U.S. hiring contractors for MiTTs. What does this mean?

According to today’s Washington Post, the U.S. military command in Iraq is soliciting civilian contractors to serve on training teams assigned to advise Iraqi military units:

The solicitation, issued by the Joint Contracting Command in Baghdad, says the individuals that a contractor recruits -- who would include former members of the U.S. Special Forces and ex-Iraqi army officers -- will be trained in the United States with military transition teams (MiTTs) and shipped as a single team to Iraq. The recruits will live on Iraqi military bases "under Iraqi living conditions and participate with MiTT special operations and convoy duties," the solicitation says.

Left unanswered in the article are some questions that come to mind.

1) Why does the U.S. military suddenly need civilian contractors for these billets? Did staff planners fail to anticipate the (well known) expansion plan of the Iraqi security forces?

2) Does MNF-I (and the U.S. Army in general) view this arrangement as a short-term, temporary fix? Or will contractors in MiTTs now be a standard practice, extending beyond the Iraq and Afghan conflicts?

3) Is MNF-I resorting to this measure because there exists a shortage of qualified officers and NCOs for the MiTT billets? If so, should the U.S. Army have taken measures earlier to prevent these shortages from occurring?

4) Does the apparent shortage of U.S. uniformed personnel for the MiTT billets result from the U.S. Army assigning these officers and NCOs to conventional, general purpose brigade combat teams instead of MiTT duty? Is the creation of new BCTs competing with MiTTs for Army talent? As an institution, which does the Army value more at this time, BCTs or MiTTs? Which does the Army believe is more useful at this time for resolving the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan?

5) Might the Army believe that contractors can do a better job than uniformed soldiers on MiTT teams? If so, is the Army happy with this?

6) Does the Army prefer its officers and NCOs to serve in BCTs rather than MiTTs? Would the Army’s officers and NCOs prefer to avoid service on MiTTs, especially if contractors can serve in their place?

7) Would the Army have been able to avoid using contractors for MiTTs had it already established in its full form LTC Nagl’s Advisor Corps command?