According to this article, yes they were involved with
> AWCC:
> http://www.afghanwireless.com/news_6apr.html
Ouch. If they were responsible for AWCC, that would hardly seem to be a
basis for awarding them another similar contract.
-Bill
A government contract handed out not on technical merit, but for back room political reasons ? Shocking!
---Mike
The funny this is at the state agencies I've worked for we were *required*
to go through a bidding procedure prior to getting final approval for a
purchase. Unless we had an established relationship with a given company
for similar products or services we had to follow the procedures. I
wouldn't at all be surprised to hear that sometime in the very near future
a lawsuit was filed by various other telcos to try and get a piece of the
pie or get the administration to be fair towards other telcos. Who says
it has to be a US telco? Why can't it be a UK telco?
Justin
How many US tanks are there now?
How many UK tanks are there now?
How many French tanks are there now?
Possession *is* 9/10ths of the law, especially when you're enforcing it
with things that shoot large heavy depleted-uranium shells with high
explosives in them... 
AWCC is the permanent Afghan network. The network MCI is building in Iraq
is a temporary local network for use by the reconstruction teams.
I can't find anything that says whether this was awarded by USAID or by
the Pentagon directly. If the former, then this is likely to be a
subcontract under Bechtel.
Uh, that's putting it in a pretty flattering light... AWCC is the
terminally flaky A-carrier that's having to be replaced. Have you ever
tried to place calls through them?
-Bill
I didn't say AWCC was good. It's permanent in the sense that it wasn't
temporary -- the Iraqi network that MCI is building appears to have a
fixed shelf-life and appears to be geographically limited to Baghdad. The
"permament" nationwide network(s) will be built by whoever the Iraqi
interim government chooses for the job (as was the case with AWCC).
Whether those end up sucking or not isn't the point here either.
please note I'm not a business guy, nor do I know anything directly about
this case... BUT, perhaps the contract was awarded on/with the FTS200X
contract? (its 2002 now I believe that WCOM/MCI is the prime on... or
atleast heavily related too) That would mean the gov't had a vehicle to
just create a task order to make the network buildout happen... As to 'why
a us company', perhaps its being done under the auspices of: "The us gov't
needs a phone network in iraq while they are there, so build something
good and leave it behind, as a bonus to the luckyiraq people?"
(and not again the initial paragraph from me... add to that: I didn't read
either of these articles)
Not speaking for my employer either....
I was wondering, who was hired to rebuild the telephone systems in Germany
and Japan after WWII? I don't recall AT&T being hired to install switches
in Tokyo or Berlin.
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/cstb46.htm
The United States Constabulary of Occupied Germany
"Wherever patrols operate, they are in constant communication by radio or
telephone with their platoon or troop headquarters, which are in turn
linked in a chain of communications reaching up to Constabulary
Headquarters. The telephone lines used by the Constabulary are, for the
most part, those of the German system, although some military lines and
equipment are available. In addition to radio and telephone, the
Constabulary is hooked up in a teletype system, which is the most
comprehensive and effective communications network operated by the United
States Army in Europe."
Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
a us company', perhaps its being done under the auspices of: "The us
gov't needs a phone network in iraq while they are there, so build
something
good and leave it behind, as a bonus to the luckyiraq people?"
Er, not quite. Every single cent/penny/whatever spent on the whole conflict
will be extracted from the oil revenues as some sort of 'commercial
compensation' plan. The taxes you (and I) end up paying to fund this little
jaunt will disappear elsewhere.
Peter