The use of Private Military Companies (PMC) in conflicts

PMC have become major actors in modern conflicts. They represent a shift in the nature of warfare. But their use comes with ethical, legal, and strategic issues.

What are PMC?

PMC are corporate entities paid to provide military and security services. They are part of the broader phenomenon of the privatization of force. They operate in conflict zones and fragile states around the world. They mostly earn their money by exploiting the resources where they operate. Their clients are mostly states and businesses.

PMC services varies from one company to another. But services often include:

• Ensuring protection of infrastructures abroad,

• Close protection of key people,

• Training and advising,

• Logistics and supply,

• Combat tasks (though often denied).

They can also include a wide range of support services to conventional forces. These include:

• Strategic planning,

• Intelligence,

• Flight operations (manned or unmanned),

• Satellite surveillance,

• Land, sea and air reconnaissance.

Why use them?

PMC are attractive for many reasons.

They have a lower footprint. Their deployment is more flexible than armies. They are also often cheaper than long-term deployments. They are mostly paid with deals on local resources. They are also often self-reliant in terms of weapons and logistics.

They are also used to augment stretched military resources.

States can also avoid negative fallout by outsourcing risky or dirty operations. PMC have less stringent rules of engagement. This is mostly due to their blurry status under international law. But as we’ll see, this aspect is often a source of concern.

Businesses also use PMC to protect key infrastructures like oil and mining which often tends to be in risky areas. They can also be employed to protect VIPs. China has up to 40 PMC that operate abroad. But they are under strict government control and do not combat. They focus on protecting China’s interests and citizens abroad. They mostly operate along the Belt and Road Initiative which runs through high-risk areas.

Examples of PMC

There are several famous PMC. On top of them are Wagner and Blackwater (now named Constellis).

Wagner is a Russian PMC. It is one of the most prominent and controversial one in the world. Its methods are more alike criminal groups and mercenaries than PMC. They have no respect for human rights or international law. Wagner acts as a proxy for the Russian state and plays a key role in modern conflicts and geopolitics. Wagner challenged western interests in the Central African Republic, Mali, and Syria. Plus, it played a big part in propaganda and disinformation campaigns for Russia.  Wagner is sanctioned by the U.S., EU, UK, and others. It is also accused of war crimes.

Blackwater is an American PMC now named Constellis. It operates for the DoD, the State Department, CIA, and other governments. It is known for its heavy involvement in the Iraq War. It was integrated within the U.S. armed forces. It provided convoy and site protection and interrogation services. It has also been accused of aggressive tactics and of killing civilians.

Executive outcomes (EO) is a South African PMC. It was hired to defeat rebel forces in Sierra Leone and Angola in the 90’s. In Sierra Leone, EO got paid with diamond concessions.  

G4S is a British PMC that protects embassies and oil plants in conflict zones.

Challenges posed by PMC

International law and ethics

PMC operate in an unregulated space in international law.

The UN Mercenary Convention bans mercenaries but not PMC. They are structured as legal corporations, avoiding the mercenary definition. Many PMC avoids that by claiming they do not directly engage in combat. They can also operate in countries not party to the convention. Many key states have not ratified the convention including the U.S., UK, Russia, and China.

This leads to a lack of accountability and regulation. Contractors’ action on the ground are hard to control. They sometimes act with impunity in lawless places. They often operate in countries with weak legal systems. There are sometimes some immunity agreements between PMC and the contracting states.

There have been issues of human rights abuses and civilian deaths. Wagner is often accused of torture, rape, and executions. In 2007, Blackwater contractors killed 17 civilians in Iraq. Four of them were convicted in the U.S., later pardoned by Trump.

PMC contractors could be charged based on individual criminal responsibility for:

• War crimes,

• Crimes against humanity

• Genocide.

But these crimes are very difficult to prosecute.

Traditional militaries on the other hand are bound by rules of engagement, laws of armed conflicts, and a code of conduct.

Reliance

PMC contractors fall under a profit logic. Their loyalty goes to paying clients, not to a nation or constitution.

Plus, some can pose a risk to national sovereignty. For example, there have been clashes between Wagner and the Russian army and state. In 2023, Wagner took control of the of a city and tried to march on Moscow.

Performance

Their performance can be altered by their for-profit nature. Their business model is based on the existence of conflicts and threats. Some have no interest in peace and stability.

Even if they wanted to, PMC cannot tackle underlying issues that fuel most conflicts. This remains a state and global community matter.

Post-conflict

There are different parts of a military operation. One part is called normalization. This happens after intervention and stabilization. During this time, other countries help fix broken systems. The goal is to rebuild the government bodies and society. This aims to create peace and order. It also gives a strong basis for recovery. This phase may include peacekeeping operations.

But PMC do not have the means and power to conduct that phase. They probably do not have the will to do so either. So what’s left after the contract is over?

Used under a legal framework, PMC can have great added value. But when operating on their own and by their own rules, the outcome might not be as positive.

Decoding geopolitics isn’t a job. It’s survival.

Joy