civil War.

How PMCs came to the aid of post-civil war Sierra Leone represents an historical lesson with relevance to the country today, and to other countries whose militaries are incapable for various reasons – incompetency, underfunding, inexperience, corruption – of mustering the strength and resources to ensure a nation’s security. PMCs have been doing mischief in post-colonial Africa for decades. However, the Sierra Leone example offers a better experience.

PMCs bring a professional response to a chaotic situation

EO’s involvement in Sierra Leone’s civil War came at a critical point when Freetown had almost been taken by rebels. EO recaptured the diamond mines, leading to their reopening, and this success was followed by a ceasefire and elections. Sandline succeeded in bringing the resulting legitimate government back from exile.

Criticism of PMC involvement in regions such as West Africa is largely made under the Western notions about state security. This assumption that only government armies may legitimately fight internal opponents and that there is something inherently wrong about hiring private firms to stand in for government militaries might have been more credible if Sierra Leone had a functioning army that benefited from foreign government assistance.

At the time of PMC intervention in Sierra Leone, little foreign aid was available to Sierra Leone through secure channels due to what was described by the West as their own resource shortages and ‘donor fatigue’. The impact that EO and Sandline had in turning the war around in Sierra Leone should be apparent. What the PMCs managed to do that the government-led interventions did not was to secure and protect remaining infrastructure.

While still not scoring impressively on the UNDP Human Development Index relative to other African developing countries, as of 2013, life expectancy in Sierra Leone has risen to 45 years; the adult literacy rate has risen to almost half; the infant mortality has decreased to 114 per 1,000 births; and per capita annual income increased over twofold, to US$580. Most importantly, the country is not at war. There is still a long way to go, and Sierra Leone is not yet rid of its ‘resource curse’, but recovery and development are apparent.

The mines are operant, there is foreign direct investment from China, there are growing small and medium-sized enterprises and there is a considerable increase in the tourism (particularly ‘adventure tourism’) sector. None of this progress can be credited solely to PMC involvement in Sierra Leone. However, without such involvement, today’s brighter security situation (albeit currently and sadly under threat by the Ebola epidemic after such progress) would have been more difficult to have obtained.

Written by Marika Josephides

The proposed policy change should prevent USAID from implementing certain destabilization programs in countries that would normally reject its aid. Especially those where the agency would have to go to "excessive lengths to protect program beneficiaries and participants."

While the destabilization activities will not be carried out by USAID, the US government will continue to fund such projects through the State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy, another body renowned for its interventions in Latin American democracies.

USAID, which claims on its website that its aim is “furthering America's interests, while improving lives in the developing world,” was condemned this year for its attempt to set up a “Cuban Twitter” in order to provoke dissent against the communist government there.

USAID's latest statement, released Sunday, claims it will continue to undertake programs in "politically restrictive environments," but with more transparency and with the safety of its volunteers at the forefront.

"We will also examine risks that might constrain effective implementation of the projects or undermine the safety of our partners, such as programmatic, legal, financial, physical and digital security-related risks," the statement said.

As early as 2009, the agency planted young people from Venezuela, Costa Rica and Peru in Cuba to agitate and undermine Raul Castro's administration, under other pretexts, such as health promotion workshops.

USAID hid its involvement in these Cuban schemes, according to a report earlier this year, creating a subterfuge with a front company, with funds diverted from the Cayman islands.

Josefina Vidal, Cuba's chief foreign ministry official for U.S. relations, demanded the immediate halt to the actions in a statement in August, when reports first surfaced of the Twitter-like project, known as ZunZuneo.

"These facts confirm that the U.S. government has not ceased its hostile and interventionist plans against Cuba," Vidal said. "The U.S. government should end once and for all its subversive, illegal and undercover actions against Cuba, which violate our sovereignty and the will expressed by the Cuban people to perfect our economic and social model."

USAID has also been criticized for other high-profile activities to undermine democratically elected governments.

Its infamous Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) in Venezuela, part of efforts to undermine the Chavez government, was forced to close in 2011 after being exposed for violations of Venezuelan law. Obama Administration’s Foreign Operations Budgets continued to provide millions to fund opposition groups in Venezuela through USAID, journalist Eva Gollinger found.

In Ecuador, the United States' top governmental aid agency closed its doors in October, after years of controversy surrounding its operations there.

In September, whistle-blowing website Wikileaks revealed that USAID funded and assisted Hong Kong protest movement Occupy central.

Original Article by  USAID Claims it Will Halt Destabilization Programs www.telesurtv.net