PMC

Stability and Coercive Security

Stability and coercive security are often fragile and do not address the fundamental political and socio-economic issues that caused the conflict. It is true that military bodies like EO (Executive Outcomes) are hired for military tasks and should not be criticized for failing to address underlying socio-economic problems. Their main function is to create an environment where it becomes possible to tackle those problems. However, an over-reliance on coercive means of achieving security, whether public or private, will rarely provide long-term solutions. The easy availability of such means through private companies might tempt states to avoid the more difficult long-term challenges of creating inclusive and pluralistic politics.

• Stability and coercive security are often fragile and do not address the root causes of conflicts.
• Military bodies like EO are hired for military tasks and are not expected to solve underlying socio-economic problems.
• The function of military and security organizations is to create an environment where it becomes possible to tackle those problems.
• Over-reliance on coercive means of achieving security, whether public or private, is not a long-term solution.
• The easy availability of private military companies might tempt states to avoid the more difficult challenges of creating inclusive and pluralistic politics.

Criticisms of EO and PMCs

While it is not fair to criticize EO or private military companies (PMCs) for not addressing underlying socio-economic problems, there are valid criticisms of an over-reliance on coercive means of achieving security.

• EO and PMCs are hired for military tasks, not for solving socio-economic problems.
• The function of military and security organizations is to create an environment where it becomes possible to tackle those problems.
• Criticisms of EO or PMCs should focus on the over-reliance on coercive means of achieving security.
• Over-reliance on coercive means rarely provides long-term solutions.
• The availability of private military companies might tempt states to avoid the more difficult challenges of creating inclusive and pluralistic politics.

Long-Term Solutions for Security

To achieve long-term security, it is important to go beyond coercive means and address the underlying political and socio-economic issues.

• Coercive means of achieving security are not sufficient for long-term solutions.
• Addressing the underlying political and socio-economic issues is crucial for long-term security.
• Creating inclusive and pluralistic politics is a difficult but necessary challenge.
• Long-term security requires tackling the root causes of conflicts.

Impact on Stability

The employment of PMCs can have an impact on stability in the areas where they operate. Some factors to consider include:

• Resentment by the regular military: The presence of PMCs may be resented by the regular military forces, as they may see it as a threat to their authority or as undermining their role.
• Tension between government and military: In some cases, the employment of PMCs has led to tension between the government and the military. For example, Sandline’s aborted contract with the government of Papua New Guinea resulted in tension between the government and the army.
• Influence on coups or political changes: There have been instances where the presence of PMCs has been associated with coups or political changes. For example, some observers link the coup in Sierra Leone that replaced Captain Strasser with the presence of Executive Outcomes (EO) and their training programs.

Proxies for Governments

There is often an accusation that PMCs act as proxies for governments. While this is true in some cases, it is not always the case. Some points to consider include:

• MPRI as an instrument of US policy: MPRI, a PMC, has been accused of functioning as an instrument of US policy in the Balkans. The fact that MPRI’s actions align with US Government policy is evident from the State Department’s issuance of licenses.
• Assumptions without evidence: Many commentators assume a link between governments and PMCs or mercenaries, often without substantial evidence. Even when governments deny any covert link, commentators may still assume its existence.

Human Rights Violations and Private Military Companies (PMCs)

Violations by National Armies

• In Sierra Leone, the national army was undisciplined, violent, and posed a threat to the civilian population.
• Some Nigerian forces operating under ECOMOG have also been accused of similar behavior.
• However, there have been no suggestions of such violations in the record of Executive Outcome, a PMC.

State Authority and Non-State Violence

• In certain cases, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in the late 1990s, state authority has declined to the point where it becomes difficult to distinguish between state and non-state violence.

The Role of PMCs in International Operations

Security Services

• PMCs and PSCs also play a role in providing security services for international operations.
• This can involve protecting personnel, facilities, and assets in potentially dangerous environments.

Ancillary Role

• PMCs and PSCs typically serve in an ancillary role, supporting the main operations of international organizations.
• They are not the primary actors but provide specialized services to enhance the effectiveness and safety of the mission.

Private Companies in Peacekeeping Operations

Private companies have the potential to play a role in peacekeeping operations for the United Nations (UN). Currently, the UN faces challenges in recruiting forces for these operations. However, holding providing states accountable can be difficult due to the UN’s status as a sovereign state. By involving private companies, the UN could potentially enforce higher standards on behavior, human rights, and efficiency in carrying out tasks.

Benefits of Involving Private Companies

1. Higher Standards: Private companies could be held to higher standards compared to providing states. This would include not only efficiency in carrying out tasks but also adherence to behavior and human rights standards.

2. Cost-effectiveness: Involving private companies in peacekeeping operations could potentially be cheaper than current methods. For example, the UNAMSIL operation in Sierra Leone costs approximately $600 million per year. By putting the tasks of UNAMSIL out to tender, private companies may be able to perform the job more cheaply and effectively.

3. Quicker Availability: Private companies may be able to provide forces more quickly to the UN compared to traditional methods. This could enhance the UN’s ability to respond promptly to peacekeeping needs.

4. Willingness to Participate: Private companies may be more willing to participate in peacekeeping operations compared to providing states. This could increase the pool of available forces for the UN.

Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870

The Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 is a law in the United Kingdom that prohibits British subjects from enlisting in the armed forces of a foreign state that is at war with another foreign state at peace with the UK. It also prohibits recruiting individuals for such service within the UK. However, there have been no prosecutions under this act related to enlistment or recruitment. The Director of Public Prosecutions considered prosecuting individuals for enlisting in the Spanish Civil War but abandoned the idea due to the difficulty of gathering evidence for activities taking place abroad. It is also uncertain whether the act would cover internal conflicts, such as those in Africa today. The Diplock Committee, after examining the issue, concluded that the act is ineffective and should be repealed or replaced.

• The Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 prohibits British subjects from enlisting in the armed forces of a foreign state at war with another foreign state at peace with the UK.
• It also prohibits recruiting individuals for such service within the UK.
• No prosecutions have been made under this act for enlistment or recruitment.
• The Director of Public Prosecutions considered prosecuting individuals for enlisting in the Spanish Civil War but faced difficulties in gathering evidence for activities taking place abroad.
• It is uncertain whether the act would cover internal conflicts, such as those in Africa today.
• The Diplock Committee concluded that the act is ineffective and should be repealed or replaced.