not ting ham discourse pmsc

8/6/2019 Not Ting Ham Discourse Pmsc

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/not-ting-ham-discourse-pmsc 1/19

Shaping U.S. foreign policy strategies

in the new millennium -Private Military and Security Companies (PMSC)

as an integral part of U.S. foreign policy

Kathrin Herbst

Politics since the millennium:

A postgraduate conference exploring politics

since 2000 and how it is discussed

University of Nottingham 4th April, 2011



Bio

• Brunel University, School of Social Sciences/Brunel Centre forIntelligence and Security Studies (BCISS)

• “U.S. foreign policy towards Africa: the U.S. African Command

(AFRICOM) and Private Military and Security Companies

(PMSC)” U.S. foreign policy in Africa under Clinton, Bush and Obama

and the use of PMSC (intentions and strategies)

Management of interagency-led AFRICOM



What are we talking about?

• Private Military and Security Companies (PMSC) play growingroles in support of state defence and multilateral

reconstruction strategies

• PMSC have become important non-governmental commercial

security actors in the new millennium• Ongoing global instability since 9/11 fosters extraordinary

demand for security providers

• Without contractor support, some missions of U.S. Army would

be at risk (U.S. General Accountability Office – GAO)• PMSC have increasing influence in formation of security

arrangements on different levels of international system




• Use of private contractors in U.S. military occupations is not anew phenomena

Expansive use of PMSC as happened in Iraq is

unprecedented in modern warfare

Occupation of Iraq saw PMSC carry out more mission-critical operations than in any previous conflict

•Universally valid definition is still non-existent

Operation Desert Storm

(1991)U.S. soldiers vs. contractors

100 : 1

Operation Iraqi Freedom

(2003)U.S. soldiers vs. Contractors

10 : 1




SSCservice support

Management of facilities and

prisons, demining

PSCprivate security

Site control,personal &

transport security,risk

analysis

PMCprivate military

Direct militaryfunctions – own

combat troops with

command

A-PCarms production

Production,research &

development andexport of weapons



The Beginnings of the Discourse

• PMSC became visible social reality after end of Cold War

Scholars started discourse in 1990s

First works:

What are they?

Can typology be created to reduce complexity?

Use of term „mercenary“

Shows scepticism to new security player

Suggests that growth of industry poses risk to states‘way of organising security

Clearly defined by international law

Not helpful to define and understand PMSC



The Beginnings of the Discourse

• As consequence of „recent“ arrival of PMSC, few books exist onthe subject

• Many of the books that do exist far from academic, often

written by former military personnel or by individuals with an

overt agenda• Good articles published by law schools and other academic

institutions



Of advocates, opponents and pragmatics

Advocates

“peace and security industry“

Doug Brooks

International Stability Operations Association (ISOA)

formerly International Peace Operations Association (IPOA)

potential of industry (skills, capacity, speed, surge capability)

PMSC important and legitimate partner if:

Better coordination of community of states, international

organisations and PMSC, and

Binding rules are implemented

If not the private sector, who?




Opponents“new mercenaries“ “mercenary firms”

Jeremy Scahill (2008)

Blackwater : The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful

Mercenary Army

existence of PMSC weakens governments’ monopoly of force

Absence of democratic legitimation mechanisms

Existence of unlegislated areas

Lack of international law

Transparency issues




• Opponents and advocates both agree that PMSC are here tostay

• Pragmatic approach arises with most of the research focusing

on finding a typology and definition for PMSC

How far do the activities of PMSC extend intoresponsibilities of states in regards to security

management?

Can there be mechanisms created to:

Increase transparency,

Increase control, and

Establish responsibilities?




• 3 to 4 different categories with criterion being “direct use of force”

The closer to combat the more likely to be mercenary

Underlying assumption: difference on whether the

government outsources

Surveillance of public spaces,

Management of prisons, or

Support of combat missions

“Unproblematic” security

companies (site control,logistics)

To be left to self regulation

Offensive military actions

To be legitimised byinternational institutions

such as UN or state alliances



Peter Singer (2003)Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatised Military Industry

• First description of the market Events that caused rise of PMSC

Variety of tasks and organisational structure

Implications of the use of the industry (effects of market

forces, morality of use)

3 major types of contractors (tip of the spear )

Military Provider Firms

Private Security Providers

Military Consulting Firms

Military Support Firms

Implementation/Command

Advisory and training

Non-lethal assistance



Deborah D. Avant (2005)The Market for Force: The Consequences of Privatizing Security

• Transnational market for force has developed• Assumed cost efficiency

• Monopoly of force affected by use of PMSC

• Outsourcing enhances PMSC influence on foreign

policy process

• How and why PMSC are used

• Attempts to regulate industry

•

Differences in opinions are based on different focus analystshave on control of violence



Political controlof violence

Who decides aboutuse of weapons and

security relatedservices?

Functional control of violence

Will capacity of statepersist or be established to

address security relatedchallenges?

Social controlof violence

Is use of forceintegrated into

international valuesand norms?

Keep state controlover organised

violence upright orlead to improvement

Increase effectiveness of security actors

Promote internationalvalues/norms

In ideal world use of PMSC would ...

Deborah Avant



Deborah Avant

• Calls for pragmatic approach PMSC mirrored against ideal approach which is never

existent in reality, also when only governmental actors

perform together (NATO, Coalition of the Willing)

For every situation where parts of the security managementare outsourced, there has to be evaluation of:

Existing possible alternatives,

Short-, mid- and long-term consequences, and

Surrounding conditions



Classification of PMSC

To whom

Open market

• IO

•NGO

•Transnationalcorporations

•States

how

•Contract mostly

hidden from publicview due to it’s

nature

•Scope and type of contract publiclyknown

what

•Broad services

•combat•security

•consultancy

• logistics

PMSCsell



Topics of discourse

Practical-political

challenges

Monopolyof forces as

part of democracy

Legalrestrictionson use of violence

Use of PMSC by

state actors

Transparency&

accountability



Topics of discourse

Theoreticalquestions

Concepts of politicalsciences

challenged?

PMSCcompeting

withgovernment

services?

PMSC tool of secret foreignand security

policy?

PMSC weakenstates?



Thank you for your attention!

Blog:

http://kathrinherbst.wordpress.com

LinkedIn:

http://uk.linkedin.com/in/kathrinherbst

E-mail:

[email protected]

not ting ham discourse pmsc

Documents