Should Mercenaries Be Allowed to Operate in the US - Report Example

Bradley Hecker English 4T Lecturer: Ms. Robinson March 17, Topic: Should Mercenaries be allowed to operate in the US? Introduction Mercenaries are considered to be the second oldest profession in the world since they have been fighting alongside soldiers for as long as wars have existed. A mercenary can be described as a soldier who fights outside the authoritative control of an actor that is deemed to be in possession of the legitimate use of force for his own personal financial gain (Strachan and Scheipers 259). The term mercenary does not only encompass particular people that are recruited especially to fight in an armed conflict but also those that who are recruited to take part in one-time or repeated violent actions. These can range from revolutionary actions that are meant to overthrow a government, or changing and weakening a state where these immediate actions are not necessarily connected to the direct participation in a conflict that involves the armed forces but they are a serious threat to the stability and security of the state that they take place in. when this is considered, the actions that are taken by the mercenaries are closely linked with those that the international terrorists take part in. Should Mercenaries in the US? A framework that is aimed at regulating activities that have a mercenary nature should include a definition of the activities that are allowed, control of the actor and the activity, the licensing provision, certification and standardization by the licensing regime and the power to recall, censure and sanctions the elements that go against the regulatory framework (Chesterman and Lehnardt 42). In terms of the activities that are allowed, bans that are outright on military activities that take place abroad or on recruitment that is aimed at military activity abroad and neither practical nor enforceable though any regulation or the codes of conduct that guide these companies are considered to be admirable but they must take as a starting position respect for and governance by the existing international and domestic laws of the country that they come from and those that they are going to. Compliance with the law is a prerogative of all the companies that are operating in this field and thus it would be considered bad for business if they are found to breach the law in the operations that they take part in. The companies that are in this area of operation would be required to provide notification of individual contacts to the industry authority of each contract that they obtain and this information is held in a central, controlled and exclusive database. This will serve to avoid the instances that the government’s claim not to be aware of the activities that took place while ensuring that there is oversight on the same operations. An interesting point to note is the response and attitude that the international community has to the existence and operations of these companies that operate private armies. Even though a lot of condemnation is directed towards them and they are considered to be criminals and mercenaries by the developing countries, the response that has come from the Western governments has been more measured especially the United States and Great Britain. A good example of the lack of interest that has been shown by both the international community and the regional organizations towards these companies is the attitude that they developed to the two main resolutions that have been passed that condemn mercenary activities in the past two decades. The United Nations General Assembly Resolution of 1989 requires twenty signatures by the member states so that it could be able to become effective at the time that it was written but only sixteen have appended their signature of endorsement on it. Consequently, the OAU’s 1977 Charter against mercenary activities has up to date been signed by a mere twenty two out of the total fifty four member states and many of the states that have hired these companies in Africa since 1990 were among those that signed that Charter which therefore indicates the worth of this measure against the hiring of mercenaries (Musah and Fayemi 44). Blackwater which is an American company is viewed to be a mercenary force that was created in the United States and as a militant political wing of President George Bush’s presidency. The only owner of the company who is also the founder perceives himself to be a crusader against the Muslims and Islam and the company is described as a war machine that is ruthless that consists of private contractors of mercenaries whose operation in Iraq, where they had taken posts as guards for the American diplomats and other people that had been identified as in need of their protection, is the source of widespread uncertainty on the policies that the United States had in Iraq and other places in the Middle East and the Far East (Hagher 43). With the national military personnel stretched to its limit, the United States government is forced to try to find allies that are ready and willing to deploy some of their personnel to take part in its war on terror that is international. Therefore, if the national armies that exist in the other states do not want to join and become part of the war, then Blackwater and the companies that are associated with it offer an alternative sort of solution to this problem. They offer a different internalization of the force that is arrived at by recruiting private soldiers from all over the world. The personnel that they recruit come from various countries even those that are against the US wars. Critics have stated that the increased use of contractors and private forces which are considered to be mercenaries makes wars easy to begin and fight as all that is needed is money and citizenry (Scahill). It is stated that the powerful mercenary group acts outside the laws of the United States and therefore it is not accountable to the taxpayer and the import of this conflict that is privatized is that countries like Nigeria can expect forces like Blackwater to operate in silence with dissidents or militant groups that can be able to afford their services and pay using raw materials such as gold and oil. In the operations that it takes part in in Darfur, Blackwater is seen to have a foothold in Africa which then challenges the United Nations, the African Union and NATO by rebranding mercenaries as peacekeepers and this development is significant of the new danger that Africa is exposed to. Companies should be allowed to take part in the physical security aspects of private security operations but these should always be defensive of protective in nature and in normal situations is not supposed to include the operations that are offensive. This then brings up a difficult issue about hot pursuit and offensive defence where the attacks by the opponents forces on particular areas, individuals, and installations that are guarded by the private armies lead to the armies pursuing the opponents’ forces away from where the attacks have taken place. This has been seen in a number of places such as in Sierra Leone and Angola where there was pre-emptive engagement in measures that were offensive so against the opponent forces for defensive purposes. A practical approach should be taken towards the issue as the majority of the personnel that work for this private armies are professional military officers that have retired with a lot of professional background. The companies should always be aware that a justification of these activities is supposed to be provided to the home country government after they have taken place and should therefore be permitted within the regulations of the license to practice their best judgment in situations such as these. This is not to state that a blanket authorization should be approved for operations that are of this kind; rather, that these operations should be perceived as being absolutely responsive to the threats that are of this nature and this will serve to avoid breaches that are related with the suggested ban on operations that have a combat nature (Chesterman and Lehnardt 45). Even though the Iraqi war is coming to an end and all the military personnel are to leave that country, it is still in the interests of the United States to continue with the efforts of controlling that country and as a result, there is a planned civilian presence that is to be left behind. The United States has built an embassy in Baghdad as well as a number of consular outposts in various places in Iraq that will need to be guarded and protected. The security of these establishments will require the services of more than five thousand members of private armies that are considered by some quarters to be mercenaries to protect the staff that will be deployed there to represent various United States government Agencies and State Departments. To guard the Baghdad embassy alone, there will be 3,650 private military personnel that will be needed and the rest will be spread out in fifteen different sites that will include three air hubs, three police training centres and five Office of Security Cooperation sites among other places (Engelhardt 139). This therefore shows the importance that of these perceived mercenaries in issues that are related with security that the United States deals with outside its borders. Since they are only deployed to take up the guarding duties of its citizens that are there, they will not be involved in the war that the military personnel were participating in. They are only supposed to have engagements with the opponents in the event that the opponents pose a security threat to the people and buildings that they will be guarding. Conclusion With the strong focus that exists today on the role of the private armies in the war in Iraq as well as the history of these companies in Africa and other countries that are developing, we are at a unique point in time to influence the international approach to the regulation of activities that are undertaken by this kind of private actors. This is supposed to be undertaken through creating a lead by employing a national regulatory initiative that will support a wider regulatory regime that is international. Without an effective international regime in existence, the national regulation will only remain a fraction of the solution and as long as the governments and the private corporations require armed protection or armed military support against insurgencies that are perpetrated by rebels, then this private armies will always have a ready market for the services and skills that they have to offer. The particular roles that they play in the conflicts that they are involved in are of concern as long as the international community turns a blind eye or is not in a position to a region security answer and this demand for armed support will continue to be fulfilled from the private sector. In light of the continued regional instability and disorder, the continued privatization of the peacekeeping endeavours is slowly becoming the best option for the developed world that is not willing or able to get involved in the escalating chaos that are associated with the regional conflicts. Works cited Chesterman, Simon and Lehnardt, Chia. “From mercenaries to market”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Print. Engelhardt, Tom. “The United States of fear. Chicago”, Ill.: Haymarket Books, 2011. Print. Hagher, Iyorwuese. “Nigeria”. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2011. Print. Musah, Abdel-Fatau and Fayemi, Kayode. “Mercenaries”. London: Pluto Press, 2000. Print. Scahill, Jeremy. Blackwater. London: Profile, 2011. Print. Strachan, Hew and Scheipers, Sibylle. “The changing character of war”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Print. Read More