Role of Private Military Companies in International Security - Essay Example

Role of Private Military Companies in International Security Introduction A private military company (PMC) is an enterprise that gives special services to citizens and even non-citizens. These services are concerned with military activities. They are normally profit making in nature. Sometimes they are partnership in nature with limited liability. Other times they could be corporation in nature. They are sometimes referred to as private military firms, Private Military Corporations and Private Military Industry in general. The PMCs provide security services to people. They carry out military training and also matters dealing with defence. Protection is also provided by PMCs nationally and internationally. They also give their services to supplement those services given by armed forces. They provide these services in places where there are no security details that are personal are involved. This means that the state actor is not involved in this case. 1 The PMCs work in conjunction with states. This is in line with providing training in military matters and national defence issues. They tend to be located where the conflict intensity is quite low. In these places it is usually risky to deploy armed forces to them. This is in terms of economics, diplomatic and politics. At Guantamano Bay, they help in setting up camps for detention. The Afghani president has benefited by getting bodyguards supplied to him from the PMCs. Colombia has in the past been given helicopter gunships which assisted in destroying coca crops. George H. W. Bush really influenced the privatization of these enterprises. General terms The PMCs can be grouped generally to mean contractors of defence. Tactical skills and specialised operations are provided by PMCs to their personnel. Combat experience is also included in this. This is unlike what the other contactors of defence do. The PMCs provide their services to state forces, business corporations and non-governmental organizations that are internationally based. The difference between PMCs and defence contractors is not recognized by (GCIII) The Geneva Convention. They term them as supply contractors. They are termed as war prisoners when issued with identity card that is valid. They are termed as mercenary when they engage in combat. Demand of private military companies There is a likely hood that there will be an increase in the demand for the private military companies. Governments usually employ the private military companies to help solve conflicts. This has been done by Angola. These companies are contracted to give logistical help. Most of the states that contract the private military companies cannot afford to sustain big militaries. For example private military companies were employed to do recruitment in Balkans. International organisations also highly demand the services of private military companies. The PMCs are also contracted or employed by the UN to provide security. Once a private military company is reputable and strong, it normally has very high demand. The UN usually compares the costs incurred in having armed forces and that of employing the PMCs. It is usually very cheaper to employ the PMCs than to have the armed forces in the nation. It is estimated that there are many private military companies that operating in Africa. This is even up to 100 private military companies in operation. The African countries that have benefited from this include Indonesia and Colombia. The PMCs are mostly contracted by countries that are in very remote areas. Such places are usually very dangerous. The PMCs are mostly from the UK and the United States. Recruitment Many private military corporations are recently attracting people and the entire personnel from Special Forces. This is because the private military companies pay the employees well compared to the salaries paid by Special Forces.2 UK private military companies There are many private military companies in the United Kingdom. They include Adson Holdings, registered in Guernsey. Aegis Defence Services, AKE Group and Armor Group. Others include Black- Op's, Branch Energy Ltd, Corporate Warriors, Defence Services, Erinys International, Gurkha Security Guards. The Hart Security Limited, Hostile Control Tactics, Sandline International, Plaza 107 and Securiforce are among the other military companies in UK. Military activity abroad The PMCs carry out different activities for people and even corporations. When foreign power is used by a professional soldier he is termed as a mercenary. An example of this is the Gurkha troop. Protocol of 1997 defines mercenary as one who fights in armed conflict after recruitment locally or internationally. He is involved in hostilities. He is not in any official duty. The Sandlines employees are members of armed forces therefore cannot be termed as mercenaries. They are called Special Constables. 3 Supply of qualified personnel The PMCs are involved in the supply of people qualified to operate equipment. They include qualified pilots who can fly aeroplanes and other aircrafts. They assist flying equipment and personnel to battlefields. Sometimes the combat missions are incorporated by the PMCs. This is only when the cases are extreme. This extreme cases call for provision of forces of combat. Advice The PMCs normally provide states with different kinds of advice. They provide advice on how the armed forces can be restructured to be more effective. How they can carry out purchasing of equipment, where they can be found. Information is given on which equipment is more effective to be used. They also provide advice on how operational planning can be carried out. This helps to improve the international security. Training This is one of the major activities carried out by the PMCs. Sierra Leone and Angola have benefited from this. The PMCs sometimes link this training to combat. In other times it just stands free, that is, not linked to anything. This was evident in UK in the 1970s.Forces present in the Middle East were trained by the Wacthguard company. Bodyguards that were personal to rulers were also trained. Guard in the Saudi have benefited from training provided by the Vinnell. Logistic support Most private military companies provide this service. The Hart Security Limited in the UK provided logistic support to the UN force in Sierra Leone. The Aegis Defence services in the UK provide such services to US forces. Example of logistic support given includes bodies' repatriation. Water purification services are provided by the PMCs. Supply of personnel The PMCs normally supply personnel to state forces. The personnel assist the state forces in monitoring roles. The Adson Holdings in UK have given this tremendous contribution to the Balkans. Their operation's monitoring was greatly improved Demining This is normally part of the security package provided by the PMCs. This is also carried out by the specialist companies. They also help to guard the installations n the state forces. It is good to note that the PMCs are not just involved in the international security only but they are also involved in their own state security. These services are usually done through local subsidiaries which have to be subject to the law existing in the nations. Extent of Private Military Company and Mercenary Activity It is good and healthy to note that some volunteers can be mistaken to be mercenaries. The operations of the PMCs are normally very significant compared to the services provided by individuals. There instances when the PMCs recruit the mercenaries. They assist in dealing with armed conflicts internally and internationally. The UK PMCs have been very active in giving their services to the African countries. These countries include Indonesia and Angola. In these nations the risks involved with violence are quite prevalent. Very few PMCs though, are unwilling to be involved in direct combat missions.4 Private military companies and cold war Many people argue that when the armed forces reduced in the West, they led to formation of the PMCs. They are thought to have come up after the end of the cold war. This is not true at all. Most of these establishments were formed by former servicemen like from UK. Private military companies and small arms proliferation In the 1990s the number of weapons used was noted to have increased tremendously. There was growth in the international arms trade. Many people and organizations were concerned on who should buy such arms. It was also a concern as to what the weapons were used for. This was due to the emergence of private military companies. So how do these companies affect the small arms proliferations Many of these private military companies provide or supply their clients with large quantities of weaponry. In this way they affect the proliferations. This has led to increased arms trafficking. This has created concerns by human rights organizations and individuals. The UN high Commissioner said the trafficking of arms needed to be regulated. This has raised concerns in regulation of PMCs and their activities. This is because it has been noted that PMCs provide easy accessibility of weapons. This has led to negative impacts in the national security. For example the Sandline International based in UK was involved in this in the year 1997.It was involved in arms brokering. It was hired by the Papua New Guinea (PNG).The assistance was in importing arms from Russia and to help bring down rebellion in Bougainville Island. Sandline carried out procurement of communication systems, equipment in electronic warfare, vehicles for armoured fighting, helicopters (Mi8/17) and explosives and ammunitions. The PNG provided the certificates for the end users. This led to appellation of the Sandline employees by the end of March in the year 1997.After operations by the PMCs they can mostly leave behind many weapons that are quite uncontrolled. This usually adversely affects peace efforts carried out internationally. It leads to the misuse of these weapons, causing wars again. 5 Violation of UN arms embargoes The private military companies have been involved in the violation of UN arms embargoes. The UK's Sandline international was involved in this violation in the year 1998.Ahmed Tejan, Sierra Leone's president signed a contract with the Sandline International. He wanted it to supply arms worth 35 tonne of shipment from Bulgaria. This was quite controversial in line with violation of UN arms embargoes. Military services are not mostly covered by embargoes. In the year 2000 Ethiopia and Eritrea faced sanctions in relation to violation of arms embargoes. The sanction was on prevention of supply of arms and any materials that are related to arms in Eritrea and Ethiopia. Sometimes these prohibitions are not followed due to poor enforcements by the arms embargoes. Driving Demand for Small Arms Among activities carried out by the private military companies is military training. Where these PMCs have operated, they may create a demand for small arms. The society where they operated can be easily militarised. It can lead to tensions in the region being exacerbated. There is very little accountability by the private military companies concerning this issue. They have in the past left surplus weapons in stockpiles in these regions. This makes such places lack peace because locals easily access the arms. International control mechanisms International control mechanisms need to be put in place to control the private military companies. Such a task cannot just be left to the governments only. There should be controls in the shipping and brokering of arms for export. The UN's protocol should be corrected concerning manufacturing of ammunition. There should be tough sanctions on the nations that violate the UN rules on brokering of arms. Such sanctions should be implemented. There should be common standards to be used in regulation of the private military companies worldwide. They should be used by EU, OAU, OAS, OSCE and the UN. United Kingdom Government Regulations Many nations like the United States and South Africa have got advanced laws that govern the private military and the surety companies. Steps are being carried out in the UK to regulate the private military companies. In the year 1870, there was the establishment of the Foreign Establishment Act. It is the only law that is relevant to the security companies and the private military. The British security companies are prohibited to recruit other companies to do the mercenary work. They are also prevented from becoming mercenaries themselves. In the past this law is highly doubted if it has being applied. This is because the law has loopholes therefore making it quite ineffective. This is because accompany that leaves the UK by ship to register or become a mercenary elsewhere, it becomes unlawful. If a person leaves by other means of transport then he is not considered unlawful. For example one who leaves by using air as means would go scot-free since he is not covered by the law The year 1896 is the last time that this law was used for trying a person in the UK. The 'arms to Africa affair' influenced the UK government to consider updating these regulations. This was in the year 1998.Robin Cook the Foreign Secretary in the UK government responded to this in the year 1999.He promised that the government would do something by the end of the year 2000.This was the production of consultation paper called the green paper. This never came to pas and one can conclude that it was empty talk. The United Nations Act of 1946 can be of use in this issue. The UK government can get powers from this body to help it in controlling the brokering. There was a publication by the UK government on its plans in regulation of arms trafficking and brokering. These plans were to be effected through the licensing system and the registration system. This was in June the year 2001.The UK government is also considering the development of proposals in this sector. Areas covered by the EU embargo or the UN will be restricted in offering any assistance technically. Only a few of the private military activities are included in this proposal. The proposed Green paper by the UK government then takes care of the rest. Many countries know that they need to curb mercenary activities. Very few have taken a step by providing laws that support this. This means that may private military securities have been left to regulate themselves. This is very dangerous because this highly affects security and peace nationally and internationally. Government regulation on the operations of the private military companies is important because; It Would Set Guidelines for the Industry This will help the industry to know what is expected of them. This also helps them to know what was initially expected of them by the government. It Could Help Establish a More Employable Industry Regulation of the PMCs will make them to be more respectable. This has been the comment of most PMCs representatives. In this way the disreputable individuals and companies will easily be marginalised. This would make the international organizations and sovereign governments would largely benefit from the reputable privatised military companies. The difficulties in the regulation include; Regulation Costs We have to acknowledge that these regulations will be carried out with costs which will be incurred by the government. The Annex C has adequately covered this. This is where assessment is carried out on the impacts of these regulations. Government guidelines have been used in this assessment. Effectiveness of the Legislation The legislation may not quite be effective considering that the private military companies are very mobile in nature. The employees in these PMCs are never permanent. They can easily move to other greener pastures when the conditions become very tough. Inconvenient regulatory environment in the private military companies will cause this. Most of these regulations take place not within the British law scope. UK Policy and International Security The Labour Party in the government may experience adverse effects on its leadership and conduct. The UK has in the past experienced upheavals. The UK government in the1980s and the one in the111990s had better policies than the present government. The current security policies existing in the UK are not the best. The British can easily involve it in the issues concerning nuclear weapon wastage. The FCO and MoD accountability has really been an issue that was pursued by the BASIC for many years. The security policies debate has been going on for quite sometime now. Replacement of the trident is very possible and there have been opportunities to do this. The UK has the potential of making its country a zone free of nuclear weapons. It is also possible to make UK a non-nuclear weapon state. 6 Conclusion Private military companies are very important in promoting international security. They do this by providing qualified personnel to states that need their services. Military equipment can also be deployed to such areas. Though these PMCs are important they can work the other way round if they are not regulated. Government policies need to be put in place that will promote international security. References Air Force Pamphlet (1 November 1976.): Military Training Standard Promotion Fitness Examination, UK Air University Library (1970): Military management: Maxwell AFB, Alabama: U.K. Air Force. Anderson, J (1970). Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon: Berkeley. Arias S (1996): human Security: Our Common Responsibility: Disarmament, A Periodic Review 19.3 Blatz, K. (1967): Human security: Some Reflections. London: University of London Press, Heath (1994): The Taiping Rebellion 1851-1866, London: Reed International Books Ltd. Klugman, (1999): Social and Economic Policies to Prevent Humanitarian Emergencies Washington DC: United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research. Liu, (1956): A Military History of Modern China1924-1949, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Norris, (1994): British, French and Chinese nuclear weapons: Nuclear weapons Data book: vol.5 Boulder: Westview Press. Read More